Science and Morality

[liquidpele]

If truth is relative to every person, i.e. the result of personal decisions, how can there be universal truths? If there are no universal truths how do you explain the laws of nature?

If truth and morality stem from urges how can human beings be regarded as responsible for what they believe and how they act? If all our behaviour has physical causes all our beliefs have physical causes and there is no guarantee that any particular belief corresponds to reality. Your belief that all beliefs have physical causes is therefore questionable to say the least. Instincts fall into the same category and we know how fallible they are!

I don’t consider the laws of nature as morals… they are reality, not subjective like morality. This points out the major difference between us though, you see morality as something omnipotent that just exists everywhere that we can’t change. I saw that morality is defined by our species evolution, social interaction, and personal decisions.

You said “If truth and morality stem from urges how can human beings be regarded as responsible for what they believe and how they act?”… it’s funny you mention that… it turns out we are NOT really in control of a lot of our decisions. Watch this:

wimp.com/ourdecisions/

You said that instincts are in the same category… YES! Yes they are! And both are fallible… or do you really not read the news lately about the wonderful morals in Ireland? Morals are a part of us, and we are VERY fallible. So what can be done? We have laws, police, prisons, etc. We strive to keep the morals that hold our societies together, even though many people break them. That’s all we really CAN do. There is no perfect answer here, perhaps you could define heaven that way or something.

 

[Leela]

I was relying in some parts on allegory. None-the-less, the modern concept of hell is very much at odds with the theology that exists for nerely 2000 years in which hell is a physical location (an eternaly lake of fire where the worms never die) and the damned are sent there as punishment. Read your encylopedia for a better description:

newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

Interesting reading. So much for the idea that hell is just a metaphor for separation from God rather than positive punishment.

But I bet you are as worried as I am about hell, and as worried as the Catholics are that Islam is true and they will burn in hell for picking the wrong religion, i.e., not in the least. It is beyond my imagination that if God exists he would inflict infinite punishment for finite transgressions.

 

[tonyrey]

It is beyond my imagination that if God exists he would inflict infinite punishment for finite transgressions.

Don’t bother to try. Hell is a self-inflicted state of isolation which is the result of alienating others by our lack of love for anyone but ourselves.

 

[tonyrey]

I was relying in some parts on allegory. None-the-less, the modern concept of hell is very much at odds with the theology that exists for nearly 2000 years in which hell is a physical location (an eternal lake of fire where the worms never die) and the damned are sent there as punishment. Read your encyclopedia for a better description:

newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

The exact nature of hell has never been defined by the Catholic Church. As early as the 5th century St Augustine wrote:

“It is my opinion that the nature of hell-fire and the location of hell are known to no man unless the Holy Ghost made it known to him by a special revelation”, ( XX.16City of God).

“The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.” (Catholic Catechism.)

Your view must be that life is dominated by injustice and unselfishness is not the best policy!

 

[tonyrey]

This points out the major difference between us though, you see morality as something omnipotent that just exists everywhere that we can’t change.

In other words you deny that there is a categorical imperative. We adapt morality to suit our own wishes. Human rights can be modified for our own convenience?

I saw that morality is defined by our species evolution, social interaction, and personal decisions.

You are smuggling in free will under the cloak of “personal decisions”.

You said “If truth and morality stem from urges how can human beings be regarded as responsible for what they believe and how they act?”… it’s funny you mention that… it turns out we are NOT really in control of a lot of our decisions.

You have left yourself a loophole. Why not “We are NOT really in control of any of our decisions”?

We strive to keep the morals that hold our societies together, even though many people break them.

If morals hold our societies together they are not subjective but truths we cannot change.

 

[liquidpele]

In other words you deny that there is a categorical imperative. We adapt morality to suit our own wishes. Human rights can be modified for our own convenience?

You are smuggling in free will under the cloak of “personal decisions”.

You have left yourself a loophole. Why not “We are NOT really in control of any of our decisions”?

If morals hold our societies together they are not subjective but truths we cannot change.

Your first and last sentence are similar, so I’ll address that first. If you back back in the forum, you’ll see my explanation for the origin of morality. It’s just my personal thoughts on what makes the most sense, not based on any research. However, the basics were that like a wolf pack has rules that the group follows for the betterment of the pack, we have rules built into our DNA that we follow (being social animals) and we call them morals. Those are objective, they span across cultures, etc. From there, we define the specifics, which are indeed subjective… this is why we have juries and courts, democracy, and police… but those all were created by us for the same reason… to keep our society healthy and prospering by building upon the morals we already had. To quote myself from previously, I believe our morals defined the basis for our governments and churches, and not the other way around.

I do believe free will consists of the ability to make choices based on our own preferences and not the environment… but that doesn’t make it immune from the physical elements of our own brains and so in this way it is very similar to our choices discussed in that video. I’ve not read up on free will debate, so if you know of online literature about it, feel free to post it.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

severntofall

None-the-less, the modern concept of hell is very much at odds with the theology that exists for nerely 2000 years in which hell is a physical location (an eternaly lake of fire where the worms never die) and the damned are sent there as punishment.

You and all atheists keep repeating your favorite mantra … God damns us. No, we damn ourselves. And it makes no difference what metaphor is used … hell is going to be the opposite of heaven.

 

[liquidpele]

severntofall

None-the-less, the modern concept of hell is very much at odds with the theology that exists for nerely 2000 years in which hell is a physical location (an eternaly lake of fire where the worms never die) and the damned are sent there as punishment.

You and all atheists keep repeating your favorite mantra … God damns us. No, we damn ourselves. And it makes no difference what metaphor is used … hell is going to be the opposite of heaven.

I don’t disagree, but I think some of the views of Christian hell and God’s judgement set unreasonable standards for heaven… but I don’t believe I’ve seen that from Catholics. PS, if anyone is interested, there is a cool documentary on the history of society’s beliefs of hell and the devil here: wimp.com/thedevil/

 

[severntofall]

Interesting reading. So much for the idea that hell is just a metaphor for separation from God rather than positive punishment.

But I bet you are as worried as I am about hell, and as worried as the Catholics are that Islam is true and they will burn in hell for picking the wrong religion, i.e., not in the least. It is beyond my imagination that if God exists he would inflict infinite punishment for finite transgressions.

Agreed, as even if it were possible to torment someone eternally, having the desire to do so would redefine pychotic.

 

[severntofall]

Don’t bother to try. Hell is a self-inflicted state of isolation which is the result of alienating others by our lack of love for anyone but ourselves.

How could anyone inflict upon themself an eternity of isolation? The fact that it’s even possible (it’s not) means that it was a part of god’s plan.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

severntofall

*How could anyone inflict upon themself an eternity of isolation? The fact that it’s even possible (it’s not) means that it was a part of god’s plan. *

According to his own logic, the atheist is willing to inflict on himself an eternity of nothingness. And that, according to him, is the plan of the universe, apparently. So he must conclude that the universe is infinitely indifferent, not even offering a choice between heaven and hell?

God makes a kinder offer than the atheist’s offer … which is nothingness.

 

[severntofall]

severntofall

*How could anyone inflict upon themself an eternity of isolation? The fact that it’s even possible (it’s not) means that it was a part of god’s plan. *

According to his own logic, the atheist is willing to inflict on himself an eternity of nothingness. And that, according to him, is the plan of the universe, apparently. So he must conclude that the universe is infinitely indifferent, not even offering a choice between heaven and hell?

God makes a kinder offer than the atheist’s offer … which is nothingness.

You really believe that eternal isolation is kinder than nothingness? By-the-way, this whole afterlife theory of yours is entirely suposition, based upon zero facts (and largely counter to the church’s beliefs regarding hell for centuries). And yes, most likely the universe is eternally indiferent and this fact has nothing to do with the will or desires of any atheist.

 

[severntofall]

The exact nature of hell has never been defined by the Catholic Church. As early as the 5th century St Augustine wrote:

“It is my opinion that the nature of hell-fire and the location of hell are known to no man unless the Holy Ghost made it known to him by a special revelation”, (City of God XX.16).

“The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.” (Catholic Catechism.)

Your view must be that life is dominated by injustice and unselfishness is not the best policy!

The fact that Augustine felt that hell had a location says a lot.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

severntofall

*And yes, most likely the universe is eternally indiferent and this fact has nothing to do with the will or desires of any atheist. *

I beg to differ. I suspect atheism is the desire to murder existence itself. The highest rate of suicide in the world is among atheists. The lowest rate is among Catholic populations.

 

[tonyrey]

How could anyone inflict upon themself an eternity of isolation? The fact that it’s even possible (it’s not) means that it was a part of god’s plan.

You underestimate the lust for power and unwillingness to acknowledge a higher authority than yourself, the desire to be answerable to no one and complete master of your own destiny. Don’t we see it in this world?
It is God’s purpose that we have the freedom to shape our own destiny even if it entails letting us worship ourselves as false gods existing for ourselves. The only alternative is to make us like robots incapable of love.

 

[tonyrey]

Agreed, as even if it were possible to torment someone eternally, having the desire to do so would redefine pychotic.

Have you never met people who are not psychotic but continually torment themselves because of their selfishness, pride, greed, envy, jealousy, impatience…?

 

[tonyrey]

The fact that Augustine felt that hell had a location says a lot.

Augustine didn’t claim to be infallible. Do you?

 

[severntofall]

Augustine didn’t claim to be infallible. Do you?

You cited him as an authority on the topic, not me.

 

[severntofall]

Have you never met people who are not psychotic but continually torment themselves because of their selfishness, pride, greed, envy, jealousy, impatience…?

Have you ever met a person who wanted to force such a person to endure in such a miserable condition for an eternity?

 

[tonyrey]

Have you ever met a person who wanted to force such a person to endure in such a miserable condition for an eternity?

You ignore the fact that no one is forced to endure the misery of separation from God. It is self-inflicted as the result of pride and the desire for total independence. Moreover it is not unmitigated misery because there is great satisfaction and pleasure in being totally independent. Otherwise no one would opt for hell. Don’t you ever find it irksome to be compelled to obey authority? I know I do.