K
KnowtheSilence
Guest
I don’t think this is true, either, but I don’t know many dedicated materialists.
- Status
T
thenobes
Guest
All metaethical theories that do not rely on an Absolute Lawgiver, are self contradictory, circular, or spiral without end (rely on higher definitions of good to select those current moral goods), or rely on gut feelings, which are irrational. Thus those theories are ultimately illogical.
peace,
steve
K
KnowtheSilence
Guest
All metaethical theories that do rely on an “Absolute Lawgiver” are either circular, provide no real motivation for following them (aside from things that are equally available to secular theories), or turn “goodness” into a featureless property. And this is before we even get to the part where the theories are invalid because the Lawgiver doesn’t exist.
T
thenobes
Guest
Peace
steve
steve
E
Entwhistler
Guest
Of the fact that atheists aren’t doomed to some sort of “simplistic” relativism.
As far as I can see, there are 3 potential origins of “truth.” First is the God origin. The second is the opinion origin where truth is the majority view which doesn’t qualify as truth. The third is some sort of evolutionary gene that was ingrained in us over time or from the beginning. And that is really only instinct. There is no backing behind that besides the material (Don’t kill the guy because his buds will comes kill you). Plus, that gets into the “where did the genes come from anyway” problem which gets us into the “God” question.
Great conversation though. Makes a person think.
K
KnowtheSilence
Guest
This doesn’t make sense to me. I think of truth as being an expression of reality, so when you say that some sort of “evolutionary gene” is the origin of truth, that doesn’t make sense because that isn’t the source of reality. Are you talking about the source of truth itself, the source of moral truth specifically, or the source of our ability to perceive truth?
I fail to see how a theistic moral theory escapes from this. Your moral theory has to at some point boil down to “do x because you want the consequences of x, don’t do y because you don’t want the consequences of y,” otherwise why would anyone have any reason to follow your moral precepts? You don’t have a reason to do anything you don’t have a reason to do.
L
Lucretius
Guest
I have never found a coherent, rational secular morality other than the natural law, but even a purely secular morality, natural law or otherwise, ultimately falls into despair and/or totalitarianism.
The problem is that when we propose a moral command, the commander must immediately consider those who will resist the command. Or, more psychologically, the moral theorist must deal with those whose heart/will is in conflict with yours. Humans can never intristically work on a person, but only externally so, and thus morality ends up, from a mere secular point of view, to either cause a person or society to force (physically, socially, mentally, etc) the opposing person to follow the command anyway, which he would reject if he wasn’t forced to from the outside. The only other option is to refuse to oppress, and thus despair about morality.
Christianity overcomes this with the Apostolic view of Grace: that is, God, who is the only one who can work from within a man, orders the man’s heart to His:
As a result, religions who deny Santifying Grace, which range from Lutheranism to Islam, ultimately make God into the Oppressor. The secular state ends up producing a Soviet Russia or a Nazi Germany, an anarchy, or a combination of both. This philosophy, a philosophy of power struggles, fear, and despair, is what Christ calls “the world.”
Chrisit pax,
Lucretius
P
Pulvis
Guest
Since no one has given this answer yet, and i know it to be very pertinent to the conversation, many christians are not catholic because they were born into different faith traditions. Something many of you may not understand, but growing up in the south of the 50’s and 60’s, outside of larger towns and cities there were very few Catholics. Everything down here was protestant. Closest thing to catholic was the occasional Episcopalian. And for many, you stick with what tradition you were born into. Heck, when meeting someone for the first time down here, first thing you ask is where y’all go to church?
I converted due to my own delving into church history, but most folks do not go that deep into why they are baptist, lutheran, methodist, et al.
I converted due to my own delving into church history, but most folks do not go that deep into why they are baptist, lutheran, methodist, et al.
L
Lucretius
Guest
One of the priests from the Oratory I visit is from Alabama (or some State in the South). I’ll have to ask him if he was raised Catholic and if not why did he convert and join a St. Philip Neri Oratory (BTW, he has an accent
).Is being a Baptist culturally oriented more to the deep South? I would guess, based on my knowledge of history, that Episcopalians would be more common in States such as Virginia and North Carolina.
In Pittsburgh its really hard not to find a Roman Catholic Church! Is it very hard to find a parish to worship at in the South? Or do you basically have to go to a city for Mass?
Christi pax,
Lucretius
E
Entwhistler
Guest
“Expression of Reality?” Could you elaborate? Do you mean “what IS?” Like two plus two equals four? I would say Truth IS reality. Of course you might have meant to say that.
L
Lucretius
Guest
He/she probably is thinking like St. Thomas, who defined truth as the mind’s conformity to Reality.
Christ is the Truth (John 14:6) because He is God Known; the Son is God as He Knows Himself, and since God is omniscient, and Reality, the Son is God Knowing Reality/Himself perfectly. This is what St. John means by the Greek word “Logos.”
Christi pax,
Lucretius
P
Pulvis
Guest
It is much easier now. With the influx of northerners moving south the Catholic population has grown dramatically. The county in which i reside now has 5 parishes and an Oratory house. Back in the 60’s it was just one very small parish and a handful of Oratorians that have been here since the 30’s. But it is still the south. Out of a state population of 4.6 million, Catholics are still under 200,000. While many parishes and missions have opened up across the state, in the less urban areas you will drive awhile to get to a parish. But the Catholic footprint goes way back. Charleston has had an active Catholic Presence since the early 1800’s. The first Baptist Church in the south was also in Charleston in the early 1600’s.One of the priests from the Oratory I visit is from Alabama (or some State in the South). I’ll have to ask him if he was raised Catholic and if not why did he convert and join a St. Philip Neri Oratory (BTW, he has an accent
Is being a Baptist culturally oriented more to the deep South? I would guess, based on my knowledge of history, that Episcopalians would be more common in States such as Virginia and North Carolina.
In Pittsburgh its really hard not to find a Roman Catholic Church! Is it very hard to find a parish to worship at in the South? Or do you basically have to go to a city for Mass?
Christi pax,
Lucretius
By the way, if the Oratory you visit is in Rock Hill, SC, the Priest you mention is from Louisiana.
L
Lucretius
Guest
Thanks for the history
No, the Oratory I visit is in Oakland, which is a part of the city of Pittsburgh, PA. Oakland is where the University of Pittsburgh’s main campus is, so the Oratory also functions as a college Newman center as well: thepittsburghoratory.org/
Oakland also happens to be where the Cathedral (St. Paul’s) for Bishop David Zubik of the Diocese of Pittsburgh is: stpaulpgh.org/
Anyway, the priests there are very devote and orthodox and reverent
Christi pax,
Lucretius
K
KnowtheSilence
Guest
Any moral system is going to have to deal with the issue of people who hear it and say “why should I care about that?” I think the main difference then becomes whether the commands come from a teleological approach to imperatives or a deontological one. With teleological imperatives, you can use empirical facts to support you commands, or try to build a bridge to your values by appealing to values that the other person already has. With deontological imperatives, if the person doesn’t already share whatever values or intuitions form the basis of your commands, there’s not much you can do except appeal to force or try switching to a teleological approach.
K
KnowtheSilence
Guest
Sorry I wasn’t clear. For the “expression of reality” comment I was using the word “truth” to mean something like “a true statement.” I agree with you that truth is reality.
T
Truth_Faith13
Guest
I consider myself Christian but I don’t attend a particular church (searching).
I voted for the moral issues - I actually agree with Catholicism on many of the moral issues and can reconcile with the likes of hormonal birth control (due to the possible abortive nature etc), IVF etc etc but struggle to understand how using a condom (ie a mere barrier) is different to tracking a woman’s cycle and abstaining during fertile periods. The intent is to avoid pregnancy in both. (Its been a while since I have been on these forums, many good people on here have tried to explain it to me but I cant work it out in my own head!).
Im interested in Catholicism as there are many aspects of Catholicism that I agree with and so far through my reading, a lot makes sense. However it also appears to be a very much all or nothing - you agree whole heartedly with the church or you don’t…
Hope that helps!
L
Lucretius
Guest
I find that, unlike artificial birth control, which is physically frustrating the sex act, all NFP allows is that a Catholic couple can not have sex during a woman’s fertility period. It’s no different than the Church saying that you can not have sex when watching a football game, when eating dinner, typing on Catholic Answers. You can even not have sex during the wife’s infertility periodI consider myself Christian but I don’t attend a particular church (searching).
I voted for the moral issues - I actually agree with Catholicism on many of the moral issues and can reconcile with the likes of hormonal birth control (due to the possible abortive nature etc), IVF etc etc but struggle to understand how using a condom (ie a mere barrier) is different to tracking a woman’s cycle and abstaining during fertile periods. The intent is to avoid pregnancy in both. (Its been a while since I have been on these forums, many good people on here have tried to explain it to me but I cant work it out in my own head!).
Im interested in Catholicism as there are many aspects of Catholicism that I agree with and so far through my reading, a lot makes sense. However it also appears to be a very much all or nothing - you agree whole heartedly with the church or you don’t…
Hope that helps!
Also, welcome back! We are glad to have you!
Christi pax,
Lucretius
E
Entwhistler
Guest
No problem.
Moral truth is just part of Truth in general. I would say that Truth is God since God is Being or Existence itself. He is not some sort of flying spaghetti monster (which is philosophically impossible) or an old man in the clouds. I get rather irritated when Atheists and Christians speak of God those ways.
I
IdiNaPut
Guest
Scrub my poll answer, I am not Catholic because I feel I could not live according to the Church’s standards. I would be a sure winner of the. ‘World’s Worst Catholic’ award. Even now, I look at many religious people (of any faith) and envy their piety, because I feel I could never be that good, that holy, that devoted.
L
Lucretius
Guest
That’s the first step! The second step is to let Christ do the heavy lifting. The Saints are holy because God is Holy, and thus makes them holy via Grace, not because they themselves are holy. They will all attest to this.
Also, I’m the holder of the Worst Catholic Award. Don’t be trying to take my trophy away
Christi pax,
Lucretius
- Status