Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 85 to 88 of 88
  1. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    21,926
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Trumps "faith advisor" and personal pastor....

    Quote Originally Posted by Terpsfan82 View Post
    I was talking to my nephew about this. He's 25 and like many of his generation, posseses a "fluid" idea of what constitutes morality, right down to how many genders exist (he believes there are more than 2). If you really study, you could rationally explain how evil is allows to exist - in the abstract. But once you start examining some of the horrible things that occur into detail (human trafficking, murder, rape, etc), it gets really hard. I dunno. My beliefs are pretty secure despite all that. But it's hard to bring over some of the younger generation.
    I think part of that is the easier life gets for you the harder it is to wrap your mind around the struggles of others. Just a thought.





  2. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    22,231
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Trumps "faith advisor" and personal pastor....

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    I think part of that is the easier life gets for you the harder it is to wrap your mind around the struggles of others. Just a thought.
    True. That's why I try to stay civically involved to stay close to people who need outside help. It's definitely true as you get older and further removed from the passion and struggle of youth.
    "We're not changing anything." -John Harbaugh





  3. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    898

    Cool Re: Trumps "faith advisor" and personal pastor....

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    I haven't read that Sam Harris book but I am quite familiar with him.

    You CANNOT have an objective morality based on biology because we all have a different biology. This seems patently obvious to me. Can you please tell me how it isn't? Don't refer to some "expert." You can use his stuff, but you tell me. Don't tell me to go read a book because I can refer you to dozens of authors and hundreds of books.

    If your mind is nothing more than your brain and its physical makeup then you don't "think" at all. You simply process information through set neural pathways. Your thinking is nothing more than electrochemical reactions. But that is a tangent.

    I take it you are not familiar with the Judeo Christian view on morality.

    Here's a question. If our morality simply evolved based on the flourishing of the species then I guess it is okay to kill people who contribute less than they consume in a society, In other words, what Hitler and the Nazis did with physically and mentally challenged people was not only acceptable but moral because it eliminated people who were drags on humanity flourishing. Would you agree that this is the best course for humanity?
    I think we speak around each other here a bit. What Iīm saying is that the basis for morality, like empathy to take one specific, is (unless you suffer from psychopathy etc) a trait that has evolved in atleast primates and probably other mammals aswell. This is what is the basis when we think of and construct ethics and morals to follow. Thereīs still much to learn here, but there shouldnīt really be any debate that this is the case? Iīm not saying we are born with a full moral guide or anything like that, rather with the genetic blueprint for it.

    We certainly "think", wheather we truly have a "free will" though is something else, but we donīt need to dive into that now perhaps.

    Iīm quite familiar with judeo christian view on morality. We might be one of the more secular countries in the world, but we still studied the bible, went to church and live in a society that is and was christian.

    This is one of the most common misconceptions about evolution, and apparently about morality too then. No, of course itīs not okay, and the main reason for this is of course that most of us, through are empathy that has been part of most constructed ethic and moral paths to follow, tell us that itīs wrong to inflict harm. That we ought to help, and our instincts are usually to do just that when we see someone harming another person or animal. Iīm not talking about what would coldly, strictly speaking be "best for humanity", because we are not detached from our empathy. Doing what the nazis did for example goes against our humanity, and most that participated in the killings took so much drugs they barely could function and still most couldnīt function, even with the brain washing of the nazis, hence the use of gas, because the guards couldnīt cope shooting them in cold blood (except the psychos that must have had a paradise for a few years there...) and so on and if the word PTSD had existed then, yeah. Itīs usually going against our nature to inflict harm in direct ways.

    But, of course, there can almost always be a case made for subjective morality. Kill one to save two, kill yourself rather than hitting the bus with school children and all those moral problems you know. The one prime example for a truly objective moral is rape of course, Youīd be hard pressed to make any sort of moral claim to justify that. Torture of a pet is another.





  4. #88
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Trumps "faith advisor" and personal pastor....

    Holy shit. You guys really did go down the Christian Apologetics "there's no morality without God" rabbit hole.

    Wow.





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->