[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Intelligible thought aside, intelligent thought requires you to acknowledge that you could be wrong.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:<<< Faith. There is no good or evil without it. >>>[/quote]A man cannot fire so much as a single synapse’s worth of intelligible thought without faith. He can neither organize the idea nor utter the phrase, “there is no God”, without loudly declaring the requirement that there is in and by that very denial. God designed it that way. [/quote]Intelligible thought aside, intelligent thought requires you to acknowledge that you could be wrong.[/quote]All sarcasm aside friend. I really wish you could trust me when I tell you that of all the things you’ve thought about in your whole life? THIS is what you’ve thought about least. There are guys here who disagree with my views entirely who will nonetheless tell you that what I just said is the truth. http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/the_key_to_everything?id=5080368&pageNo=0 Metaphysics: The ACTUAL Key to Everything - Politics and World Issues - Forums - T Nation We had almost 10’000 views in the first 5 days of that epistemology thread. Here’s another. http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/free_will?id=4523136&pageNo=0
True, out of everything I think about philosophy takes up the least amount of time at around 1-2 hours a day. But then Strategy, violence and sex are important too. And what kind of a human would I be if I neglected those?
But then again, you were probably talking about faith which I really don’t think about all that much. You see, I generally start with a question but faith by necessity starts with an answer.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:<<< You see, I generally start with a question but faith by necessity starts with an answer.[/quote]Very good dude. Seriously. THAT is a profundity for whic hI will giev you genuine credit. However, you DO start AND end with nuthin BUT questions although you live in answers your questions have not given you a right to. You have most assuredly NOT thought this through. This is not the thread though.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Alex Good wrote:<<< You see, I generally start with a question but faith by necessity starts with an answer.[/quote]Very good dude. Seriously. THAT is a profundity for whic hI will giev you genuine credit. However, you DO start AND end with nuthin BUT questions although you live in answers your questions have not given you a right to. You have most assuredly NOT thought this through. This is not the thread though.
[/quote]
And what answers would those be?
Read the threads man. Seriously. I have typed the substance of my positions I don’t know how many times. I’m not putting you off as you will plainly see if you read those threads.
I’m far too lazy to bother doing that.
[quote]Alex Good wrote: I’m far too lazy to bother doing that.[/quote]Well, that’s an honest answer that I can at least somewhat respect.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
And I do right because I believe it’s the right thing to do…[/quote]
And so does the dictator. So does the conqueror. So does the guy shooting the other guy who disrespected him. And you can’t even say they’re wrong.[/quote]
Ofcourse I can.
Cortes, what is a metaphysical entity?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
And I do right because I believe it’s the right thing to do…[/quote]
And so does the dictator. So does the conqueror. So does the guy shooting the other guy who disrespected him. And you can’t even say they’re wrong.[/quote]
Ofcourse I can.[/quote]
You can say it, but then then you either don’t mean it, or you don’t actually adhere to this worldview we’ve been chatting about. If morality only exists as each man has constructed it, and you have no faith that yours is actually more right (or wrong) then theirs, then you might as well be telling them they picked the wrong answer to ‘what is your favorite color?’
There are plenty of objective moral systems that exist with no supernatural being.
There is much disagreement within even the same denominations about all of the moral principles that would make up a particular religion’s moral system. Generally this is negated when brought up by the “not a true scotsman” deal.
In the end morality in the grey areas tends to be a matter of personal taste.
We are all hypocrites which allows beliefs like the following to exist in the same person…or its converse.
Its terrible to abort a child yet its ok to use bombs to kill 160k of the other.
Its terrible to kill 160k with bombs but abortion is ok.
Positive rights are good and moral to uphold and laws should be made to enforce them but its terribly immoral to try to legislate any negative rights.
[quote]groo wrote:<<< There is much disagreement within even the same denominations about all of the moral principles that would make up a particular religion’s moral system. Generally this is negated when brought up by the “not a true scotsman” deal. [/quote]Please give me an example of this among the overwhelmingly Christian population of the United States around the year 1800. A major example please. Not whether women should wear head coverings or how long men’s hair should be, but some major principle of morality. What was the divorce rate then? Tolerance of open extra marital whoredom and flagrant adultery? Support for the butchering of one’s own unborn child to escape the responsibility of sex? Gay marriage?
Among ALLLLLLL those denominations (of which there were really only a few), show me this “much disagreement”. “Christian”, like “American” once had a definition that was simple common knowledge. Both have been successfully buried under a mountain of multi level revisionism. That’s a why I look like a nutcase today. I’m like them by the grace of God. This country SOARED while we agreed on what objective morality to follow and we are dying a gasping gurgling whimpering death in the wake of all this “progress”.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This country SOARED while we agreed on what objective morality to follow and we are dying a gasping gurgling whimpering death in the wake of all this “progress”. [/quote]
If you soared or not is relly not my business, but how do you measure this decline? You are not using the average lifespan, are you?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You did it yourself in a thread where you said any Christian that used violence was not a true Christian. Those using violence would certainly differ with you.
Do you think its a moral action to use bombs that kill civilians in war? Some Christians would say no some would say yes. I’d certainly say that its a large and not so minor issue.
The world is only simple when you allow that your perspective is the sole correct one. Thats simply not the case.
From a Christian perspective the death penalty is immoral yes? But many Christians support it. Are they deluded? Not true Christians? Or simply just like everyone else and take the position that appeals to their taste.
I’ll say this the vast majority of people that are of any religion or nonreligion hold abstractly to an objective moral code, but where the rubber meets the road its often just a lot of horseshit. That is my opinion and I’ve pretty much universally seen it in behavior.
Probably the closest objective morality that I’ve seen in practice would have to quantified is some sort of partial hedonism.
I don’t see the answer to my question in which is a gold mine of data on the topic of this thread.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t see the answer to my question in which is a gold mine of data on the topic of this thread.[/quote]
Around 1800 an issue where there was dispute whether something was moral or not in America even within churches?
Slavery.
As well if you want to say things like covering heads etc are not as important of moral principles I’d certainly agree. What we are doing by this though is applying our subjectivity to recognize they have less value. Those principles which I agree are trite are less to our taste now so they are discarded.
And since now I have to work for awhile I leave you with an example of an action that isn’t immoral and is certainly unhealthy.
[photo]37517[/photo]
[quote]What was the divorce rate then? Tolerance of open extra marital whoredom and flagrant adultery? Support for the butchering of one’s own unborn child to escape the responsibility of sex? Gay marriage? Among ALLLLLLL those denominations (of which there were really only a few), show me this “much disagreement”. [/quote]I’m not gonna get an answer am I?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:<<< There is much disagreement within even the same denominations about all of the moral principles that would make up a particular religion’s moral system. Generally this is negated when brought up by the “not a true scotsman” deal. [/quote]Please give me an example of this among the overwhelmingly Christian population of the United States around the year 1800. A major example please. Not whether women should wear head coverings or how long men’s hair should be, but some major principle of morality. What was the divorce rate then? Tolerance of open extra marital whoredom and flagrant adultery? Support for the butchering of one’s own unborn child to escape the responsibility of sex? Gay marriage?
Among ALLLLLLL those denominations (of which there were really only a few), show me this “much disagreement”. “Christian”, like “American” once had a definition that was simple common knowledge. Both have been successfully buried under a mountain of multi level revisionism. That’s a why I look like a nutcase today. I’m like them by the grace of God. This country SOARED while we agreed on what objective morality to follow and we are dying a gasping gurgling whimpering death in the wake of all this “progress”. [/quote]
Do you mean whether it was frowned upon? You always make early America out to be some type of moral golden age. There were MANY brothels that were frequented. Abortion was legal in many colonies and were performed at a later stage than now and why would there be divorce when the woman was practically owned by the husband? There was no need when all she did was cook, clean,work, and raise HIS children.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
And I do right because I believe it’s the right thing to do…[/quote]
And so does the dictator. So does the conqueror. So does the guy shooting the other guy who disrespected him. And you can’t even say they’re wrong.[/quote]
Ofcourse I can.[/quote]
You can say it, but then then you either don’t mean it, or you don’t actually adhere to this worldview we’ve been chatting about. If morality only exists as each man has constructed it, and you have no faith that yours is actually more right (or wrong) then theirs, then you might as well be telling them they picked the wrong answer to ‘what is your favorite color?’
[/quote]
When someone acts in a way that’s detrimental to me or my kin there’s no reason whatsoever why I can’t call such actions wrong.