Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

How does God make morality objective?

reasonable75
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:39:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Most people think that if there's a God then there's obviously an objective morality. Not even non-believers question this premise. Perhaps, I'm being completely foolish when it comes to this concept, but I lack the certainty that others seem to possess. While it's obvious that an all-powerful God could bully his/her/it's way on us, I'm unsure on how his/her/it's preferences are any less subjective than our own. Many will label me with the fallacy of anthropomorphism, but I fail to see how. Think about this, how could cherry ice cream ever be objectively the best tasting thing to eat? People may say "well it's obvious that cherry ice cream is objectively tastier than detergent". However, this seems to me to be untrue. While it is objectively true that all human sapiens (that I know of) have a more preferable subjective experience when eating cherry ice cream than detergent, this doesn't make the statement "cherry ice cream objectively tastes better than detergent" true. Think for a moment if we came in contact with an alien species that in fact prefers the taste of detergent, would we be objectively right and they objectively wrong? Even if nothing enjoys the taste of detergent better, the mere possibility that someday something could is something to think about. I wonder at what point does ones greatness transform their subjective opinions into objective declarations. Some will simply answer "when there God". This makes sense in some arenas, but I'm not so sure about others. While obviously as God you could make it so everyone prefers the taste of cherry ice cream over anything else - he/she/it could make cherry ice cream the equivalent of an orgasm in your mouth - (or better) , but I fail to see how a statement like "cherry ice cream is objectively the best tasting anything" could be true. Someday possibly God could decide to create a creature that hates the taste of cherry ice cream, and this possibility alone maintains the subjectivity of such a preference even for God. (I think)

What does this have to do with morality?

I in fact believe that there is an objective morality, and that morality is separate of God. (If there is one) If I'm wrong, if in fact anything God declares is objectively right, well then the possibility of assault, rape, and murder being objectively moral remains. What kind of objective morality this would be I wonder? Some will say "God would never say such things are moral", he's/she's/it's perfection. But what's perfection? God could deem what we see as evil as perfect goodness. I continue to see countless suffering and ignorance sprouting to life because of the belief that "everything God says is objectively right". In the Arab world we see the oppression of women, in the west we see sayings like "protecting the dignity of marriage" against gays, and as a whole religious sects continue to be pinned against each other sure their opposition is damned. I won't go into my argument for an objective morality just yet, but I ask can God's preferences be subjective?

I anticipate a rain of criticism and I welcome it. I accept that I must be far off the mark as everyone seems so convinced that I am. However, I would be nothing but a conformist if I didn't demand superior reasoning for why I am wrong.

My best wishes,

Reasonable75
"There's a false assumption about science operating here. Science is not in principle committed to the idea that there's no after-life, or that the mind is identical to the brain, or that materialism is true. Science is completely open to whatever in fact is true." - Sam Harris

jimtimmy wrote:
"Look at me look at me look at me! I am a scary racist... trololololol. Oh noes somene is holding me to account for my sh1t."

Cerebral_Narcissist: "Cool story bro."
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 2:03:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Objective morality is an absurdity, God or not.

Even if God declared an objective morality, it would still be based on relativistic principles. It wouldn't actually be objective.

The closest thing you can get to "objective morality" would probably be the law of the universe that holds it together.

You could say that God itself is the objective morality.

Moral Naturalism is based on this understanding, and it is what is closest to what I would consider to be morality. Even then, moral naturalism is relativistic by nature. Objective morality can not be grasped by human beings.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 7:12:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I essentially agree, objective morality requires that there be moral laws that operate like scientific or logical laws. Everything else is relativism and when examined the only conclusion is nihilism.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.