Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

(P)Religious thinkers responsible for ethics?

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 3:40:00 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?

I can take this two ways.
If there were never any religion on earth, would there be questions and answers concerning ethics?
Well, yes, of course.

In the world today, comparing the contribution of secular ethicists to religious ethicists, which is greater?
Historically ethics has come from religion. Although there has been a trend recently to recognize the validity of secular ethics, religious ethics has had a several thousand year head start, it will take a while for secular ethics to catch up.
Most of the foundational work has been done by religionists.
Secular ethics was more at work in Eastern cultures, Confucianism comes to mind.
It is certainly not one sided for religion, but the balance tips to their side, historically if not contemporary.

Secular ethics has always been around, during recorded history.
Saying there would be no such desipline as ethics, without religion, is not accurate
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 4:08:56 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 3:40:00 AM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
At 11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?

I can take this two ways.
If there were never any religion on earth, would there be questions and answers concerning ethics?
Well, yes, of course.

In the world today, comparing the contribution of secular ethicists to religious ethicists, which is greater?
Historically ethics has come from religion. Although there has been a trend recently to recognize the validity of secular ethics, religious ethics has had a several thousand year head start, it will take a while for secular ethics to catch up.
Most of the foundational work has been done by religionists.
Secular ethics was more at work in Eastern cultures, Confucianism comes to mind.
It is certainly not one sided for religion, but the balance tips to their side, historically if not contemporary.

Secular ethics has always been around, during recorded history.
Saying there would be no such desipline as ethics, without religion, is not accurate

Ok, thank you for your insights. I will be doing some research.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 4:21:15 AM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
The Buddha never claimed himself to be God, and never claimed there was a God.
Buddhism has assimilated other religions and cultures, so can be considered a religion today, although that is far from unanimous.
I, for one, object to calling it a religion.
Buddhism, before the influence of religions, was secular, as well as the ethics of the Buddha.
I haven't given it much thought, I am sure there are other examples, but they do not come to mind.
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 8:48:41 PM
Posted: 3 weeks ago
At 11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?

I agree. The academic field of ethics should attempt to account for all ethics. Leaving out specifically religious ethics would be unwarranted. Even if you're specifically studying secular ethics, you have to be able to draw comparisons between the two in order to have a fuller understanding of why you believe what you believe.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
Subutai
Posts: 3,147
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2016 11:17:48 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?

Well it depends on how you want to define "religious thinkers". Aristotle thought about ethics a lot, and, while he wasn't a religious figure, can potentially be thought of as a "religious thinker", as he did think about those sorts of things.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 12:38:10 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/20/2016 11:17:48 AM, Subutai wrote:
At 11/9/2016 2:50:12 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
In a recent conversation:

"I am saying that you don"t have the field of ethics as an academic field without religious thinkers."

Agree? Why or why not?

Well it depends on how you want to define "religious thinkers". Aristotle thought about ethics a lot, and, while he wasn't a religious figure, can potentially be thought of as a "religious thinker", as he did think about those sorts of things.

That is one of the objections I had to this statement. If someone thinks of god does that make all of their thinking "religious"? I find that questionable, but assuming that were the case I think there may be some equivocation in that statement since the god early philosophers advocated would be different than the "God" intended by the modern speaker.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 3:07:01 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
Although religion has played a significant role in codifying ethical thought and ideology, I do not believe it is specifically responsible for generating this category of human consideration. I believe ethics to originate in the social necessity of cooperation. Not in man's intellectual relationship with unknown or inexplicable forces (theology).

As such, it is not the product of religion so much as it is the product of our need to cooperate with each other for our mutual benefit and survival.