Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Thought of the Day #3

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist, rather design is an illusion, what does that say about objective morality in an evolutionists world view?

Expanded; if there is no design in nature yet only illusion of design, what does that say about object morality in the same sense - is objective morality an illusion too?

(Rickard Dawkins says that design is an illusion in nature, Sam Harris says objective morality exists.)

Defend that objective morality is not an illusion with reason and logic. Or submit otherwise.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:20:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist, rather design is an illusion, what does that say about objective morality in an evolutionists world view?

Objective morality doesn't exist but in theory. So, it would say that perhaps their views oppose the general views.

Expanded; if there is no design in nature yet only illusion of design, what does that say about object morality in the same sense - is objective morality an illusion too?

(Rickard Dawkins says that design is an illusion in nature, Sam Harris says objective morality exists.)

Defend that objective morality is not an illusion with reason and logic. Or submit otherwise.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:32:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:20:03 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist, rather design is an illusion, what does that say about objective morality in an evolutionists world view?

Objective morality doesn't exist but in theory. So, it would say that perhaps their views oppose the general views.

Expanded; if there is no design in nature yet only illusion of design, what does that say about object morality in the same sense - is objective morality an illusion too?

(Rickard Dawkins says that design is an illusion in nature, Sam Harris says objective morality exists.)

Defend that objective morality is not an illusion with reason and logic. Or submit otherwise.

Every teaching of morality is a theory, evolution is a theory. I am not concluding that objective morality exists, I am simply addressing a human error, by contrasting objective morality being an illusion, with design in nature being an illusion. Or rather said; if design in nature is an illusion, objective morality is therefore an illusion too. If something so clear is maybe an illusion (design in nature) then perhaps objective morality is equally an illusion. Now what are your thoughts?
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:49:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:32:20 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 4/25/2012 1:20:03 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist, rather design is an illusion, what does that say about objective morality in an evolutionists world view?

Objective morality doesn't exist but in theory. So, it would say that perhaps their views oppose the general views.

Expanded; if there is no design in nature yet only illusion of design, what does that say about object morality in the same sense - is objective morality an illusion too?

(Rickard Dawkins says that design is an illusion in nature, Sam Harris says objective morality exists.)

Defend that objective morality is not an illusion with reason and logic. Or submit otherwise.

Every teaching of morality is a theory, evolution is a theory. I am not concluding that objective morality exists, I am simply addressing a human error, by contrasting objective morality being an illusion, with design in nature being an illusion. Or rather said; if design in nature is an illusion, objective morality is therefore an illusion too. If something so clear is maybe an illusion (design in nature) then perhaps objective morality is equally an illusion. Now what are your thoughts?

I totally agree with you. Same thing with stars murdering stars, it is just as 'wrong' as murder - we just view it differently based on subjective experience.

Wrong meaning negative.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 10:03:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist, rather design is an illusion, what does that say about objective morality in an evolutionists world view?

Theists like to claim that their morality is objective and ours isn't. But they never defend that claim. They never even say why it would be good if they were right.
Nosaj5q
Posts: 175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 10:25:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist,

Not really nature designs itself based on what designs work and what designs can achieve certain things like starfish and mollusks being having radial symmetry because those blueprints work for surviving. in the same way I believe you will find if we ever encounter intelligent alien life (in our lifetimes) I would not be surprised if they look not all that different from us "there is a formula for success" in the same way that's why you find animals and different parts of the globe developing similar attributes despite having no relation. nature has a design it just wasn't made by an omnipotent being it was made by natures natural processes.
Slimy yet satisfying"
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 11:31:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 10:25:38 AM, Nosaj5q wrote:
At 4/25/2012 1:11:54 PM, GodSands wrote:
If there is no design in nature in the perspective of an evolutionist,

Not really nature designs itself based on what designs work and what designs can achieve certain things like starfish and mollusks being having radial symmetry because those blueprints work for surviving. in the same way I believe you will find if we ever encounter intelligent alien life (in our lifetimes) I would not be surprised if they look not all that different from us "there is a formula for success" in the same way that's why you find animals and different parts of the globe developing similar attributes despite having no relation. nature has a design it just wasn't made by an omnipotent being it was made by natures natural processes.

That all might be correct according to the theory of evolution, I'm not doubting you there. You haven't made an argument against my case. I am saying if design isn't actual design, then why think any differently towards morality, as in morality is what you make and design is in ones eye and not the others.
Nosaj5q
Posts: 175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 11:37:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
That all might be correct according to the theory of evolution, I'm not doubting you there. You haven't made an argument against my case. I am saying if design isn't actual design, then why think any differently towards morality, as in morality is what you make and design is in ones eye and not the others.

well I don't think any differently toward morality I think the Maine reason for the human moral code has t do with our intelligence and empathy and we realize if this other person is the same sort of thing I am then I shouldn't do to it what I wouldn't what it to do to me.
Slimy yet satisfying"
Nosaj5q
Posts: 175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 11:37:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 11:37:14 AM, Nosaj5q wrote:
That all might be correct according to the theory of evolution, I'm not doubting you there. You haven't made an argument against my case. I am saying if design isn't actual design, then why think any differently towards morality, as in morality is what you make and design is in ones eye and not the others.

well I don't think any differently toward morality I think the Maine reason for the human moral code has t do with our intelligence and empathy and we realize if this other person is the same sort of thing I am then I shouldn't do to it what I wouldn't what it to do to me.

at least in reference to other humans
Slimy yet satisfying"
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 4:49:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 11:37:14 AM, Nosaj5q wrote:
That all might be correct according to the theory of evolution, I'm not doubting you there. You haven't made an argument against my case. I am saying if design isn't actual design, then why think any differently towards morality, as in morality is what you make and design is in ones eye and not the others.

well I don't think any differently toward morality I think the Maine reason for the human moral code has t do with our intelligence and empathy and we realize if this other person is the same sort of thing I am then I shouldn't do to it what I wouldn't what it to do to me.

Ok, so what you are posing here is that because we are intelligent and empathetic beings, objective morality is true? If this is what you meant, that it has little to do with my case. Whether or not you believe in objective morality, doesn't stop the possibility of objective morality being an illusion. You can believe an illusion and it will seem real, perhaps based off of other things, such that we are intelligent or empathetic. Objectives come from an authority, objectives are given, they are not self founded or self created. An objective is something that is appointed to something or someone to attend, complete, keep or obey. Based in the favor of evolution, our intelligence may make it seem that murder is wrong, evil or incorrect, but that is just an illusion that might help us survive better. However it may be the case that murder could help us survive easier. One may just need to be very intelligent to carry out sufficient murders to get him or her thought life with ease.

Going back to basics here, if design in nature is an illusion, then surely there is no such thing as 'design' in morality (objective morality).
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 5:46:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
De-mystified, morality is really just a matter of human or animal flourishing. It follows that there can easily be objective answers to moral questions.