Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Morailty from God?

johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,

Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?
bulproof
Posts: 25,260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 6:39:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
If you don't mind I'll "pass" on any moral guidance or instruction from bible god. I have a perfectly good scum filled pond at the bottom of my yard thanks.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:10:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

It's all about how to make morality axiomatic, I think. Supposedly gods can do this (probably not), and if we don't believe in them, we're effectively moral nihilists. Apparently.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:14:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The morality arguments (and similar ones) are truly bizarre. The start with there premise that something (such as morality) comes from god.

What is the point? If you're arguing with a nonbeliever, then obviously they don't accept that premise. If you're arguing with a believer, then they probably already accept the conclusion. In either case, the argument is irrelevant.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:23:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:14:59 AM, drafterman wrote:
The morality arguments (and similar ones) are truly bizarre. The start with there premise that something (such as morality) comes from god.

What is the point? If you're arguing with a nonbeliever, then obviously they don't accept that premise. If you're arguing with a believer, then they probably already accept the conclusion. In either case, the argument is irrelevant.

But I am a believer Drafetrman and still I contend the argument simply because I do not understand it......Why would you think it's irrelevant in both cases?

Also my question about having a desire to end all human suffering went un-answered as to why this law has to come from God and not from our own selves.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:27:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:23:23 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:14:59 AM, drafterman wrote:
The morality arguments (and similar ones) are truly bizarre. The start with there premise that something (such as morality) comes from god.

What is the point? If you're arguing with a nonbeliever, then obviously they don't accept that premise. If you're arguing with a believer, then they probably already accept the conclusion. In either case, the argument is irrelevant.


But I am a believer Drafetrman and still I contend the argument simply because I do not understand it......Why would you think it's irrelevant in both cases?

Also my question about having a desire to end all human suffering went un-answered as to why this law has to come from God and not from our own selves.

Why does anything have meaning? Why does suffering mean anything? People think that gods can give things meaning.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:27:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 6:39:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
If you don't mind I'll "pass" on any moral guidance or instruction from bible god. I have a perfectly good scum filled pond at the bottom of my yard thanks.

Really, a perfectly scum filed pond.....At the bottom of your yard.....It's all your buddy.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:48:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

Well that is another argument, which seems to me to be very untrue. It can also be that "evolved morality" doesn't seem to them to have any inherent value.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 7:50:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

Thanks Phantom, On another note I realized your signature the other day and it reminded me of the Nietzsche quote again.... I would like to present it to you.....

"Without music, life would be a mistake.... I would only believe in a God who knew how to dance."

Friedrich Nietzsche

So since we have music and we have dancing then is it not to be concluded That life is not a mistake and that God is indeed a dancer? lol

As Einsteien once said....

Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."

R13; Albert Einstein
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 8:42:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
We would never agree on what Morality is, except for few obvious things, also Morality is for establishing Justice, meaning if a person or a group transgresses the Morality rule, what there sentence should be? And you , as a believer of God, may not know what God wants from us ? does he want us just enjoy ourselves ? or He want us to strive for his sake ? the purpose of our existence may change the set of Morality you would get.

It's not that we can't define Morality so that it would work for us , but it may not be the right set of Morality that we need to accept and follow or meant by the creator.
Sower4GS
Posts: 1,718
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 8:42:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:50:42 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

All of you. Don't think. Stop. Repent in Yahushua's name. Then let Him do the thinking cause you are all off.

Thanks Phantom, On another note I realized your signature the other day and it reminded me of the Nietzsche quote again.... I would like to present it to you.....



"Without music, life would be a mistake.... I would only believe in a God who knew how to dance."

Friedrich Nietzsche


So since we have music and we have dancing then is it not to be concluded That life is not a mistake and that God is indeed a dancer? lol

As Einsteien once said....

Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."

R13; Albert Einstein

So please don't think but do the above.
bulproof
Posts: 25,260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 8:55:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 8:42:28 AM, Sower4GS wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:50:42 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

All of you. Don't think. Stop. Repent in Yahushua's name. Then let Him do the thinking cause you are all off.

Thanks Phantom, On another note I realized your signature the other day and it reminded me of the Nietzsche quote again.... I would like to present it to you.....



"Without music, life would be a mistake.... I would only believe in a God who knew how to dance."

Friedrich Nietzsche


So since we have music and we have dancing then is it not to be concluded That life is not a mistake and that God is indeed a dancer? lol

As Einsteien once said....

Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."

R13; Albert Einstein

So please don't think but do the above.

I'm happy to leave the "not thinking" to you pal. You're a natural from what I've seen. LOL
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 9:40:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The argument in my view arises almost wholly from quoting Nietzsche and others who follow him as proof that without God there is no morality. I also cannot for the life of me after reading "The AntiChrist" and "Thus Spake Zarathustra" see the value of Nietzsche as a philosopher.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 9:41:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

Bearing in mind (I may be wrong here) phantom was a theist who promoted this argument who does not any more, I'd take his interpretation of it as the better authority we have here on the case.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 11:54:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:48:21 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

Well that is another argument, which seems to me to be very untrue. It can also be that "evolved morality" doesn't seem to them to have any inherent value.

I don't put much worth to the argument but sometimes it does make you need to think how different moral traits, like altruism evolved.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 11:57:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 9:41:33 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:36:17 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/23/2013 6:21:40 AM, johnlubba wrote:
Why can't morality be a desire to see the end of all human suffering,


Why does it have to be a transcendent God who enforces this rule, why can't we as a species know what it feels like for another person to suffer and not wish it upon them.?

I am confused about the morality argument somewhat, could someone please clarify?

I think those who advocate the moral argument usually can't find it plausible that morality, or at least, morality as it is, could arise naturally. They think under atheism everyone would be free to do as they please with no obligations to anyone else and that no one would truly care about horrible things happening to those they don't know, like 911. Survival of the fittest, after all. That's usually the essential argument I come across.

Bearing in mind (I may be wrong here) phantom was a theist who promoted this argument who does not any more, I'd take his interpretation of it as the better authority we have here on the case.

Yeah, I used to support it. Here's how I presented the argument. http://www.debate.org... http://www.debate.org... Keep in mind, back then I barely knew anything about philosophy.

I'm going more off of conversations I've had with other people, though, than the with the exact argument I used to support.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2013 12:32:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/23/2013 7:23:23 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 6/23/2013 7:14:59 AM, drafterman wrote:
The morality arguments (and similar ones) are truly bizarre. The start with there premise that something (such as morality) comes from god.

What is the point? If you're arguing with a nonbeliever, then obviously they don't accept that premise. If you're arguing with a believer, then they probably already accept the conclusion. In either case, the argument is irrelevant.


But I am a believer Drafetrman and still I contend the argument simply because I do not understand it......Why would you think it's irrelevant in both cases?

Because... "If you're arguing with a nonbeliever, then obviously they don't accept that premise. If you're arguing with a believer, then they probably already accept the conclusion." Like I just said...


Also my question about having a desire to end all human suffering went un-answered as to why this law has to come from God and not from our own selves.

Because it doesn't have to come from God. Nothing does.