Higher != absolute.
Humans likely have the set of core values we are born with because it is evolutionarily advantageous for our given situation. So, as random mutation and natural selection is a hill climbing algorithm, it comes from a computational system that is higher than us.
This does not make it absolute. Does an ant operate under the same rules as a tiger? No. Their situations are quite different. The behaviors that are advantageous to one won't necessarily work for the other.
Strictly speaking, we do not. Evolutionarily speaking, we have it because getting along with others is a better survival strategy. Nonlnear's response was a good one.
Morality has no rational basis. It is arational, even for theists who have elected to adopt what they believe to be their God's prescribed morality.
You're confusing opinion with morality. The two are not the same. I believe Spidey is a loon in his opinions on government and politics but I don't think he's an immoral person.
The "need" is not a priori, it's anthropic. Species which survive will tend to look like they have what it takes to survive, and will tend to act like surviving matters. Hmm... "ascent" is a rather interesting turn of phrase. The perfect typo, as it were!
You are correct that those who claim to have a self-proving rational construction of their beliefs are deluded. However those who are honest about their choice of axioms (and what a choice of axioms entails) can pull off just about any construction they want. It always boils down to the aesthetic choice of axioms though, which makes some uncomfortable - namely those who like to smugly claim that their belief system is "totally rational" (by which they often incorrectly mean self validating) or some other such ballyhoo.
S: Make up your minds. You can't have it both ways. Either power = the determination of what is right and wrong (and thereby trampling everyone who disagrees underfoot violating any real sense of right and wrong) or morality is absolute and comes from a higher power. If you think that cultures and governments (i.e., power) decide what is right and wrong, hopefully you will realize how stupid it is to argue about the topics in P&N. Let's be logically consistent please.
M: It comes neither with power nor some external higher power but from simple organic love, the fact that a human who loves disappears into his lover. God creates me and I create Him. To awaken into being is to be all there is.
First we were everything and we lost it. Then we remembered it in a dream. When we awaken we become everything we dreamed by a return to who we were.
I am an atheist and I do not believe that
If our conscience is a result of mindless chance, then why should we follow it?
How is it that atheists believe in no god, but for some reason accept the idea of there being a voice in their head telling them right from wrong?
I'm not the one claiming there is an objective and unchanging morality. That would be the theists. The Deuteronomy pic is just one example of "divinely inspired" ethics that most Christians would find repugnant today..along with the repeated commandments from the Christian God to commit genocide and to enslave entire civilizations. Religious morality changes over time as the moral sentiment of those who practice it changes. It is clearly not the timeless and perfect work of a timeless and perfect God. Otherwise we could never hope to evolve beyond the barbarism displayed in "the good book". That was the point.
Yup. I always get a kick out of it when the Atheist Experience points out to Christian callers how they(the Christians) are more Moral than their God. The God of the Bible has no problem with Slavery or Womens' Inequality. Christians have rejected those sentiments, for the most part, and now consider them Immoral.
If a theist believes that God determines what is right and wrong for man to do, why would it be irrational to think that the laws God prescribes for a society are going against what God says is right and wrong? That makes no sense at all. The theist believes that right is to obey/please God and wrong is to disobey/displease Him. If He chooses to use a greater punishment in one instance of wrong doing and chooses a seemingly lesser punishment in another instance of wrong doing, that is His prerogative b/c the wrongdoing is ultimately against Him. God is not a judge ruling in a case that does not involve Him. Every offense committed in this universe is against Him. He does not commit offenses against Himself.
Wut?
God considers Slavery and even Genocide to be A OK. Do you?
God used Israel as his punishing stick on many different nations. God used Babylon and Assyria for the same purpose. God punishes nations that sin against Him to this day. I don't have a problem with that. How am I supposed to say to the God who created everything "You are wrong." That makes absolutely no sense. He makes the rules and we break them and we get punished for it. And yes, God holds entire nations accountable. God does not take pleasure in this, but He can not abide with sin.
Ezekiel 18
23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? ...
31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!
As SBT mentioned above, God offers forgiveness through Christ.
No, I am ok with God punishing people according to how He sees fit. I do not like it, and as scripture clearly states, neither does God. This was clearly stated.So you're ok with Genocide. Thanks for clearing that up.
This is a baseless assumption. Sure we observe it, but science can't prove why it exists-- why evolution evolved the need to survive.
There is no need to survive, strictly speaking. Therefor, what reason is there why any member of society shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they want?
No, I am ok with God punishing people according to how He sees fit. I do not like it, and as scripture clearly states, neither does God. This was clearly stated.
You really shouldn't worry about what I believe. You would undoubtedly hang it on some simple little framework so you'd have something to use as a baseline for responses, but that's not gonna be of any help to you. The number of attempts you make at understanding me is not going to exceed your number of failures, and the methods by which you reach your failures will reveal much about yourself. And, frankly, there's a lot of noise on that channel -- so much will come through that is just mundane. If I am interested in a particular facet of you I have much better methods of revealing it than just listening to you crash about in the dark.
Yes, it's self-centered, but as I cannot help you, that comes out on top.
And don't bother to post what you make of this. Like I said, there's a lot of noise on that channel. I've watched a lot of people spin their wheels over the years and it just isn't interesting anymore.
Weak. You realize those are just Political choices at the time and thrown onto God as justification?
What do you think makes something right or wrong?
This is a baseless assumption. Sure we observe it, but science can't prove why it exists-- why evolution evolved the need to survive.
There is no need to survive, strictly speaking. Therefor, what reason is there why any member of society shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they want?
B/c you say so? You may not like what I am saying, but since when has what we liked had any bearing on reality?
Oh, sorry. If you disapprove of Hitler, Mussolini, or Chairman Mao, what's your basis for doing so?
No questions exist where there is love. The lover does not think. Love is always right.
Love is bullshit.No questions exist where there is love. The lover does not think. Love is always right.
I do what feels right to me. I don't understand the basis of my judgment other than that.I don't think anyone said it's proof of anything. It's just a challenge to atheists to identify the origin of their morality.