Page 25 of 33 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 324

Thread: Bread and The Bible page 25

  1. #241
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Primal Fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by UTfootball747 View Post
    ....so people who don't believe in God can't have legitimate opinions on what is right or wrong? That's silly.
    I didn't say that. I'm saying in a materialistic reality right and wrong, what is "good", can be whatever you (or someone's Islamic Khilafat) want it to be.

    G. E. Moore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Good as indefinable

    Moore contended that goodness cannot be analysed in terms of any other property. In Principia Ethica, he writes:

    It may be true that all things which are good are also something else, just as it is true that all things which are yellow produce a certain kind of vibration in the light. And it is a fact, that Ethics aims at discovering what are those other properties belonging to all things which are good. But far too many philosophers have thought that when they named those other properties they were actually defining good; that these properties, in fact, were simply not "other," but absolutely and entirely the same with goodness. ( 10 3)

    Therefore, we cannot define "good" by explaining it in other words. We can only point to an action or a thing and say "That is good." Similarly, we cannot describe to a blind person exactly what yellow is. We can only show a sighted person a piece of yellow paper or a yellow scrap of cloth and say "That is yellow."
    Good as a non-natural property

    In addition to categorising "good" as indefinable, Moore also emphasized that it is a non-natural property. This means that it cannot be empirically or scientifically tested or verified - it is not within the bounds of "natural science".
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  2. #242
    UTfootball747's Avatar
    UTfootball747 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    I didn't say that. I'm saying in a materialistic reality right and wrong, what is "good", can be whatever you (or someone's Islamic Khilafat) want it to be.
    Absolutely. Anything beyond that is just theory, anyway.

    What does this have to do with believing in a 'God' or not?

  3. #243
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote Originally Posted by UTfootball747 View Post
    Absolutely. Anything beyond that is just theory, anyway.

    What does this have to do with believing in a 'God' or not?
    What is the point of atheism if an atheist isn't grounding his belief in materialism? Show me an atheist who doesn't so. I really don't care to rehash all this stuff. I did enough of that back in the old Usnet. What I get tired of, though, are the smug put downs on theists that can only be based upon that atheist's arguing a moral realism of his own.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  4. #244
    UTfootball747's Avatar
    UTfootball747 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    What is the point of atheism if an atheist isn't grounding his belief in materialism? Show me an atheist who doesn't so.
    I don't see how you get from that to the notion that atheists must necessarily then reject morality, right and wrong, emotion, etc., simply because they attribute those concepts to 'materialistic' origins.

    I really don't care to rehash all this stuff. I did enough of that back in the old Usnet. What I get tired of, though, are the smug put downs on theists that can only be based upon that atheist's arguing a moral realism of his own.
    Good lord, but what you're peddling isn't "smug"!?

  5. #245
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote Originally Posted by UTfootball747 View Post
    I don't see how you get from that to the notion that atheists must necessarily then reject morality, right and wrong, emotion, etc., simply because they attribute those concepts to 'materialistic' origins.
    I didn't say they had to reject morality. Any sociology class will talk about morality and cultural moral codes. That class will put "right and wrong" within cultural norms (normative ethics), aka Cultural Relativism. That doesn't mean you don't have your moral preferences; beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What it mean, however, is that you (or anyone else) could have no rational justification to argue that your moral preferences are somehow factually superior. So much for the UN's Declaration on Human Rights in that rights are somehow "inherent." The UN Declaration would also have to be the stuff of fairy tale.

    Quote Originally Posted by UTfootball747 View Post
    Good lord, but what you're peddling isn't "smug"!?
    It's a counter. Someone always wants to put down theists for believing in "fairy tales."
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  6. #246
    Lumifer's Avatar
    Lumifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    What I get tired of, though, are the smug put downs on theists that can only be based upon that atheist's arguing a moral realism of his own.
    How about put downs on theists by true moral relativists? :-)

  7. #247
    UTfootball747's Avatar
    UTfootball747 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    I didn't say they had to reject morality. Any sociology class will talk about morality and cultural moral codes. That class will put "right and wrong" within cultural norms (normative ethics), aka Cultural Relativism. That doesn't mean you don't have your moral preferences; beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What it mean, however, is that you (or anyone else) could have no rational justification to argue that your moral preferences are somehow factually superior.
    But the religious among us DO have such a "rational justification"? That seems strange, because even within a particular sect of a single denomination of one of the various religions on the planet, there can be great disagreement. Humans learn of religion from other humans.

    I don't need to argue that my beliefs are "factually superior" in order to advocate on their behalf.

    It's a counter. Someone always wants to put down theists for believing in "fairy tales."
    So you, in turn, resort to these philosophical back-flips to put atheists in their place? I'm not saying there aren't a lot of smug atheists (and as I noted I'm simply agnostic), but there's plenty of that coming from the side of religious believers ("Oh you poor dear, I will pray you find your way to agreeing with my belief system before you're subjected to an eternity of damnation.")
    Last edited by UTfootball747; 04-03-2013 at 01:25 PM.

  8. #248
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    How about put downs on theists by true moral relativists? :-)
    He's fine with those. Keep 'em coming!

  9. #249
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    930
    Quote Originally Posted by UTfootball747 View Post
    But the religious among us DO have such a "rational justification"? That seems strange, because even within a particular sect of a single denomination of one of the various religions on the planet, there can be great disagreement. Humans learn of religion from other humans.

    I don't need to argue that my beliefs are "factually superior" in order to advocate on their behalf.



    So you, in turn, resort to these philosophical back-flips to put atheists in their place? I'm not saying there aren't a lot of smug atheists (and as I noted I'm simply agnostic), but there's plenty of that coming from the side of religious believers ("Oh you poor dear, I will pray you find your way to agreeing with my belief system before you're subjected to an eternity of damnation.")
    At one point I was agnostic. I couldn't accept the ethical implication materialism has. Back flips? OK. Depends, not all atheists. I really don't care whether someone is atheist, theist, deist, whatever. It's when an atheist puts down theists for believing in fair tales in inadvertently using his own. These days I pass over most of those arguments. And I agree that there are smug theists. Someone even replied to a post of mine using a biblical phrases. At least that's what I thought the intent was. I used to take issue with theists as well in forums were atheists and theists were debating each other. I argued with atheists against theists. I'll do that when a fundamentalist is arguing against evolution. I posted a rebuttal on that earlier in this thread.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  10. #250
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    What I don't get, Scott, is your insistence on equating atheism with materialism. It's a faulty premise from which the rest of your faulty reasoning proceeds.

    Ya see, I actually have a PhD. I didn't just get complemented (sic) by one once.

    Boy this gets the silly thread of the month award for sure.

Page 25 of 33 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •