joe1776
Well-Known Member
If a Loving Creator exists, and if it wanted us to have freewill along with moral guidance, we would have a simple-to-use, cross-cultural, internal moral guidance system. It's very likely that conscience is exactly that.
A bias is any preexisting belief capable of sending a judgment off its correct course. Even when we want to do the right thing morally our judgment can be thrown off course by a bias. Because of biases, the simple and powerful nature of conscience isn't obvious.
When we read the facts in a case of cold-blooded murder, we immediately feel moral outrage. That's a signal from our conscience that the act is wrong. We have to regard that judgment as infallible because conscience is the only moral authority we have.
When we write criminal laws to prohibit murder, they are unnecessary at best and biases at their worst because human acts happen in an almost infinite variety, moral situations are not an exception. Conscience is equipped to deal with those variations, the reasoning function of our brains cannot. It's not possible to write the perfect law on murder or any other kind of act.
The very same killing might be justifiable in several states in the USA but not in others. And, we're talking about laws that have a history of a thousand years, going back to English common law. The collective conscience of unbiased juries, after hearing all the facts, and unhindered by laws, would offer the best judgments on such cases.
The reasoning function of our brains is the wrong tool for dealing with moral judgments. In addition to criminal laws, interpretation of religious texts and self-made moral rules, also products of reasoning, often create biases.
The laws in the USA have been heavily influenced by interpretations of scripture from the Christian Bible. Many of those laws were and still are immoral. As we examine our conscience, issue by issue, we are getting rid of the immoral laws such as those that allowed slavery and those that deprived women, minorities and homosexuals of their equal rights.
Criminal laws could be replaced by a simple mission statement to establish the state's obligation to protect innocent citizens from serious harm. Conscience has taught us that it is wrong to intentionally harm or endanger an innocent person. That's enough to guide unbiased juries.
Conscience alone isn't compelling evidence that a Loving Creator exists, but once we understand its simple and powerful nature, it should create the suspicion.
Comments or questions?
A bias is any preexisting belief capable of sending a judgment off its correct course. Even when we want to do the right thing morally our judgment can be thrown off course by a bias. Because of biases, the simple and powerful nature of conscience isn't obvious.
When we read the facts in a case of cold-blooded murder, we immediately feel moral outrage. That's a signal from our conscience that the act is wrong. We have to regard that judgment as infallible because conscience is the only moral authority we have.
When we write criminal laws to prohibit murder, they are unnecessary at best and biases at their worst because human acts happen in an almost infinite variety, moral situations are not an exception. Conscience is equipped to deal with those variations, the reasoning function of our brains cannot. It's not possible to write the perfect law on murder or any other kind of act.
The very same killing might be justifiable in several states in the USA but not in others. And, we're talking about laws that have a history of a thousand years, going back to English common law. The collective conscience of unbiased juries, after hearing all the facts, and unhindered by laws, would offer the best judgments on such cases.
The reasoning function of our brains is the wrong tool for dealing with moral judgments. In addition to criminal laws, interpretation of religious texts and self-made moral rules, also products of reasoning, often create biases.
The laws in the USA have been heavily influenced by interpretations of scripture from the Christian Bible. Many of those laws were and still are immoral. As we examine our conscience, issue by issue, we are getting rid of the immoral laws such as those that allowed slavery and those that deprived women, minorities and homosexuals of their equal rights.
Criminal laws could be replaced by a simple mission statement to establish the state's obligation to protect innocent citizens from serious harm. Conscience has taught us that it is wrong to intentionally harm or endanger an innocent person. That's enough to guide unbiased juries.
Conscience alone isn't compelling evidence that a Loving Creator exists, but once we understand its simple and powerful nature, it should create the suspicion.
Comments or questions?
Last edited:
