• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Transcendent Truth

McBell

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
lunamoth said:
OK, I worded that poorly. No, I'm not saying that and I think I've said in more than one post that people use religion or their idea of 'truth' and many other things to try to justify violence.
Click to expand...
I am confused.
Lets start out with a simple question: Is violence ever justified?

lunamoth said:
One point of the talk is that it is not rational to cut all religious viewpoints out of public discourse, or to suggest that the main problem facing social harmony in the world is conflict between religious ideals.
Click to expand...
Two things come to mind:
1. If religion is not the main problem, then what is?
2. To suggest that conflicts between religious ideals is not a barrier to social harmony is merely ignoring the fact that it exists.
The same is true with the minimization you seem to be doing with it.
​
lunamoth said:
It goes on to suggest that a religiously plural society preserves a diversity that is healthy for social unity. Religious truths, including the truths of non-theistic religions, preserve an important aspect of our search for justice and peace, and that is a holding out against the idea that the highest truth is power, against the idea that might makes right, and uphold the idea that the voice of the conscientious objector is important and meaningful.
Click to expand...
How do you come up with the idea that the highest truth is believed to be power?


It seems that perhaps I am starting in the middle of some philosophical theory and my missing the beginning has left me at a disadvantage.
 
lunamoth

lunamoth

Will to love
Mestemia said:
I am confused.
Lets start out with a simple question: Is violence ever justified?
Click to expand...
No, but people will try to justify it.


Two things come to mind:
1. If religion is not the main problem, then what is?​
Click to expand...
IMO the main problem is that humans are 'fallen' creatures. I use that metaphorically to refer to the idea, as does Paul, that even though we often know what is right and even want to do it, we often don't. Or, the way JS Spong puts it, we are 'incomplete.'
​

2. To suggest that conflicts between religious ideals is not a barrier to social harmony is merely ignoring the fact that it exists.
Click to expand...
The same is true with the minimization you seem to be doing with it.​
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to minimize it or excuse it. I am saying it's not the only factor, and if you were able to eradicate religion, it would not solve the problem and it would (I think) make it worse.​
How do you come up with the idea that the highest truth is believed to be power?
Click to expand...
I don't. That is in the OP and the paper I linked to, and it's been discussed a couple of times already in this thread.

In the absence of a higher/transcendent truth, how do humans detemine what is right?


It seems that perhaps I am starting in the middle of some philosophical theory and my missing the beginning has left me at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. If you are interested you could read the whole paper by Williams. I linked to it in an earlier post. I'll go get the link again in case you can't find it.
 
atomic47

atomic47

Member
Humans determine what is right by seeing the effects of their decisions. If some actions creates a negative impact, well then it's bad, or vice versa. We don't need a nanny to tell us what's right and wrong, we can figure out those things on our own.
 
McBell

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
lunamoth said:
No, but people will try to justify it.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree then.


lunamoth said:
IMO the main problem is that humans are 'fallen' creatures. I use that metaphorically to refer to the idea, as does Paul, that even though we often know what is right and even want to do it, we often don't. Or, the way JS Spong puts it, we are 'incomplete.'
Click to expand...
Fallen?
Incomplete?

lunamoth said:
I'm not trying to minimize it or excuse it. I am saying it's not the only factor, and if you were able to eradicate religion, it would not solve the problem and it would (I think) make it worse.I don't. That is in the OP and the paper I linked to, and it's been discussed a couple of times already in this thread.
Click to expand...
I agree that eliminating religion will not eliminate violence.
However, you will be hard pressed to convince me that eliminating religion will make things worse.
Do you really believe that the only reason people do good is because they think some absolute truth tells them so?

lunamoth said:
In the absence of a higher/transcendent truth, how do humans detemine what is right?
Click to expand...
The same way that society has agreed that certain things that certian 'higher truths' condone are actually immoral.
Slavery for instance.

lunamoth said:
Perhaps. If you are interested you could read the whole paper by Williams. I linked to it in an earlier post. I'll go get the link again in case you can't find it.
Click to expand...
i must have missed the link.
I wish this board would colour them blue or something to distinguish them from the rest of the text, since underlining it does not seem to work for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top