Just_me_Mike
Well-Known Member
Anyone up to the challenge?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Anyone up to the challenge?
What challenge? If you want to prove moral law must exist, then please proceed.
Then I'll see what I think of your reasoning.
I think he's correctly arguing that anyone who says X is better for humanity (which I'm assuming is equivalent to "We ought to do X") is implicitely assuming the existence of moral law.
Ah...then I'd make such an argument based upon morals shared by whomeverI think he's correctly arguing that anyone who says X is better for humanity (which I'm assuming is equivalent to "We ought to do X") is implicitely assuming the existence of moral law.
Unless they're merely stating their opinion about what is best for humanity. In other words, "we ought to do X because I think the result of X is good".I think he's correctly arguing that anyone who says X is better for humanity (which I'm assuming is equivalent to "We ought to do X") is implicitely assuming the existence of moral law.
How? I'd have thought it works perfectly alongside evolution if you know that memes evolve just as much as individuals.I would think that it would be very difficult to defend Social Biology in debate because it violates some key tenets of the Theory of Evolution.
Unless they're merely stating their opinion about what is best for humanity. In other words, "we ought to do X because I think the result of X is good".
However there really isn't opinion in the matter. If we were discussing opinion than nothing means anything.Unless they're merely stating their opinion about what is best for humanity. In other words, "we ought to do X because I think the result of X is good".
Better according to what standard? Yours? Your culture's? The standard that's most popular today? If we could go back in time and bring our ancestors to the present, perhaps they would say that moral value appears to get worse as we observe history. Why would your judgment be more accurate than theirs?The evidence is moral value does appear to get better as we observe history.
Maybe we'd try to deal with witches diplomatically if we believed they existed today. Who knows.Some people point to the witch hunts and similar events and say were their moral values good? Others might say about them hunting the would be witches, it was moral to them, which means morals are subjective. Thus, when we stopped burning people, it is easy to point and say our morals changed, but they really didn't.
What changed was we no longer believed there were witches. Because if we did, we might still be doing the same thing today.
What reasons? That perhaps we'd be burning witches today if we believed they existed? That's a long shot from supporting the argument that morals don't change.It is for reasons like this I say the argument can be made that morals don't change, in fact can't change.
Neither of the above, I am saying it is Law, and there is good reason to say so. It is a law unique to human beings.Better according to what standard? Yours? Your culture's?
A big misconception is thinking that as we look farther back through time, cultures are so much different in terms of morals. It is simply a lie to say such things, and anyone who spends anytime researching the morals of older cultures will find some difference, but not polar opposites as some might ignorantly suggest.The standard that's most popular today? If we could go back in time and bring our ancestors to the present, perhaps they would say that moral value appears to get worse as we observe history. Why would your judgment be more accurate than theirs?
Well you said moral values improved throughout history. What standard are you basing that on? What "Law" do you claim to have an understanding of?Neither of the above, I am saying it is Law, and there is good reason to say so. It is a law unique to human beings.
Sure. Maybe you can start with slavery.A big misconception is thinking that as we look farther back through time, cultures are so much different in terms of morals. It is simply a lie to say such things, and anyone who spends anytime researching the morals of older cultures will find some difference, but not polar opposites as some might ignorantly suggest.
Are you interested in hearing the argument for this?
If you look carefully I said it "appears" that morals improve. I didn't say they do. There is a difference.Well you said moral values improved throughout history. What standard are you basing that on? What "Law" do you claim to have an understanding of?
Sure we can start here. I can't help but comment though, in effort to save us both time. There is a huge difference in advancing our knowledge and calling it moral advance.Sure. Maybe you can start with slavery.
Right, you said moral values appear to have improved throughout history. What standard are you basing that on?If you look carefully I said it "appears" that morals improve. I didn't say they do. There is a difference.
No, because it wasn't entirely a matter of education. Slavery mostly ended because of war and political movement. Some people still believe that slavery is moral and that certain races deserve less respect than others.Slavery in many forms, well legalized slavery was entirely a matter of education. Moral principles have remained the same, as our knowledge of facts changed. Does that make sense?
Because we observe and say they get better. We can only do that if there is something between good and bad morals. Otherwise their is no standard, which would be fine if that is what we observe, but it doesn't fit what we see.Right, you said moral values appear to have improved throughout history. What standard are you basing that on?
Your not thinking your replies through to their conclusions. If someone still believed slavery is moral, it has NOTHING to do with morals, or moral law, it has to do with education. Are you not able to follow that rabbit trail?No, because it wasn't entirely a matter of education. Slavery mostly ended because of war and political movement. Some people still believe that slavery is moral and that certain races deserve less respect than others.