Is morality objective, even without God?

[Ana the Ist]

We can come to know about reality empirically or rationally.

Ok.

Knowledge of God, or if you like, the force that caused those elements to come into being, is empirically unknown.

Ok.

However, as Pierre rationally hinted, that intelligence is vast and must be outside space, time and matter.

Pierre doesn't seem to have rationally arrived at that conclusion.

I don't even know if what he calls a god is what I call a god.

And you keep saying "outside" space, time, and matter as if that's a location or place one can be.

As if the universe were a fishbowl of sorts and god is outside it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

an·ar·chy
[ˈanərkē]
noun

1. a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems

One doesn't have to recognize authority or "controlling systems"....but one should if they intend to survive amongst a society.

Even the vast majority in agreement on a moral rule does not equate to everyone willingly accepting an authority external to themselves.

Indeed.

One cannot claim to discern right or wrong for themselves and simultaneously willing accept an external authority in contradiction.

Acceptance and agreement are not the same. I can accept I don't make the rules...but that doesn't mean I agree with them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

YHVH is not contained in a book, in a building, in a country, in the world, in the universe, .....
He is beyond infinite in every way - indescribable.

Without repentance to YHVH, as written in HIS INSTRUCTIONS,

there is no forgiveness of sin. ie. no way to be healed nor saved.

Well that's a difficult predicament.

Your thoughts and conscience and life is simply a wisp here today and gone tomorrow.

Without forgiveness, only judgment awaits.

Seems as if judgment has been passed if forgiveness is needed in the first place.

God has judged us evil....hasn't he?

 

[Aaron112]

"Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD his God, the Maker of heaven and earth, the sea, and everything in them.
He remains faithful forever.
He executes justice for the oppressed and gives food to the hungry.
The LORD sets the prisoners free,…
Berean Standard Bible · Download"

God has judged us evil....hasn't he?

 

[o_mlly]

If we were to judge who was telling the truth though...we can only be certain of the snake. He doesn't appear to have died of fruit.

Misplaced pronoun? The snake didn't die in the story. But nor does the story say the snake ate the fruit or would die if he did.

If "he" is Adam and he is dead then his disobedience in eating the fruit caused his death.

The certainty in the story is that the snake is a liar. A rereading of the story seems to be in order. The snake lied to Eve telling her that she would not die ... she's dead too.

Once he ate the fruit or before?

What is the lesson?

Before. Assuming he plucked the fruit himself.

Don't disobey God.

 

[o_mlly]

Pierre doesn't seem to have rationally arrived at that conclusion.

I don't even know if what he calls a god is what I call a god.

As a rational atheist, Pierre did not conclude there is a god. However, his rational "hint" is that if there is a god then that god must be eternal and omniscient about the material universe.

And you keep saying "outside" space, time, and matter as if that's a location or place one can be.

As if the universe were a fishbowl of sorts and god is outside it.

An eternal being exists not in a place. Not "somewhere" but "everywhere". Not "sometime" but in "no time". La Place seems to have known that.

Acceptance and agreement are not the same. I can accept I don't make the rules...but that doesn't mean I agree with them.

The social contract is an agreement requiring citizens to accept the lawful rules promulgated by its rulers.

Living in organized societies under effective government and enforceable laws, as they must in order to survive and prosper, human beings neither have autonomy nor are they entitled to unlimited liberty of action.

 

[QvQ]

Would you agree that without any god...morals disappear entirely for this solitary man?

No
If a person is entirely alone there are still states of being that are morally right or wrong.
Again, that quote:
"You know, I once read an interesting book which said that, uh, most people lost in the wilds, they, they die of shame."

I have spent considerable time alone in the wilderness. Fear, despair, impatience can get a person killed.
I went out to the middle of nowhere to get away from all the things that were making me do.
And I found, that no matter where you are, there you are and the only person making you is you.
Even in the wilderness
There are still the moral judgements, the feeling of guilt and shame concerning actions and decisions.

That movie I quoted above, the movie makers concluded a person lost in the wilderness should "think."
I can testify that a person alone in the wilderness had better pray as providence is the will of God.

And if a person is entirely alone on a planet, that is confined. It can be voluntary or involuntary but for that time, it is confinement.

 

[Aaron112]

Don't disobey God.

okay

 

[Ana the Ist]

No
If a person is entirely alone there are still states of being that are morally right or wrong.
Again, that quote:
"You know, I once read an interesting book which said that, uh, most people lost in the wilds, they, they die of shame."

I've seen autopsies of those who died lost in the woods. Typically, exposure, thirst, or starvation do them in....not shame.

I have spent considerable time alone in the wilderness. Fear, despair, impatience can get a person killed.

Uh huh.

I went out to the middle of nowhere to get away from all the things that were making me do.
And I found, that no matter where you are, there you are and the only person making you is you.

Catchy.

Even in the wilderness
There are still the moral judgements, the feeling of guilt and shame concerning actions and decisions.

You can certainly judge yourself....it's simply unclear why you would.

That movie I quoted above, the movie makers concluded a person lost in the wilderness should "think."

I'd suggest they find a water source.

I can testify that a person alone in the wilderness had better pray as providence is the will of God.

Ok....I'm guessing you'd add that to the list of moral good behaviors.

And if a person is entirely alone on a planet, that is confined.

Well it's alone. I don't think we would describe you as confined on this planet if you were alone.

confine

1. to limit an activity, person, or problem in some way: 2. to keep someone…

dictionary.cambridge.org

I suppose we can argue mankind is confined to this planet indefinitely but that's an odd use of the word.

 

[Ana the Ist]

As a rational atheist, Pierre did not conclude there is a god. However, his rational "hint" is that if there is a god then that god must be eternal and omniscient about the material universe.

Again...I don't think he got there rationally.

An eternal being exists not in a place.

Ok.

Not "somewhere" but "everywhere".

Those are both places.

The social contract is an agreement requiring citizens to accept the lawful rules promulgated by its rulers.

Contracts unenforced are mere words.

Living in organized societies under effective government and enforceable laws, as they must in order to survive and prosper, human beings neither have autonomy nor are they entitled to unlimited liberty of action.

See? Enforcement. There goes that idea of anarchy.

 

[Aaron112]

Again, that quote:
"You know, I once read an interesting book which said that, uh, most people lost in the wilds, they, they die of shame."

Any idea why the book was thought to be interesting? It likely had to be a fleshly carnal book ?

 

[QvQ]

Well it's alone. I don't think we would describe you as confined on this planet if you were alone.

Beam me up Scotty?

In the story "To Build a Fire" the abiding sin was arrogance.

 

[o_mlly]

Again...I don't think he got there rationally.

OK. We can ask Pierre when next we see him.

Those are both places.

Well, not really; somewhere" is = at time t --> x, y, and z equal a, b, and c.

On the other hand, "everywhere" or (omnipresent) is at no time t --> x, y, and z equal all a, all b, and all c.

Contracts unenforced are mere words.

Yes.

See? Enforcement. There goes that idea of anarchy.

How so? In the contract the gov has a monopoly on the use of force.

 

[Aaron112]

How so? In the contract the gov has a monopoly on the use of force.

I think not a monopoly.... Remember the mob, the pharmacy/pharmakeia, and the worldwide world church.

Not counting the groups from Japan, China, North Korea, and other places that have a way of dealing with people.

 

[Ana the Ist]

OK. We can ask Pierre when next we see him.

Ok.

Well, not really; somewhere" is = at time t --> x, y, and z equal a, b, and c.

On the other hand, "everywhere" or (omnipresent) is at no time t --> x, y, and z equal all a, all b, and all c.

Oh look...the goalposts moved.

Outside of space and time suddenly became "everywhere"....which includes, by necessity, inside space and time.

And we're right back to your god being "somewhere".

Anything else? Maybe there's another place you can imagine him being/not being.

Yes.

Oh good...agreement.

How so? In the contract the gov has a monopoly on the use of force.

Does the government enforce "social contracts"?

 

[o_mlly]

Oh look...the goalposts moved.

? Uh ... there are no goalposts in eternity.

Outside of space and time suddenly became "everywhere"....which includes, by necessity, inside space and time.

Well, numerically didn't seem to work for you ... let's try graphically.

Ven diagram:

1. Draw the circumference of a large circle.
2. Draw a smaller circle within the circumference of that circle
3. Label the smaller circle Time, Space, Matter.
4. Erase the circumference of the larger circle.
5. Label the whole thing as Eternity.

Does the government enforce "social contracts"?

I used to work in the BOP system. Let me personally assure you, the government enforces our social contracts.

 

[Ana the Ist]

? Uh ... there are no goalposts in eternity.

Sure...but there are goalposts in your claims.

Claim 1# God is outside time and space.

Claim 2# God is everywhere (All possible places).

If you're going to claim that everywhere = outside time and space....I'd ask what sort of location has time and space and why god isn't there or why we wouldn't include it in "everywhere".

Well, numerically didn't seem to work for you ... let's try graphically.

Ven diagram:

1. Draw the circumference of a large circle.
2. Draw a smaller circle within the circumference of that circle
3. Label the smaller circle Time, Space, Matter.
4. Erase the circumference of the larger circle.
5. Label the whole thing as Eternity.

It sounds like you want a picture like this...

I'll just point out the obvious, it's not a venn diagram....there's no second set.

Also, you forgot to tell me where to place God.

I used to work in the BOP system.

BOP system?

Let me personally assure you, the government enforces our social contracts.

The government enforces laws, not social contracts.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Beam me up Scotty?

Again, it's a thought experiment. If you don't want to engage with it honestly, then just don't. Repeated attempts to mold it into a different thought experiment is dishonest I think.

In the story "To Build a Fire" the abiding sin was arrogance.

Never read it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well, not really; somewhere" is = at time t --> x, y, and z equal a, b, and c.

On the other hand, "everywhere" or (omnipresent) is at no time t --> x, y, and z equal all a, all b, and all c.

I honestly skipped this because I first read it as proving my point.

How about I simplify it...

In the context of time, clearly you think matter, space aka the universe exists.

In the context of "outside of time" do these things still exist in any sense? If they do...is god within them as you so claim?

 

[dlamberth]

Anything else? Maybe there's another place you can imagine him being/not being.

Being/Not Being is a perfect description. Some mystics use the term "God/Not God". Both terms mean the same thing and are interchanged by some mystics.