How is it consistent to criticize the left for hating America AND not having an objective morality ?

[Bradskii]

Not relevant.

I want to know if you think that people need to freedom to make their own mind up about moral problems. I can understand, and agree, that children need to be instructed. But what happens when they become adults? Do you think that someone should tell their 40 year old daughter what she can and cannot do?

 

[gaara4158]

You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time. You still have no basis for right or wrong.

You just said what the basis was. It’s feelings. Ultimately feelings are the basis for everything we do, including search for things more “legitimate” to base our actions on.

 

[Ken-1122]

You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time. You still have no basis for right or wrong.

And how is your Bible any different? According to the Bible, isn't right vs wrong based on what God feels is right or wrong?

 

[Bradskii]

You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time. You still have no basis for right or wrong.

This is beyond nonsensical. This thread is over 500 posts long and many of them have explained exactly where secular morality comes from. How in heaven's name can you come up with such a statement? It defies belief...

Do you have a conscience? Does it guide you as to what you should and shouldn't do? Do you look at the facts of any given matter before you make a decision? Do you listen to those whose opinions you trust? Do you empathise with other people? Do you consider the well being of other people? Do you make conscious decisions about what you consider to be right and wrong?

Well, gosh. Me too!

Who would have thought that we reach moral decisions in exactly the same way? I don't know about you, but I'm astonished. Really astonished I say. Not that that is the case. But that after hundreds of posts and countless threads you still don't understand it.

 

[Hammster]

I want to know if you think that people need to freedom to make their own mind up about moral problems. I can understand, and agree, that children need to be instructed. But what happens when they become adults? Do you think that someone should tell their 40 year old daughter what she can and cannot do?

Still not relevant to the point I made.

 

[Hammster]

This is beyond nonsensical. This thread is over 500 posts long and many of them have explained exactly where secular morality comes from. How in heaven's name can you come up with such a statement? It defies belief...

Do you have a conscience? Does it guide you as to what you should and shouldn't do? Do you look at the facts of any given matter before you make a decision? Do you listen to those whose opinions you trust? Do you empathise with other people? Do you consider the well being of other people? Do you make conscious decisions about what you consider to be right and wrong?

Well, gosh. Me too!

Who would have thought that we reach moral decisions in exactly the same way? I don't know about you, but I'm astonished. Really astonished I say. Not that that is the case. But that after hundreds of posts and countless threads you still don't understand it.

That’s not the discussion. Go back to what I said at the beginning.

 

[Bradskii]

That’s not the discussion. Go back to what I said at the beginning.

This is what you said:

'You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time. You still have no basis for right or wrong.'

That is abject nonsense.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Not everybody comes to logic by reading books; for some it's just a matter of common sense.

Maybe, but I think it's safe to say that where something called "common sense" is being all too frequently referred to as a supposed equivalency for the ability to make an "intelligent choice," we end up only really referring to some very low hanging fruit.

More often than not, common sense ends up being a kind of folkish expectation about positive outcomes that we think surely must come simply because we like to apply some optimism to our moral choices, like the idea that "if I just pull out soon enough from a heated situation, then I believe nothing consequential will happen."

This more 'common' sense of common sense often emerges as the fallacy that it is:

Argument from incredulity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah, that's more along the lines of what passes for "common sense" these days. It's usually not referring to one of the other denotations of the same term that may present us with a more developed notion about which senses in the human mind are truly common, such as are suggested by Thomas Reid as but one older example.

It can also be thought of as one that plays out in the thinking of Thomas Paine. Whether his notion is common, and whether his was politically and morally correct in the first place, is another matter.

Personally, I tend toward being skeptical like Descartes; it's always best not to be too sure of one's own assumed sense of common sense, especially where epistemic issues may arise and become relevant where Ethics and Morality is concerned.

 

[Hammster]

This is what you said:

'You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time. You still have no basis for right or wrong.'

That is abject nonsense.

No, it’s not. But let’s find out. Is it wrong to shoot your neighbor for letting his dog poop in your yard? If so, why?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

No, it’s not. But let’s find out. Is it wrong to shoot your neighbor for letting his dog poop in your yard? If so, why?

You really seem to have an obsession with this scenario, but the response of force is not proportionate.

A more realistic scenario would be is it wrong for a father to kill those responsible for his son's death?

 

[Bradskii]

No, it’s not. But let’s find out. Is it wrong to shoot your neighbor for letting his dog poop in your yard? If so, why?

Of course it's wrong. I hope you can say why. I gave you all the reasons. Is it that you don't understand any of them? I'll repeat what I said:

Do you have a conscience? Does it guide you as to what you should and shouldn't do? Do you look at the facts of any given matter before you make a decision? Do you listen to those whose opinions you trust? Do you empathise with other people? Do you consider the well being of other people? Do you make conscious decisions about what you consider to be right and wrong?

So my conscience says it's wrong. It guides me as to what I shouldn't do. I looked at the facts and decided that crap in my garden didn't justify taking a human life. I have listened over the years to very many people who have explained the value of human life and that it shouldn't be taken lightly. I empathise with people so I would understand that my neighbour loves his life and wouldn't want to lose it. And his family would be grief stricken if I killed him. I consider his well being in what I do. And I made a conscious decision that all I needed to do was fix the hole in my fence.

Now really, what on earth is so difficult to understand about any of that? Are you a reasonable person? Because all those are reasonable positions to hold. So it's really got me beat why you can't follow them. Honestly, I'm totally at a loss.

 

[Hammster]

You really seem to have an obsession with this scenario, but the response of force is not proportionate.

A more realistic scenario would be is it wrong for a father to kill those responsible for his son's death?

It’s a though experiment. But I can’t make you respond.

 

[Hammster]

Of course it's wrong. I hope you can say why. I gave you all the reasons. Is it that you don't understand any of them? I'll repeat what I said:

Do you have a conscience? Does it guide you as to what you should and shouldn't do? Do you look at the facts of any given matter before you make a decision? Do you listen to those whose opinions you trust? Do you empathise with other people? Do you consider the well being of other people? Do you make conscious decisions about what you consider to be right and wrong?

So my conscience says it's wrong. It guides me as to what I shouldn't do. I looked at the facts and decided that crap in my garden didn't justify taking a human life. I have listened over the years to very many people who have explained the value of human life and that it shouldn't be taken lightly. I empathise with people so I would understand that my neighbour loves his life and wouldn't want to lose it. And his family would be grief stricken if I killed him. I consider his well being in what I do. And I made a conscious decision that all I needed to do was fix the hole in my fence.

Now really, what on earth is so difficult to understand about any of that? Are you a reasonable person? Because all those are reasonable positions to hold. So it's really got me beat why you can't follow them. Honestly, I'm totally at a loss.

Based on what you’ve said, someone else’s conscience could say it’s okay. Would they be just as right as you?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You really seem to have an obsession with this scenario, but the response of force is not proportionate.

A more realistic scenario would be is it wrong for a father to kill those responsible for his son's death?

That depends. And I don't say this lightly since I don't think it's an emotionally fair question in this instance.

But answering your question does depend upon certain factors and contexts that we all have to fully take into account.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Of course it's wrong. I hope you can say why. I gave you all the reasons. Is it that you don't understand any of them? I'll repeat what I said:

Do you have a conscience? Does it guide you as to what you should and shouldn't do? Do you look at the facts of any given matter before you make a decision? Do you listen to those whose opinions you trust? Do you empathise with other people? Do you consider the well being of other people? Do you make conscious decisions about what you consider to be right and wrong?

So my conscience says it's wrong. It guides me as to what I shouldn't do. I looked at the facts and decided that crap in my garden didn't justify taking a human life. I have listened over the years to very many people who have explained the value of human life and that it shouldn't be taken lightly. I empathise with people so I would understand that my neighbour loves his life and wouldn't want to lose it. And his family would be grief stricken if I killed him. I consider his well being in what I do. And I made a conscious decision that all I needed to do was fix the hole in my fence.

Now really, what on earth is so difficult to understand about any of that? Are you a reasonable person? Because all those are reasonable positions to hold. So it's really got me beat why you can't follow them. Honestly, I'm totally at a loss.

And here I thought you were going to say something significant and place it as a moral priority, something like that all human beings are made in the Image of God and that their lives are God-given and we are to respect this fact regardles of whatever other mental machinations that others, or we ourselves, might contrive in our heads, unless of course we know that said neighbor has besmirched his own image. In which case, we call the police.

I'm amazed that you wouldn't just express this first off and place it by principle before any other consideration, even before those you've gratiously listed.

But I get it. Not everyone has the added advantage of having a Bible to read and understand.

 

[NxNW]

I have no idea what this means.

It's a Monty Python skit.

 

[NxNW]

You’ll believe what lines up with your feelings at any given time.

You are no different.

You still have no basis for right or wrong.

Neither do you.

 

[Hammster]

It's a Monty Python skit.

Mkay.

 

[Hammster]

You are no different.

No, I actually have a basis for my morality.

Neither do you.

Yes, I do.

 

[Neutral Observer]

But answering your question does depend upon certain factors and contexts that we all have to fully take into account.

To me, therein lies the problem, there are a great many instances wherein knowing the factors precisely enough simply isn't possible, and we're left with what you seem to be advocating, which is an "Unwritten Universal Moral Principle". (I hope that I've quoted you correctly this time)

So I have a question. What is this "Unwritten Universal Moral Principle"?

P.S. Forgive me if I'm asking a question that you've already answered.