Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I do disagree. Undesirable could mean an oligarch objects to a union rep being protected from being murdered by the oligarch’s lackeys.So you disagree that “Actions intended to cause undesirable things to happen to people is immoral.”
Now you’ve changed again. Now it’s that things can be undesirable as long as the ends justify the means.They’d have to argue that the end doesn’t justify the means, where our hypothetical specifically has the ends justifying them. They couldn’t do it.
For instance, do we try to ensure that everyone has a chance at making $200000, or do we just give everyone $200000?What do you mean by “fairness of outcome”?
And you change your mind when they explain why you are wrong, correct?I explain to them why they are wrong.
That doesn’t explain how you know it’s accurate.I always assume my measuring stick is accurate, until proven otherwise.
Scripture.How do you know your measuring stick is accurate?
Yep.I do disagree. Undesirable could mean an oligarch objects to a union rep being protected from being murdered by the oligarch’s lackeys.
That sounds more like EQUAL opportunity vs equal outcome. IMO equal opportunity is a must in a fair society; equal outcome is impossible in a fair society.For instance, do we try to ensure that everyone has a chance at making $200000, or do we just give everyone $200000?
If that were to happen; correct. The way I see it, when an honest man is proven wrong, he has 2 choices; he can stop being wrong, or he can stop being honest. I try to be honest.And you change your mind when they explain why you are wrong, correct?
Keep in mind; 100% certainty is not necessary for everybodyThat doesn’t explain how you know it’s accurate.
And if scripture is proven wrong? Do you stop being wrong? Or do you stop being honest.Scripture.
Some folks think equal outcome is fair.That sounds more like EQUAL opportunity vs equal outcome. IMO equal opportunity is a must in a fair society; equal outcome is impossible in a fair society.
I’m sure you do. But you use yourself as the guide to right or wrong.If that were to happen; correct. The way I see it, when an honest man is proven wrong, he has 2 choices; he can stop being wrong, or he can stop being honest. I try to be honest.
I know.Keep in mind; 100% certainty is not necessary for everybody
Scripture isn’t wrong.And if scripture is proven wrong? Do you stop being wrong? Or do you stop being honest.
You are stripping the moral calculus from a specific moral judgment in order to extract a blanket moral declaration, which is incorrect. This is equivalent to declaring that murder is ok under your god-based moral framework because of the times God commits or commands it in the story. You’re arguing in bad faith.Now you’ve changed again. Now it’s that things can be undesirable as long as the ends justify the means.
So we are back to slavery being okay.
I used your own arguments. Feel free to show how I used them incorrectly.You are stripping the moral calculus from a specific moral judgment in order to extract a blanket moral declaration, which is incorrect. This is equivalent to declaring that murder is ok under your god-based moral framework because of the times God commits or commands it in the story. You’re arguing in bad faith.
My arguments were crafted to mirror yours. You successfully discovered that the basis is arbitrary or subjective when presented to you as a non-theistic moral framework. But now all of your objections also apply to your theistic framework. How will you resolve this?I used your own arguments. Feel free to show how I used them incorrectly.
That doesn’t show how I used your argument incorrectly.My arguments were crafted to mirror yours. You successfully discovered that the basis is arbitrary or subjective when presented to you as a non-theistic moral framework. But now all of your objections also apply to your theistic framework. How will you resolve this?
You used it correctly. But it also applies to your framework.That doesn’t show how I used your argument incorrectly.
How does it apply to my framework?You used it correctly. But it also applies to your framework.
You were doing moral calculus incorrectly, but that’s fine. My argument actually benefits from your error.
Are you one of those people?Some folks think equal outcome is fair.
Anybody can say that; but how do you know?( I could just as easily say I am never wrong) What method do you employ to verify Scripture is never wrong?Scripture isn’t wrong.
No.Are you one of those people?
It’s self-authenticating. And you’ve admitted that you could be wrong.Anybody can say that; but how do you know?( I could just as easily say I am never wrong) What method do you employ to verify Scripture is never wrong?
You have no objective basis for your moral framework other than something you picked arbitrarily because it subjectively made sense to you.How does it apply to my framework?
I do. It comes from God.You have no objective basis for your moral framework other than something you picked arbitrarily because it subjectively made sense to you.
Or, to shorten it in your style, you have no basis for morality.
It’s the truth.Which you subjectively feel is a good basis, but you have no objective basis for that determination.
All someone would have to say is it’s not the truth and there are no morals, by your standard.It’s the truth.
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
— John 14:6
Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.
— John 17:17
They can say whatever they want. I can’t stop them.All someone would have to say is it’s not the truth and there are no morals, by your standard.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?