Is morality objective, even without God?

[Ben Leevey]

Just for clarity, my profile says 'Agnostic'. In actuality, I'm an epistemological solipsist. Which means that I will accede to anything that makes logical sense, and hold in question anything that doesn't.

So if you can get your concept of God to make logical sense, then I'll wholeheartedly accept it, if you can't, then I'm perplexed as to why you think that I should.

Okay.
Well, what I generally point to is the fact that if you see a building, you assume it must have a builder(s) and an architect.

The same applies to creation, which is more complex, in just one part, than any building.
But then someone will argue for Polytheism. But the universe works in way to much of a perfect rhythm to be created by multiple powers. Just as no fine piece of machinery is created by two inventors who are rivals.

This moves us to the question: which single God created the universe? There can be but one.

Well, firstly, for this being to exist, he must be perfectly self sufficient, or else he cannot exist as the supreme being because he relies on something outside Himself.

That rules out Allah, though they say He is self sufficient, they also say He is loving in his very essence. But he is not trinity, and thus must love something outside Himself, or not at all.

We can't have Polytheism, we can't have non-trinitarian mono-theism. That leaves only the God of the Bible.

 

[partinobodycular]

If I describe "cat" you know cat. You describe it and name it
Jung noted that if I describe God, you know God. You describe it and name it.
It exists independent on any cultural or educational teaching.

Far be it from me to question Jung, but I'm pretty darn sure that your description of God and my description of God are going to be completely different. (And lest you be confused, I do consider myself to be a Christian)

 

[partinobodycular]

Okay.
Well, what I generally point to is the fact that if you see a building, you assume it must have a builder(s) and an architect.

The same applies to creation, which is more complex, in just one part, than any building.
But then someone will argue for Polytheism. But the universe works in way to much of a perfect rhythm to be created by multiple powers. Just as no fine piece of machinery is created by two inventors who are rivals.

This moves us to the question: which single God created the universe? There can be but one.

Well, firstly, for this being to exist, he must be perfectly self sufficient, or else he cannot exist as the supreme being because he relies on something outside Himself.

That rules out Allah, though they say He is self sufficient, they also say He is loving in his very essence. But he is not trinity, and thus must love something outside Himself, or not at all.

We can't have Polytheism, we can't have non-trinitarian mono-theism. That leaves only the God of the Bible.

First, excellent response. Unlike most 18yo you tried to be logical and completely non condescending. So kudos for that.

You've also done an excellent job of presenting many of the common philosophical arguments for God. Unfortunately, refuting each of them is outside the scope of this thread. Which is a shame because I love philosophical discussions. On the other hand there are some here who absolutely abhor them.

Then again, you really don't need me at all. Just go through each argument and ask yourself... is there anywhere in here that I've made an assumption? I know that you probably think that they're airtight, but if you can learn to critically analyze your own arguments then you're capable of doing far more than I ever could. Just take a cue from a solipsist... don't make assumptions.

 

[Ben Leevey]

First, excellent response. Unlike most 18yo you tried to be logical and completely non condescending. So kudos for that.

You've also done an excellent job of presenting many of the common philosophical arguments for God. Unfortunately, refuting each of them is outside the scope of this thread. Which is a shame because I love philosophical discussions. On the other hand there are some here who absolutely abhor them.

Then again, you really don't need me at all. Just go through each argument and ask yourself... is there anywhere in here that I've made an assumption? I know that you probably think that they're airtight, but if you can learn to critically analyze your own arguments then you're capable of doing far more than I ever could. Just take a cue from a solipsist... don't make assumptions.

I always like to discuss such things. They become more airtight, the more I discuss, because I can refine the wrinkles. But I understand, they'll zap you here if I do (which is sad, because it prohibits the gospel). If you like we can go to another channel and discuss.

I've talk ed with many agnostics and atheists. You one of the few who hasn't mocked me right away, or silenced me.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

No. I consider some cultures more aligned with my morality than others. Identifying differences is not identifying superiority.

Your statement is the best one can hope for in a world of moral relativism. You cannot say another's morality is wrong, just not "aligned" with yours.

 

[BCP1928]

It might be helpful to cite specific names so we know whom you're referring to and whom to apply some critical sauce. Otherwise, you're just whistlin' dixie.

Michael Dummitt comes to mind, but are you not aware that mathematical realism is not without controversy? It is, in fact, an unfalsifiable proposition, so no doubt the matter will never be settled. What is your opinion on the ontological status of mental constructs?

 

[QvQ]

Far be it from me to question Jung, but I'm pretty darn sure that your description of God and my description of God are going to be completely different. (And lest you be confused, I do consider myself to be a Christian)

However, if you told me your description of God, I would recognize it as Concept "God."
All cultures also recognize "demon" or "devil."
And have very close and similar descriptions of those beings.

There have been efforts, for instance the Soviets, to use education, science, and suppression while creating a secular society and goverment bureaucracy to function as and fulfill what mankind seems to need from God.
It only made the Orthodox Christianity much stronger. God seems to be the reality men need, not a manmade social substitute.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Your statement is the best one can hope for in a world of moral relativism. You cannot say another's morality is wrong, just not "aligned" with yours.

Yes. How I interact with another is a matter of social negotiation, not fiat.

If someone's morality doesn't align with mine, we negotiate or agree not to interact.

 

[Ben Leevey]

Far be it from me to question Jung, but I'm pretty darn sure that your description of God and my description of God are going to be completely different. (And lest you be confused, I do consider myself to be a Christian)

You say your a Christian? Do you believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God?

 

[Ben Leevey]

No. I consider some cultures more aligned with my morality than others. Identifying differences is not identifying superiority.

How come there are strains of morality that are consistent in all cultures?

 

[Tinker Grey]

How come there are strains of morality that are consistent in all cultures?

There is one chain of evolution. We evolved as a social species. The bell-curves of our behavior significantly overlaps. Nothing mysterious here.

 

[Ben Leevey]

There is one chain of evolution. We evolved as a social species. The bell-curves of our behavior significantly overlaps. Nothing mysterious here.

But if we all developed cultures separately (we're not all descended from Sumerians) then why are there moral rules, (which you have styled "cultural") consistent thru out?

 

[partinobodycular]

You say your a Christian? Do you believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God?

Absolutely not. If in your opinion that disqualifies me from being a Christian, then I guess I'm not. But do you truly believe that identifying who is and who isn't a Christian is really that easy?

 

[Ben Leevey]

Absolutely not. If in your opinion that disqualifies me from being a Christian, then I guess I'm not. But do you truly believe that identifying who is and who isn't a Christian is really that easy?

That's not the whole essence, but that's part of it.

Christianity is defined by believing in the one true trinitarian eternal God. The only place he is defined clearly to us is the Bible.

 

[partinobodycular]

That's not the whole essence, but that's part of it.

Christianity is defined by believing in the one true trinitarian eternal God. The only place he is defined clearly to us is the Bible.

Then by all means expel me from the brotherhood of Christians. I've always been more at home among the outcasts anyway.

 

[Mark Quayle]

For your argument to be valid, you'd have to demonstrate unequivocally that God exists. If something is a matter of faith, by definition, it can never be either proven true or falsified.

'If-Then' statements can be valid apart from whether the IF has been established.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

No. I consider some cultures more aligned with my morality than others. Identifying differences is not identifying superiority.

So you cannot say that a culture is wrong for not recognizing woman's rights. All you can say is, It's not my cup of tea, but you do you boo."

 

[Ben Leevey]

Then by all means expel me from the brotherhood of Christians. I've always been more at home among the outcasts anyway.

I'm not trying to be harsh with you.


But it is important that you understand that the cursing's of hell are yours, and you are excluded from the blessings of heaven (whether you believe in those or not) unless you repent.

 

[BCP1928]

That's not the whole essence, but that's part of it.

Christianity is defined by believing in the one true trinitarian eternal God. The only place he is defined clearly to us is the Bible.

But that is not, for most Christians why we believe in Him.

 

[BCP1928]

I'm not trying to be harsh with you.


But it is important that you understand that the cursing's of hell are yours, and you are excluded from the blessings of heaven (whether you believe in those or not) unless you repent.

Repent of not believing in the literal inerrancy of scripture?