• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.
  7. There has been an addition to the announcement regarding unacceptable nick names. The phrase "Let's go Brandon" actually stands for a profanity and will be seen as a violation of the profanity rule in the future.

Is there an absolute morality?

Discussion in 'Ethics & Morality' started by Bradskii, Oct 23, 2021.

  1. VCR-2000

    VCR-2000 Well-Known Member

    756
    +256
    United States
    Seeker
    Single
    US-Others
    That's the downside to life. The One that chose to create is also the One that may choose to take away. We may have a free will, but we are not free.
     
  2. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    in what way. I know chocolate lovers think the world of chocolate.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2021
  3. Ken-1122

    Ken-1122 Newbie

    +1,487
    Atheist
    Private
    So you are not gonna answer my question; why am I not surprised?
     
  4. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    Actually chocolate is something that brings you pleasure or whatever it brings up (nice taste) which makes it instrumentally valuable. Perhaps cocoa is intrinsically valuable but then the plant relies on other intrinsic things like sunlight and water so it doesnt really make coaoa intrinsically valuable.

    Also choccolate is a mix of other ingredients like sugar, milk products, so the end produce of chocoalte relies on other things to make it what it is so is not intrinsically valuable.
    Thats a logical falalcy. It doesnt follow that because x amount of people consume chocolate it must be intrinsically valuable.
    Once again the laws are about stealing. Your logic would mean anything stolen has intrinsic value. Thus is illogical.
     
  5. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    intrinsic value is something that has value in its own right and does not depend on something else that has intrinsic value. In that sense we could say Water (H2o) is intrinsically valuable.

    Extrinsic values are centred on external approval or rewards; for instance wealth, social status, self image and personal security.
     
  6. VirOptimus

    VirOptimus A nihilist who cares.

    +4,391
    Atheist
    Married
    All of that have to have agents to have values. None of it is intrinsic.

    Do you even understand what intrinsic means?
     
  7. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    But that is more or less feeding into the idea that life is intrinsically valuable. When you say "thats the sort of beings we are" that is exactly the point. As humans we are what we are and we recognise our worth. There is something about human life that makes it special and we know it. Its not because of any arguemnet we can make we just know humans life is intrinsically valuable.
    But they don't overrule others who don't value life forno good reason. Its because life is recognised as being intrinically valuable that we force laws on others to value life.
     
  8. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    All of what. If you mean wealth, social status, self image and personal security I have said that has Extrinsic values rather than intrinsic value. That means it depends on something else intrinsic to give it value. But something like water and human life has intrinsic value because they don't depend on anything else that has intrinisc value.
     
  9. VirOptimus

    VirOptimus A nihilist who cares.

    +4,391
    Atheist
    Married
    No, value has to be for someone, an agent. Value cannot be independent of the agent.

    Neither life or water has intrinsic value.
     
  10. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    then how do you explain this

    All major normative ethical theories identify something as being intrinsically valuable.

    All major normative ethical theories identify something as being intrinsically valuable. For instance, for a virtue ethicist, eudaimonia (human flourishing, sometimes translated as "happiness") has intrinsic value, whereas things that bring you happiness (such as having a family) may be merely instrumentally valuable.

    Intrinsic value (ethics) - Wikipedia

     
  11. VirOptimus

    VirOptimus A nihilist who cares.

    +4,391
    Atheist
    Married
    Yes, some belive that, but it still requires an agent. And ethics are not objective.
     
  12. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    Its not just some. It states "all normative ethical theories" identify something as being intrinsically valuable.

    What you are talking about with humans making something valuable is called relative intrinsic value. But there is also absolute intrinsic value in ethics.

    Absolute and relative[edit]
    There may be a distinction between absolute and relative ethic value regarding intrinsic value.

    Relative intrinsic value is subjective, depending on individual and cultural views and/or the individual choice of life stance. Absolute intrinsic value, on the other hand, is philosophically absolute and independent of individual and cultural views, as well as independent on whether it discovered or not what object has it.
    Intrinsic value (ethics) - Wikipedia
     
  13. Moral Orel

    Moral Orel Proud Citizen of Moralton Supporter

    +2,335
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    I'm thinking of a number. You tell me what it is, and I'll accept this claim. If you can't tell me what that number is, stop pretending you can read minds.
     
  14. Moral Orel

    Moral Orel Proud Citizen of Moralton Supporter

    +2,335
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    You mean this response here?
     
  15. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    In what way am I reading minds.
     
  16. Moral Orel

    Moral Orel Proud Citizen of Moralton Supporter

    +2,335
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    You claim to know the contents of the knowledge of all humans. "We all know this" and "All humans know that" and such. If you can tell me what I know, then you can tell me what number I'm thinking of. If you can't tell me what number I'm thinking of, then you can't tell me what I know.
     
  17. stevevw

    stevevw inquisitive

    +540
    Christian
    Private
    I get you now. But unfortunately that is not the case. Knowing a specific number you are thinking and understanding some of the accepted ways humans think or act is different. Through the sciences we can get to know some basic common thinking and bahviours common to all humans. Through Epistemology we can work out what how humans know and what they can know. That is all I was referring to. For example research shows that children as youn g as 6 months know right from wrong. So its seems to be an ability humans just have.

    Children know the difference between right and wrong before they reach the age of two, according to new research published today. Scientists have found that babies aged between 19 and 21 months understand fairness and can apply it in different situations.23 Feb 2012
    Research shows toddlers understand right from wrong at just 19 months

    Another example is that we know humans are different to animals so we can understand some common abilities humans have including how we think in similar ways that animals don't have. Psychology allows us to determine ways humans think which tells us that we have some common thinking including moral thinking.
     
  18. VirOptimus

    VirOptimus A nihilist who cares.

    +4,391
    Atheist
    Married
    Yes, you dont know what you are talking about.
     
  19. VirOptimus

    VirOptimus A nihilist who cares.

    +4,391
    Atheist
    Married
    Humans are animals by definition.

    Try again.
     
  20. Moral Orel

    Moral Orel Proud Citizen of Moralton Supporter

    +2,335
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    Okay, let's look at the source your provided to prove that all humans think and act the same in some ways. 75% of the infants acted one way, 25% of the infants didn't. Try again.
     
Loading...