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 am saying it would not be a moral issue if it were never discussed.Absolutely!
Rape is an evil whether people judge it to be an evil or not. It would be a moral issue even if people are unaware that it qualifies as one.
Are you seriously saying that rape would not be an evil if no one thinks that it is?
eudaimonia,
Mark
I am saying it would not be a moral issue if it were never discussed.
Ken
I agree with you, people make value judgments all the time without thinking about it. I am saying right and wrong do not have a physical existence by themselves; they come into being via value judgments. If it were possible to refrain from making value judgments, right and wrong would not be an issue.I'm not sure it is possible for people not to make value judgments.
In most cases I would consider it reflexive and automatic. Any time we take an action that prioritizes anything we value with regard to something else we have made a judgment. For instance, If I saw a rape and forcibly stopped it I have made an implicit value judgment about my safety, and the proper use of force and a dozen other things. If I saw one and let it go I would have as well.
Values come from valuing, the way someone values is to act. This makes value judgement pretty much automatic in any thinking thing.
Are you suggesting we must be aware we are making a value judgment to make one?
I agree with you, people make value judgments all the time without thinking about it. I am saying right and wrong do not have a physical existence by themselves; they come into being via value judgments. If it were possible to refrain from making value judgments, right and wrong would not be an issue.
Ken
When I said "discuss" I also meant thoughts as well. My point is, right and wrong exist in your head, it does not have an actual existence outside of our thoughtsI must whole heartedly disagree.
Morality/values are based upon how we act not thought or words.
The way we think about morality is abstract but the practice is not abstract.
When I said "discuss" I also meant thoughts as well. My point is, right and wrong exist in your head, it does not have an actual existence outside of our thoughts
Ken
I agree!I do not think it is possible to refrain from making value judgments. I think they are implicit in living.
So you think right and wrong might be physical? Like an evil fog that might affect your behavior if you come in contact with it? If different, how do you suppose good and bad might be physical?I might disagree about the physical too.
So you agree with me that right and wrong do not exist by themselves; independent of value judgments?I see the ideas of "right" and "wrong" as abstract extensions of value judgments, a description of them, an attempt to categorize and systematize them.
I think the value judgments themselves are rooted deep inside our physical existence, so, I think they are descriptions of things that are rooted in physical realities.
I value my life for physical reasons at the core for instance. Morality is how I describe this.
The values can exist without thinking about them, it just means the morality is nondescript.
So you think right and wrong might be physical? Like an evil fog that might affect your behavior if you come in contact with it? If different, how do you suppose good and bad might be physical?
Ken
So you agree with me that right and wrong do not exist by themselves; independent of value judgments?
Ken
Yeah, that too. But your expectation is rooted in the confidence (or trust or faith) in the thing you have expectations about.
So, since I told you I think my car will either work or not work,If we're talking about faith as trust or confidence (rather than the much more cognitive "believing stuff without evidence"), this trust or confidence is broken down to inclinations of the will. You can't have faith without your will being proportionately in line with the thing or person you have faith in.
To be precise, you don´t have faith in my math abilities, or to even be more precise, you don´t have faith that my math abilities match this particular challenge.If I say I have faith in your ability to do math but come the calculus exam I cheat off of someone else, then I don't have faith in you.
Ok. Please make a chart concerning the car issue, with three columns:It's the instances of will relating to the thing in which you have faith that determine the quality of the faith in question.
Ok. Seeing how I usuaslly can´t tell whether someone is a theist or not from their real life behaviours (apart from occasional verbal affirmations)...That difference in behavior is, IMO, the stuff of faith.
Ok. Seeing how I usuaslly can´t tell whether someone is a theist or not from their real life behaviours (apart from occasional verbal affirmations)...
I consider faith to mean belief without evidence, and I have no use for that in my life.
I want to make the best decision I can, every time. Clearly making decisions based on faith isn't going to allow that to happen. Rather it will lead to making poor decisions. Like invading Iraq.
Even though there is a tendency for atheists to follow certain routes, like a rejection of the supernatural, they are usually a result of some higher ideology. That is, atheism is always a component of a belief system, never a belief system itself.
To say atheism is a belief system is to say theism is a belief system; it only plays a part in the overall belief system of a person.
The physical people would take action because of their values; but the values themselves are not physical, they only exist in their heads. If the people died, their values would die along with them because values cannot exist on their own.They would be the description not the object of it, the values themselves are what I think exists physically.
For example in the rape case you specified earlier, the people in the society that never invented the concept of rape would still take actions when it happened, and thus would have values regarding it.
I'm atheist. I do not reject the supernatural.
BUT I expect evidence.
That means I reject the fantastic version of the supernatural that many others fixate on.
The physical people would take action because of their values; but the values themselves are not physical, they only exist in their heads. If the people died, their values would die along with them because values cannot exist on their own.
K.
So if values exist independent of mankind, where do they exist?Just because something is subjective (can die) doesn't mean it isn't a physical reality.
Humanity can be wiped from existence, but that doesn't mean there was never a physical reality of the process of say human pain.
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?