Hans Blaster
Raised by bees
- Mar 11, 2017
- 22,529
- 16,902
- 55
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
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.
You think the Earth is flat?Did I say that? C'mon, Sir Bradskii! I think you know what, or who, I mean when I analogize by a 'North Star.'
Well, that was disappointing. I was all primed for a decent argument.I can see there's no fooling you, Bradskii, regardless of how many qualified, nuanced words I use.
Lesson learned.
You think the Earth is flat?
Well, that was disappointing. I was all primed for a decent argument.
Why did you put that in quotes when that is not what I said?There's no argument: my main rebuttal to doubtingmerle was regarding his affirmation that "any path leads to the same moral destination," which I obviously disagree with ............
What? It was an astronomy joke. It had nothing to do with Asperger's or any other ASD condition.Are you asking me if I think everyone in the world has Asperger's and that I must, absolutely present my analogies accordingly?
What exactly is a "moral destination"? That term is vague and inadequate by which to show any form of moral equivalence.Why did you put that in quotes when that is not what I said?
Many moral destinations have been worked out.
While these basic principles are find and dandy, I think we both know there is a lot, lot more that goes into the formation of domestic peace and well-being that merely these alone.Ultimately, these all come down to some version of the basic idea that if people want a good life, then they must do certain things, such as restricting murder, respecting property rights, and not allowing false accusations.
Not exactly. I think you're obscuring the historical actualities by appealing to vague notions of "success" ......................How that works out in the details varies from culture to culture.
And your sources on Ethics, Social Philosophy and World History by which you're asserting this truism are what? Please cite them.Where there are differences, we can generally figure out ways to live together by working out a set of rules that we will enforce together.
None of this requires an absolute morality.
Declaring one morality to be absolute does nothing to improve things.
What? It was an astronomy joke. It had nothing to do with Asperger's or any other ASD condition.
An analogy involving a star you can't see is about as useful as an absolute morality from a source you can't see.
Russell's teapot.Ok, Mr. Astronomer, I'll ignore my reference to Celestial Navigation | Time and Navigation.
What celestial analogy should I have used to make a more copacetic moral analogy alluding to the Absolute moral value of Jesus Christ?
The problem with claims of absolute morality is that we have to trust those who claim to have a source of absolute morality. I do not find any of them trustworthy.Which doesn't assume an absolute morality.
This aligns with what I often say: those that think there is an objective morality believe that somehow it's theirs.The problem with claims of absolute morality is that we have to trust those who claim to have a source of absolute morality. I do not find any of them trustworthy.
Which doesn't assume an absolute morality.
Which doesn't assume an absolute morality.
Deciding that it's a fact that morality is relative is not a problem. Facts are absolute by definition. Morality is not. And your philosophy prof didn't know that?The funniest thing is that my Social Philosophy professor years ago said to all of us 30+ students in his class that, with an understanding of what 'absolute morality' actually is conceptually, we're all absolutist if we're each convinced that there is a right way to be moral.
I agree with what he taught. The fact that I have to make that decision myself makes it a relative morality.As for Jesus, well, I think He thought that His commands and admonitions and assorted moral teachings carried absolute authority...
As a fact, yes. See post above. Facts and positions on morality are not the same. Facts are absolute: There is a pen on the table. Morality is relative: Killing animals for fun is wrong.Do you absolutely believe that?
So my morality is absolute. As is yours. So when we have two different moral positions on a given matter they are both absolute?Everyone with the capacity to reason.
So my morality is absolute. As is yours. So when we have two different moral positions on a given matter they are both absolute?
I'm not sure you thought that through.
Bull. Different kinds of facts are subject to varying degrees of interpretation. So no, facts are not absolute in all cases.Deciding that it's a fact that morality is relative is not a problem. Facts are absolute by definition.
Our perspectives on what we each may think morality should be is subject to relative contexts, and my philosophy professor knew that. But that wasn't his point. Of course, relative to the fact that you weren't in the class, you didn't know that.Morality is not. And your philosophy prof didn't know that?
I agree with what he taught. The fact that I have to make that decision myself makes it a relative morality.
While these basic principles are find and dandy, I think we both know there is a lot, lot more that goes into the formation of domestic peace and well-being that merely these alone.
Nowhere did I state or hint that an "absolute morality" is one that can be declared a priori; asserting as such wasn't my point.
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?