Noah's Ark

[quatona]

They shouldn't, but they should care about the reality of evil, and, if you want evidence that people intuitively know that there is such a thing as evil, just trawl the web for atheists announcing religion to be evil.

So you abandon your previous point and instead bring up different one? Ok, noted.

It´s not uncommon for people to word their opinion in a seemingly objective way ("this tastes bad", "this is poor music", "this is not acceptable"...), even though they are fully aware that it´s their subjective view.

They are wrong about religion of course, but they know exactly what the word means, and they do not imagine themselves to be expressing a purely personal opinion.

Some may, some do not. In any case, playing psychic does not a convincing argument make. But once we are at it, I could simply assert that all objectivists know exactly that their opinions express a subjective opinion.

Btw., the dichotomy "objective vs. purely personal" leaves out a couple of other options.

 

[quatona]

People from widely differing cultures often render the same 'subjective' opinion regarding beauty (not to be confused with desirability), and that across ethnic lines. If this happens a lot it can be said to be 'objective' can't it?

"Universally agree upon" and "objective" are two different concepts.
This is even more important to keep in mind if the word "objective" is also used for "independent of human perception and view" in the same discussion.

 

[AV1611VET]

*

Five minutes and forty seconds into this video and he says nothing, while [canned?] laughter is heard after almost every sentence.

How appropriate that, as he paces back and forth, the word EDUCATION is seen in large letters behind him.

 

[Skreeper]

Five minutes and forty seconds into this video and he says nothing, while [canned?] laughter is heard after almost every sentence.

How appropriate that, as he paces back and forth, the word EDUCATION is seen in large letters behind him.

I'm sorry you didn't understand the lecture. Is there something in particular you need help understanding? Or are you just upset that the audience was in a good mood?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I am so sorry that you could not understand it. Tell me which parts were too difficult for you and I will gladly help.

Perhaps you should listen to it more carefully. His whole 'schtick' was that in the future we can build a secular morality system superior to that of religion. Also he built an enormous straw man that bears no resemblance to religion based morality. In fact what he held as secular morality is actually religion based morality. He simply appropriated it for his own purpose. The 'religious morality' he describes went the way of the Great Auk many years ago (although "BECAUSE I SAY SO" is still a useful tool for parents of stupid kids who insist on answers that they can't possibly understand).

 

[AV1611VET]

Is there something in particular you need help understanding?

Yes: why I watched it for so long.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Five minutes and forty seconds into this video and he says nothing, while [canned?] laughter is heard after almost every sentence.

How appropriate that, as he paces back and forth, the word EDUCATION is seen in large letters behind him.

26 minutes in....still nothing.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What point do you think you are making?

That 'philosophizing' morality = navel gazing.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

"Universally agree upon" and "objective" are two different concepts.
This is even more important to keep in mind if the word "objective" is also used for "independent of human perception and view" in the same discussion.

So 'beauty' is determined "independent of human perception and view"?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Perhaps you should listen to it more carefully. His whole 'schtick' was that in the future we can build a secular morality system superior to that of religion. Also he built an enormous straw man that bears no resemblance to religion based morality. In fact what he held as secular morality is actually religion based morality. He simply appropriated it for his own purpose. The 'religious morality' he describes went the way of the Great Auk many years ago (although "BECAUSE I SAY SO" is still a useful tool for parents of stupid kids who insist on answers that they can't possibly understand).

We can do it right now. It is being done right now. Morality is secular. In Europe the best societies, those with the highest standard of living, the best health care, the lowest crime rates, tend to be in the most secular of countries.

What strawman did he build? I have seen creationists claim this but they never seem to get it right.

And the last correction that I will give you is that you have it backwards. Most "religious morality" is actually secular morality. You may have watched it, but you definitely did not pay attention or understand it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes: why I watched it for so long.

I see.

Too difficult for you too.

 

[Skreeper]

So 'beauty' is determined "independent of human perception and view"?

Is there an objective standard to determine what is to be considered beautiful by all humans irrespective of anyone's personal opinion?

 

[quatona]

So 'beauty' is determined "independent of human perception and view"?

Not in my view.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is there an objective standard to determine what is to be considered beautiful by all humans irrespective of anyone's personal opinion?

Well you have to go to the right person. May I suggest a person well versed in beauty. A man that has been married three times to beautiful women. A man that has barged into changing rooms of beautiful women many times . A man who said "Grab 'em by . . . " Whoa!! Let's not go there right now. And for my last clue, a man that knows how to spell "kat". In his opinion you could not find a better judge.

 

[Skreeper]

Well you have to go to the right person. May I suggest a person well versed in beauty. A man that has been married three times to beautiful women. A man that has barged into changing rooms of beautiful women many times . A man who said "Grab 'em by . . . " Whoa!! Let's not go there right now. And for my last clue, a man that knows how to spell "kat". In his opinion you could not find a better judge.

As they say: "The smaller your hands, the bigger your beauty compass"

 

[Subduction Zone]

Five minutes and forty seconds into this video and he says nothing, while [canned?] laughter is heard after almost every sentence.

How appropriate that, as he paces back and forth, the word EDUCATION is seen in large letters behind him.

So a lack of a sense of humor is another trait of yours. Noted.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

We can do it right now. It is being done right now. Morality is secular. In Europe the best societies, those with the highest standard of living, the best health care, the lowest crime rates, tend to be in the most secular of countries.

What strawman did he build? I have seen creationists claim this but they never seem to get it right.

And the last correction that I will give you is that you have it backwards. Most "religious morality" is actually secular morality. You may have watched it, but you definitely did not pay attention or understand it.

General morality is indeed secular as most of the world is secular. When I refer to religious morality I mean true spiritual morality. Most Christians don't yet possess true spiritual morality (it's a work in progress), thus the two are quite similar. He has branded Christian morality according to the moral level of most Christians. This is a strawman as the discussion is about morality, not people. People screw everything up, including morality.

What he is doing is like condemning fishing because no one is catching anything.

 

[AV1611VET]

Too difficult for you too.

Painful.

 

[AV1611VET]

So a lack of a sense of humor is another trait of yours. Noted.

Listening to others laugh isn't my idea of humor.

And by the way, was he in a university classroom?

If so, it reinforces what I say about higher academia.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Listening to others laugh isn't my idea of humor.

And by the way, was he in a university classroom?

If so, it reinforces what I say about higher academia.

University of Wisconsin Madison campus building probably (not necessarily sanctioned, but permitted, by the UW), one of the most liberal cities and universities in the country. And the laughter is real (and almost demonic).

He came on like the devil himself as was greeted with peals of joyful applause by his adoring demon possessed sycophants.

(Too harsh? )