The apologia of the cosmos. Evidence of God

[Elioenai26]

Of course I have an aversion to killing children. To suggest otherwise is asinine.

Are you a moral realist?

 

[Elioenai26]

irrelevant for the points you try to dodge.

Not dodging any point.

But simply want to know, since you imply that God's commands are evil, we need to discuss why you think that.

To begin, we can address your views regarding morality.

Tell me, if you are willing, are you a moral realist or moral anti-realist?

I do hope you will answer, but if you are smart, you may just refuse to do so because of the obvious "pickle" you will place yourself in either way....

 

[HitchSlap]

Are you a moral realist?

Define it as you understand it.

 

[Elioenai26]

Define it as you understand it.

There is one definition, the one you find in philosophy textbooks. Did you not even post a link to a wikipedia article on it? Or was that someone else?

 

[HitchSlap]

There is one definition, the one you find in philosophy textbooks. Did you not even post a link to a wikipedia article on it? Or was that someone else?

Why does it matter to you? Are you unable or unwilling to participate in discussions unless you label someone?

 

[quatona]

Not dodging any point.

But simply want to know, since you imply that God's commands are evil, we need to discuss why you think that.

To begin, we can address your views regarding morality.

Tell me, if you are willing, are you a moral realist or moral anti-realist?

I do hope you will answer, but if you are smart, you may just refuse to do so because of the obvious "pickle" you will place yourself in either way....

1. Whether I find a certain action evil was immaterial to the point made: the point demonstrated an inconsistency in YOUR reasoning.
Even if you could manage to show
that my position has a weakness it wouldn't help removing the contradiction in YOUR argument and it wouldn't help you out of the corner you have argued yourself into.
3. We've been discussing morality here for more than a year. You've seen me giving my views often and in great detail. We are not at a point where the question for a label can possibly be meant to give you information you don't have.
5. Address the points made and which you have quoted instead of evading it by attacking MY position in morality. For all I care we can assume that this position is completely untenable. Doesn't help removing the contradictions in your reasoning.

 

[Eudaimonist]

There is one definition, the one you find in philosophy textbooks. Did you not even post a link to a wikipedia article on it? Or was that someone else?

That might have been I who had posted that link, but you should know that at Wikipedia there are two distinct definitions.

The one I favor and endorse is called the "robust" definition of moral realism (pay special attention to the section "Robust versus minimal moral realism"):

Moral realism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For moral realism in the "moderate" or "minimal" sense, you'll also want to read this article (but read the first one carefully):

Moral universalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I personally think you should explain carefully just what you mean by moral realism, and not assume that everyone has the same definition/understanding in mind.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I am ecstatic to have you atheists talking about killing children as if you have a moral aversion to the killing of children....

So if you all will tell me.....if you are brave enough.....

Who here is a moral realist?

Not me. If you want to discuss moral realism, make a new thread. We're currently discussing the inherent inconsistency with Genesis 22 and your claim ("It's never justified to disobey God"), as well as your inability to answer a simple question ("Would you kill your child if God told you to?"). Our own views on morality are irrelevant - we're discussing the morality inherent in Christianity.

As far as I can tell, your simplistic maxim is rife with holes (as most overly-simple rules are), so I'm poking them to see what extra caveats arise. What if God issue a command, but you don't know if it's God doing the commanding? What if you (erroneously) conclude it's Satan or schizophrenia, and defy the command because you believe that's what God wants? What if the command is a test to see if you'll stand up against moral actions - should you obey or disobey?

And shame on you, Elioenai26.

"Answer that question and I will answer yours." (#850)

I answered your question, so please answer mine (the one in #849).

 

[Elioenai26]

Not me. If you want to discuss moral realism, make a new thread. We're currently discussing the inherent inconsistency with Genesis 22 and your claim ("It's never justified to disobey God"), as well as your inability to answer a simple question ("Would you kill your child if God told you to?"). Our own views on morality are irrelevant - we're discussing the morality inherent in Christianity.

As far as I can tell, your simplistic maxim is rife with holes (as most overly-simple rules are), so I'm poking them to see what extra caveats arise. What if God issue a command, but you don't know if it's God doing the commanding? What if you (erroneously) conclude it's Satan or schizophrenia, and defy the command because you believe that's what God wants? What if the command is a test to see if you'll stand up against moral actions - should you obey or disobey?

And shame on you, Elioenai26.

"Answer that question and I will answer yours." (#850)

I answered your question, so please answer mine (the one in #849).

You asked a question in post 849? All I saw was a misrepresentation of what I said and a bunch of rambling.

 

[HitchSlap]

You asked a question in post 849? All I saw was a misrepresentation of what I said and a bunch of rambling.

Oh, the irony.