The Moral Argument

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Furthermore, I would ask, if the only thing that gives life meaning is an afterlife, what gives the afterlife meaning? The after-afterlife? Then the after-after-afterlife etc? Please explain how that math works.

First of all, why is it so difficult for an atheist to admit that the universe and all life is meaningless and pointless without God? If I was an atheist I would say, "absolutely, the universe and everything in it is pointless and meaningless if there was no God who created it with purpose or meaning. Even though I may create my own purpose for my life, in the end, my life is meaningless. That's fine with me. I don't care so I will live my meaningless life the best I can".

Second, in regards to your statement above, I have absolutely no clue what you are saying here. After-after-afterlife? Really?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

First of all, why is it so difficult for an atheist to admit that the universe and all life is meaningless and pointless without God?

Once again, that is what YOU believe. I am not you.

If I was an atheist I would say, "absolutely, the universe and everything in it is pointless and meaningless if there was no God who created it with purpose or meaning. Even though I may create my own purpose for my life, in the end, my life is meaningless. That's fine with me. I don't care so I will live my meaningless life the best I can".

Good for you, hypothetical atheist who happens to believe cosmic meaning is the one and only type of meaning. Have an imaginary cookie.

Second, in regards to your statement above, I have absolutely no clue what you are saying here. After-after-afterlife? Really?

It's illustrating the absurdity of the implicit assertion that life is meaningless without an afterlife.

 

[Sapiens]

Please demonstrate premise 1.

If objective moral values do not exist, then God doesn't exist. This is another way of putting it. Basically, God is the best and the only viable explanation for their existence. He is a subjective person with an unfailing judgment (the only one in fact). Objective moral values cannot exist without an objective judge.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Once again, that is what YOU believe. I am not you.



Good for you, hypothetical atheist who happens to believe cosmic meaning is the one and only type of meaning. Have an imaginary cookie.



It's illustrating the absurdity of the implicit assertion that life is meaningless without an afterlife.

It is a fact that anything that was ever created for a purpose has to have a creator with some level of intelligence to bestow a purpose to that creation. I challenge you to name one thing that was ever created for a specific purpose that did not have a creator with some level of intelligence. You can't. Sure, you can take something that had no purpose and give it a purpose. An example would be a rock. Nature created the rock. But the rock was created without any purpose or meaning. It was simply a product of natural means. However, a being with intelligence can take a rock put it on a stack of paper and now you have a paperweight. The rock now has a purpose. If atheist are correct, your life and the existence of all mankind has no created purpose. Sure, you can create a purpose for your life. But that still does not change the fact that life, including your life, was created without a purpose. It is also a fact that if the universe is ultimately going to fade into blackness, ultimately whatever purpose you created for your life to give it meaning....is meaningless and you and your existence is no different from a rock.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

It is a fact that anything that was ever created for a purpose has to have a creator with some level of intelligence to bestow a purpose to that creation. I challenge you to name one thing that was ever created for a specific purpose that did not have a creator with some level of intelligence. You can't. Sure, you can take something that had no purpose and give it a purpose. An example would be a rock. Nature created the rock. But the rock was created without any purpose or meaning. It was simply a product of natural means. However, a being with intelligence can take a rock put it on a stack of paper and now you have a paperweight. The rock now has a purpose. If atheist are correct, your life and the existence of all mankind has no created purpose. Sure, you can create a purpose for your life. But that still does not change the fact that life, including your life, was created without a purpose. It is also a fact that if the universe is ultimately going to fade into blackness, ultimately whatever purpose you created for your life to give it meaning....is meaningless.

You are STILL confusing yourself with me.

It is you, not me, who believes the universe was created by Yahweh.

It is you, not me, who believes Yahweh to be the dictator of purpose and meaning.

It is you, not me, who holds the bizarre nihilistic belief that eternal cosmic meaning is the only type of meaning.

Therefor, it is you, not me, whose life is purposeless and meaningless without Yahweh.

What is your excuse for your continued failure at distinguishing yourself from other people?

 

[Sapiens]

You keep confusing me with yourself. It is your religious narrative that has Yahweh as the author of the universe and the dictator of its meaning, therefor it is your life that is rendered meaningless without Yahweh.



I happen to think there are other types of meaning besides cosmic meaning. Actually, I think cosmic meaning is the least meaningful, as it is largely impertinent to humans.

What a thing to believe - literally nothing matters unless it lasts forever? You're welcome to wallow in your bizarre brand of nihilism, but don't project it on me.

Also, I will point out a basic economic concept - scarcity.

If you find a diamond in a desert, you have something of value. That's life in the temporary view.

If you find a diamond in a desert made of diamonds, on a continent made of diamonds, on a planet made of diamonds, you have something worthless. That's life in the eternal view.

Furthermore, I would ask, if the only thing that gives life meaning is an afterlife, what gives the afterlife meaning? The after-afterlife? Then the after-after-afterlife etc? Please explain how that math works.

So you're saying that your life can be meaningful, and even more, if temporary on this earth?

May I ask what is that meaning you have with this view?

It's not that it's after that matters, it's that it doesn't end, and in fact starts for real then. We don't yet know the true extent of life for which we were created.

And even if temporary meaningfulness was true, would it not still be better to not die and keep on enjoying life?

Do you think life loses value because it doesn't end? Life is valuable in itself, unlike money and diamonds, which of themselves are worthless to begin with. Imagine you stayed stuck alone in that desert with your diamond...

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You are STILL confusing yourself with me.

It is you, not me, who believes the universe was created by Yahweh.

It is you, not me, who believes Yahweh to be the dictator of purpose and meaning.

It is you, not me, who holds the bizarre nihilistic belief that eternal cosmic meaning is the only type of meaning.

Therefor, it is you, not me, whose life is purposeless and meaningless without Yahweh.

What is your excuse for your continued failure at distinguishing yourself from other people?

Yahweh is not the point. The point is that a CREATOR with some level of intelligence is mandatory in order for an object to be created for a purpose. If there is no intellegent creator, it is impossible for that object to be created for a purpose. Thus, your life was created without a purpose. If you cannot accept that fact, you are more delusional than the theists you mock.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

"In a world without God, there is no good or bad. Just blind pitiless indifference "

Richard Dawkins on the Moral argument.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

[Video=youtube]

[/video]

I hope this video may help explain the Moral Argument.

 

[Davian]

If atheist are correct and there is no God. In the grand scheme of things, the universe is meaningless because it was created without a purpose. There has to be a creator in order for a creation to have purpose.

Why?

So if the universe is meaningless and without purpose, life is meaningless and pointless.

The purpose of life is to create more life. It is an ongoing process, that continues as conditions allow.

If life is meaningless and pointless, your life is meaningless and pointless.

"I don’t think anything gives your life joy and meaning. I think your life simply has joy and meaning. The love for my children, the love for my parents and the love for my friends is the end in itself. The meaning is life.” ― Penn Jillette

Atheist may create their own purpose and meaning to their lives but when you apply it the entire course of the history of the universe, it is meaningless. After the universe ultimately fades to blackness, your life and all our accomplishments will account for nothing. You and your existence is meaningless. Period.

Are you presenting this as a [fallacious] argument from consequences?

The best you have to hope for is to make your existence as pleasing as possible before you die and fade off into non-existance.

Works for me. I have never believed otherwise.

That is the argument that atheism cannot defend.

It requires no defence. I am simply not convinced of the existence of gods, and have not been presented with evidence that we have anything more than this biological stint here on Earth.

Without God.....life and all that goes with it....including morality, is meaningless and pointless.

The only point to morality, as it was defined on the first page of this thread, is to describe how we get along in and as a society. The point of morality is that we get along sufficiently well enough that we can raise another generation successfully. That we can rise above that, and treat each other even better than that, is just gravy.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Why?

The purpose of life is to create more life. It is an ongoing process, that continues as conditions allow.

Why? What is the point of creating more life if life will eventually fade into non-existance?

 

[Murby]

Why? What is the point of creating more life if life will eventually fade into non-existance?

Where do you folks come up with this stuff????????????????????????????????

 

[Davian]

In support of the moral argument, we see that even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else's. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed and cowardice are universal. If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Further, it is not simply a record of what mankind does—rarely do people ever live up to their own moral code. Where, then, do we get these ideas of what should be done? Romans 2:14-15 says that the moral law (or conscience) comes from an ultimate lawgiver above man. If this is true, then we would expect to find exactly what we have observed. This lawgiver is God.

And it is exactly what I would expect to find if those tribes have a moral code based on a varying mix of reason, compassion, empathy, and relative human wellness, the Silver Rule, and the social contract. no gods required. Parsimony, and all that.

To put it negatively, atheism provides no basis for morality, no hope, and no meaning for life.

Neither does not collecting stamps.

While this does not disprove atheism by itself,

Atheism is not a truth claim.

if the logical outworking of a belief system

Atheism is not a belief system.

fails to account for what we instinctively know to be true,

We instinctively know the Earth to be flat, and that it hangs in space while the Cosmos rotates around it.

it ought to be discarded.

Atheism will persist, while god claims remain unconvincing.

Without God there would be no objective basis for morality, no life, and no reason to live it.

Atheism is not nihilism.

Yet all these things do exist,

I have yet to see an objective moral detailed in this thread.

and so does God.

So you believe.

Thus, the moral argument for the existence of God.

Thus, you are asserting both the existence of objective morals, and the existence of your god, and claim you can't have one without the other, without demonstrating the existence of either.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Where do you folks come up with this stuff????????????????????????????????

Sometimes I get it from the gnome who lives in my basement. The only problem is that one by one the pinguens steal my sanity and the tree frogs of the underworld keep leaving the toilet seat up. Darn treefrogs...what was I talking about?

 

[Davian]

Ok, ok, ok. I didn't know about the consequence fallacy. It's not that my point was not good but I presented it somewhat badly, both in order and content, I admit. What I wanted to show is that in light of uncertainty, we have to choose between, yes, the most plausible possibility but also in light of the most advantageous to believe, if it ultimately comes down to a choice.

Belief is not a conscious choice. I cannot decide to believe in gods anymore than I can decide to believe that extraterrestrial aliens are controlling our government.*

Now, I will please ask you to give me a bit of a chance, you're like ten people on my case and I'm one. I've got to respond to everyone and often I'm just on my cell to do that (takes longer). Besides, I've got studies to do. Please be indulgent with me.

Take your time. The beauty of discussion boards is that everything keeps, and you can take it at your own pace.

BTW, unlike many people here, I am still beginning the art of argumentation. I'm discovering things as I go along.

I'm just n00b here myself. There is always stuff to learn.

Concerning your first paragraph, is it so because a lot of people, even with good reputations in their field, say it is so? Hey man, there's like two billion people on earth that are Christian. The Bible is the most printed book in the whole world, maybe it's true? Nobody was there when the earth started, and those who might have been are no longer around to tell about it (except God of course).

Don't confuse consensus of opinion with scientific consensus. Consensus of opinion can easily be seen as a [fallacious] argument from popularity if you are not very careful.

I think the best proof we might have, is based on our intuition. Despite the fact that we might be imperfectly capable to discern them or that we don't neccessarily agree on what is which, at least we know good and bad, true and false exist.

(my bold)

Sure, but your own words allude to their subjectivity. Situational ethics, and all that.


* (Apologies in advance to any of my fellow members of this site that count themselves among those that believe that Earth is being visited by extraterrestrial craft. This post is in no way intended to offend or embarrass. I, for one, welcome our alien overlords.)

 

[Davian]

Why? What is the point of creating more life if life will eventually fade into non-existance?

I can only speak for myself, of course, but I would say that, for the most part, it has been fun, interesting, rewarding, and seems far better than the alternative (not being alive).

As those biological life forms that I have created (with the not insignificant assistance of my spouse) reach their teenage years, my enthusiasm has been somewhat abated, but I do hope they go on to have as much fun as I have had so far.

What's it like for you? Is this life just a doormat for you? Do you volunteer for experimental surgery, or fly experimental jet aircraft, hoping that it will expedite your transition to the [hypothetical] "next" world?

Do you even need to floss?

 

[Davian]

[Video=youtube]

[/video]

I hope this video may help explain the Moral Argument.

The failure of presuppositional apologetics is in the fact that they make far too many presuppositions. This one presumes the existence of objective morals.

 

[Murby]

Do you fly experimental jet aircraft,

I wish! Did you really need to stick that on in there?

 

[Murby]

[Video=youtube]

[/video]

I hope this video may help explain the Moral Argument.

That was great! I'm always entertained when someone practiced in the art of twisting logic and reasoning does a presentation like that.. Its kind of like an intellectual puzzle to pick out the flaws.

But this one was easy... Even in the Animal kingdom, signs of morality, empathy, fairness, and reciprocity are recorded across many species. Whales regularly morn their dead, monkeys recognize and react to fairness and reciprocity, and the list goes on and on. Some of the most prominent and respected scientist in the world have published their findings on this.

Morals are not just a human characteristic.. we're just a bit more evolved with them.

But even if we didn't conduct any science on the animals concerning this, its not difficult to recognize that human morals are based on nothing more than propagation of the species and our desire to survive. Without cooperation, which by the way is seen all through out the animal kingdom, humans would not be here today..

Your morals are based on your circumstances and your circumstances are dictated by evolution and science. (read the green line in my signature).. It really is that simple and if you want, I can provide you with examples of how your morals would change in relation to your circumstances.

In science, and in most of life, when we search for answers, they can usually be found by looking at the extremes at both ends of the argument.. When you do that, the area between the extremes becomes clearer and easier to understand.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I wish! Did you really need to stick that on in there?

I fly attack helicopters for the Marine Corps. That is all the excitement I need for now.