Where is the Objective Morality?

[childeye 2]

Ok, what has that to do with anything?

I'm saying you think religion is nonsense and philosophy isn't when essentially they're the same thing for better or worse. For example you said god(s) and meant religion and I pointed out that it's only reasonable that there is one source of the energy that creates all things including us and including morality. Hence there is one morality we all share as a moral collective in the reality we share.

I have submitted Love others as yourself as an objective moral principle with compassion as the power. You have not refuted it in any substantive way except to dismiss out of hand. My attempts to engage in debate over this has been met with a response that I need to educate myself, which is more or less a sentiment that considers me ignorant without any commentary as to how that refutes the moral principle I have submitted. To me this amounts to an ad hominem logical fallacy, which kind of makes you look like chicken food.

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm saying you think religion is nonsense and philosophy isn't when essentially they're the same thing for better or worse. For example you said god(s) and meant religion and I pointed out that it's only reasonable that there is one source of the energy that creates all things including us and including morality. Hence there is one morality we all share as a moral collective in the reality we share.

I have submitted Love others as yourself as an objective moral principle with compassion as the power. You have not refuted it in any substantive way except to dismiss out of hand. My attempts to engage in debate over this has been met with a response that I need to educate myself, which is more or less a sentiment that considers me ignorant without any commentary as to how that refutes the moral principle I have submitted. To me this amounts to an ad hominem logical fallacy, which kind of makes you look like chicken food.

No, theology and philosophy is not the same thing.

You are ignorant on the subject, at least that is what your posts show.

Moral philosophy is an academic discipline with a long history and defined terminology and schools. You seem to know nothing about them or the subject.

 

[Astrid]

I'm saying you think religion is nonsense and philosophy isn't when essentially they're the same thing for better or worse. For example you said god(s) and meant religion and I pointed out that it's only reasonable that there is one source of the energy that creates all things including us and including morality. Hence there is one morality we all share as a moral collective in the reality we share.

I have submitted Love others as yourself as an objective moral principle with compassion as the power. You have not refuted it in any substantive way except to dismiss out of hand. My attempts to engage in debate over this has been met with a response that I need to educate myself, which is more or less a sentiment that considers me ignorant without any commentary as to how that refutes the moral principle I have submitted. To me this amounts to an ad hominem logical fallacy, which kind of makes you look like chicken food.

I cannot see loving the man who raped me.
Any notion that I objectively should is garbage.

 

[childeye 2]

No, theology and philosophy is not the same thing.

So you say. But they both establish beliefs about the reality we all share.

You are ignorant on the subject, at least that is what your posts show.

If you mean that I don't study philosophy, that's not entirely true. I study lots of things. You appear ignorant to me too in your posts judging from some of the stuff you say. But I don't tell you go educate yourself. I attempt to educate you because that's how I would want to be loved.

Moral philosophy is an academic discipline with a long history and defined terminology and schools. You seem to know nothing about them or the subject.

So you say, over and over and over, yet you provide nothing to refute the objective moral principle of love others as yourself.

What good is all that philosophy or religion if it only makes one a pompous windbag looking down their nose at others?

 

[Astrid]

So you say. But they both establish beliefs about the reality we all share.


If you mean that I don't study philosophy, that's not entirely true. I study lots of things. You appear ignorant to me too in your posts judging from some of the stuff you say. But I don't tell you go educate yourself. I attempt to educate you because that's how I would want to be loved.

So you say, over and over and over, yet you provide nothing to refute the objective moral principle of love others a yourself.

What good is all that philosophy or religion if it only makes one a pompous windbag looking down their nose at others?

Eze to refute. I just did.

 

[childeye 2]

I cannot see loving the man who raped me.
Any notion that I objectively should is garbage.

I have no comprehension of what that would be like. I wouldn't pretend to. But I do know that even hatred comes from a sense of betrayal. And that suggests there was a trust in the love of others that has been betrayed.

 

[childeye 2]

Eze to refute. I just did.

Respectfully, that was your subjective view. You actually prove it. The rapist did not love you as he would want to be loved.

 

[Astrid]

I have no comprehension of what that would be like. I wouldn't pretend to. But I do know that even hatred comes from a sense of betrayal. And that suggests there was a trust in the love of others that has been betrayed.

Its nothing to do with hatred or betrayal.

Saying i should love that nan is garbage.

 

[childeye 2]

Its nothing to do with hatred or betrayal.

Saying i should love that nan is garbage.

Love others as yourself means you wouldn't want to be raped so don't rape others. Where does it say love rapists and raping others?

 

[Astrid]

K

Love others as yourself means you wouldn't want to be raped so don't rape others. Where does it say love rapists and raping others?

I said my bit and i stand by it.
Your irrelevant question changes nothing

 

[childeye 2]

K


I said my bit and i stand by it.
Your irrelevant question changes nothing

Then you've not refuted it, because it doesn't say love rapists and raping others.

 

[VirOptimus]

So you say. But they both establish beliefs about the reality we all share.


If you mean that I don't study philosophy, that's not entirely true. I study lots of things. You appear ignorant to me too in your posts judging from some of the stuff you say. But I don't tell you go educate yourself. I attempt to educate you because that's how I would want to be loved.

So you say, over and over and over, yet you provide nothing to refute the objective moral principle of love others a yourself.

What good is all that philosophy or religion if it only makes one a pompous windbag looking down their nose at others?

You have nothing to learn me.

Keep your preaching.

 

[childeye 2]

You have nothing to learn me.

Keep your preaching.

Since this doesn't refute in any way that Love others as yourself is an objective morality, then it stands unrefuted.

 

[Astrid]

Then you've not refuted it, because it doesn't say love rapists and raping others.

And i didnt claim it does.
As you have to make things up to refute mr, it
merely shows your are refuting your self.

 

[childeye 2]

And i didnt claim it does.

On the contrary you wrote this below as an aspersion and claimed you had refuted the principle of love others as yourself as being an objective morality, when in fact to any reasonable person that principle shows rape to be an objective immorality.

"I cannot see loving the man who raped me.
Any notion that I objectively should is garbage".

 

[VirOptimus]

Since this doesn't refute in any way that Love others as yourself is an objective morality, then it stands unrefuted.

No, its not objective morality.

 

[childeye 2]

No, its not objective morality.

Why, how? Refute it with something.

 

[VirOptimus]

Why, how? Refute it with something.

I dont need to.

You are making an assertion, then its on you to support/prove it.

 

[childeye 2]

I dont need to.

You are making an assertion, then its on you to support/prove it.

I did. Compassion is the power of morality as seen all over the world. You now have to prove that compassion is immoral.

 

[VirOptimus]

I did. Compassion is the power of morality as seen all over the world. You now have to prove that compassion is immoral.

No I dont as its not. And that has nothing to do with objective morality.

You really really should look up what objective morality is about.