Morality - Christianity / Judaism / Islam

[reaper]

Where did I say that since morals are basically already defined, or a path set forth for morals to develop, that this only applies to Chrisitans?

[[BTF]Sigma]

You can try and understand morals all you want, but god has already set them up properly.   In other words there's little need to try and figure them out, they've already been handed down.

My bad. I thought that you meant the Christian GOD in this post. Or did you imply it?

[|iR|Focalor]

Since God doesn't make sense... and Reaper also makes no sense...

I'm going to put forth the idea that Reaper is in fact Jehovah.  I think according to him, it would be the obvious logical conclusion.

[Whirlingdervish]

You can try and understand morals all you want, but god has already set them up properly.   In other words there's little need to try and figure them out, they've already been handed down.

My bad. I thought that you meant the Christian GOD in this post. Or did you imply it?

It doesn't matter who the God is that he is postulating. None of them are required for science to illuminate the process by which morals are formed (a process that does not involve or need the involvement of God) which was part of his initial statment.

he took issue with the title of this book "The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values" based on what I am assuming is a misunderstanding of the title.

I'm assuming that he read it more like "How Science determines human values for them" which would line up with his stated belief in an unproveable nonexistent diety who supposedly "makes up these rules for us" and negates the need for anything else to do so.

He's seeing the book as stating that Science is taking his God's job.

The statement in the title of the book is the least important thing here, and all told it could have 2 different meanings both of which he is failing to grasp, judging by his responses.
 
It could be an implication that Science can be used to determine what the values inherent in human civilizations are and why they formed, or it could be aimed at showing that greater understanding of the world as a result of science can change the values that humans live by, away from primitive superstition based values to those that actually do further the species.

Both would be pretty far from anything that would get us a response like this:

I know I've mentioned Sam Harris' book, The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, in another thread fairly recently.

science doesn't need to, god has already done it

Science doesn't need to what?
Science has no NEEDS.

God doesn't exist.

SHUT THE FUCK UP WITH THAT RETARD SHIT.

You can try and understand morals all you want, but god has already set them up properly. In other words there's little need to try and figure them out, they've already been handed down.

 

[Kami]

does god dictate morality?

or

is god dictated by morality?


and other religious morality discussion

You can try and understand morals all you want, but god has already set them up properly.   In other words there's little need to try and figure them out, they've already been handed down.

you seem to be intentionally glazing over this question, because its a very important one in dispelling the idea that god can determine morality at all

[haunted]

Christians nor god invented morality.

[BIG DICK RICK]

Christians nor god invented morality.

You're right. 





I did.

[|iR|Focalor]

Christians nor god invented morality.

You're right. 





I did.

And I invented immorality.

You are all very welcome. Please, no thank you cards. It's enough to know that your heinous carnal sins bring you all such joy.

[reaper]

Seems like a waste of time when the bible says it all: treat others as you would treat yourself.  If people follow -the- primary tenant of all major religions, they make choices for others and not themselves.  The environment dictated this, whether you believe it's from god or not.  You said I took exception with the title, and I did somewhat.  I also went on to read the "frequenty asked questions" by the author, and took exception to his answers as well.

you seem to be intentionally glazing over this question, because its a very important one in dispelling the idea that god can determine morality at all

"
does god dictate morality?

or

is god dictated by morality?
"

I think that is unknown and largely irrelevant, although I would assume it's a combination.

[|iR|Focalor]

If people follow -the- primary tenant of all major religions, they make choices for others and not themselves.

They make choices FOR others... and not themselves? As in, they butt into other people's lives where their meddling probably isn't wanted while not applying the same standards to their own behavior? Wow, religion is awesome, sign me up.

[Kami]

er, i wonder what happaned to my reply...

"
does god dictate morality?

or

is god dictated by morality?
"

I think that is unknown and largely irrelevant, although I would assume it's a combination.

the reason why it's not irrelevant is that a morality from god must be a standard.  it cannot be a combination of the two, because you cannot be dictated by something at the same time as dictating that same something.  that is like saying while being born you were birthing your mother.

the problem with religious morality is this:  if god dictates morality, then morality becomes arbitrary; as in no standard exists with which to judge morality but what god were to say.  this means god could say that shooting the left foot of a raccoon on sunday leads to heaven, and it becomes moral simply because of this.  simply put, morality has no inherent meaning (as most religious people may find disagreeable). 

the only difference between upholding and worshipping "the one God" and committing murder is that your god has said that one is morally right, and that the other is morally wrong.  there exists no standard with which to judge why either action would be right or wrong in this case.

so surely then god is simply a being that abides by morality, as in whatever god does is considered moral, as he is a moral being.  now this must be it right?  oddly enough, no, this cannot be either.  if god is a moral being, then god's actions are dictated.  if he were to be dictated, that means he is not omnipotent, as in there is a standard that essentially predates god, or is higher on the chain of authority.

but the real problem with this is that we should then follow his example as a moral being.  yet there are many instances of the bible in which he commits genocides and other atrocities.  at this point there exists a paradox.  god says this and does something different.  since god did not dictate morality, would we not be moral by rejecting god's commandments and following his example instead?

this conundrum is one of the reasons i left the christian faith and generally reject theistic religions.  it cannot be resolved without invoking a "its beyond our puny human brain" type answer which at this point is a pretty unacceptable answer to a philosophical question such as this.

[quadz]

This thread is literally as old as Aishah when she was married to Muhammad.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwhq31Vj0aU  (runtime: 90 seconds)
<span data-s9e-mediaembed="youtube" style="display:inline-block;width:100%;max-width:640px"><span style="display:block;overflow:hidden;position:relative;padding-bottom:56.25%"><iframe allowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" style="background:url(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/zwhq31Vj0aU/hqdefault.jpg) 50% 50% / cover;border:0;height:100%;left:0;position:absolute;width:100%" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zwhq31Vj0aU"></iframe></span></span><br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/zwhq31Vj0aU" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/zwhq31Vj0aU</a>

[haunted]