by shadow 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Its notable that so many theists still suffer from Platonic essentialism.-cofty
Nonsense speak for yourself. You are just quoting Dawkins, I believe in God and do not suffer from platonic essentialism. I also believe in evolution. Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. I am not blind. Platoism is not a real condition of most people.
Give me your stats and figures and studies to back your nonsense claim
Love Kate xx
Platoism is not a real condition of most people
Every time somebody asks about missing links they betray their essentialism. In this context when people like Shadow or Unstop or William Lane Craig confuse objective morality with absolute morality they reveal their Platonic assumptions.
Every time somebody asks about missing links - cofty
That's not that many of the world population of 60/70 billion people. It's a few JWs in my experience, not "many theists" as you put it. Agreed ?
Kate xx
No its more like 99% of people who haven't grasped evolution, including many who accpept it, but we are getting off the interesting topic of ethics.
"Science without religion is lame"
What is that supposed to mean? You really think atheists are "lame"? Or is it that you think my science teachers should be force-feeding me their religious beliefs along with the math, science, and engineering lessons.
cofty, no I did not get your point about descriptive vs prescriptive Before you assume that I'm a stupid window-washer (actually I was one for a while, window-washer that is), I do have a post-graduate degree.
Billy - (I'm also an ex-bethelite) "And according to the OT, a man can have many wives." Now would that be an advantage or disadvantage from an evolutionary point of view? Greater opportunity to spread genes but greater risk of shorter life-span? Ok, point taken, maybe that's not an absolute.
Interesting discussion. I believe I shall retreat from moral absolutism to regroup around the position that morality is determined by God and that atheists have no foundation for morality other than imposition of such by the strong over the weak.
Just retreat. I don't care where you go. Just go.
DJS, You do realize that this thread and my comments are not required reading, don't you? Though I am flattered by your inability to stay away.
Shadow - When I said evolution is descriptive not prescriptive I meant that it describes what really happened. Genes that were most "fit" thrived in the gene pool at the expense of competing genes. But we are not bound by our selfish genes. We have the ability to reason and make decisions that are in the longer term interests of others and of society.
When you keep asserting that somebody who believes in evolution "ought" to think or act in a certain way you are ignoring the last few hundred millennia, when we evolved the ability to resist our selfish replicators. You do it everytime you use contraception.
I shall retreat from moral absolutism to regroup around the position that morality is determined by God
That is a distinction without a difference.
atheists have no foundation for morality other than imposition of such by the strong over the weak.
Not at all. Some actions really do promote the flourishing of conscious creatures and some actions do the opposite. These are moral facts that do not depend on opinions or preferences.
By the way if I disappear from the conversation its because I am off to bed not because I have lost interest.
Please try to distinguish between absolute, objective and relative morality.
Absolute morality is ethics by divine fiat. Rejecting it does not condemn us to merely accept popular opinion as the alternative.
Homosexuality is a good example. According to divine fiat it is wrong. According to popular opinion it depends on where you do your survey. But being objective we only have to ask the question of whether consensual gay relationships promote or damage human well-being.
We could establish first that homosexuality is largely determined by genetics and embryonic development. People don't choose their sexuality. Let's not have the debate now lets just agree that this is a question that lends itself to scientific investigation.
Then we could consider whether the acccusations against gay relationships have any objective merit, and so on.
Our conclusion is neither based on absolutes or popular opinion but on objective facts and reasoning. That is real morality.
