by chrisuk 320 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Anyybody who actually took the time to read the article jgnat linked and did some further reading would have a great deal to contribute to this coversation. It is excellent.
The well being of conscious creatures is the foundation of OBJECTIVE morality.
The article describes the origins of those things humans value and abhor.
Ruby how can you agree to disagree until you have carefully considered what you are disagreeing with?
+1
__
Focus
("Never waste a good argument" Class)
Religious ritual including self sacrifice and child scarifice are not exceptions. Attempts to please the deity and win rewards in the next life are still examples of worrying about the well being of conscious creatures.
lol focus - I shall retreat gracefully as cofty sounds like he is on an obey the party line mission.
Moral type behaivor in primates and other species can not be used to imply that there is some universal objective Moral Code which is absolute. It only suggests that some type of morals exists in species interaction other than our species, that is both different and similar to our species. The interpetation of these behaivors of course are highly subjective and give no evidence of the existance of an absolute moral authority which everything in the universe must abide and be judged by, instead it is a manifestation of the human species ability to project their morals onto the patterned responces of other species and clasify it as morals.
When a lion kills a human being; baby or adult, he feels no guilty conscience but to humans he is guilty of a crime and mostly likely he will be hunted down and put to death for doing so. This is not done in obedience to some universal moral code which places human life at a far higher value than say a gazelle and requires retribution.
I shall retreat gracefully as cofty sounds like he is on an obey the party line mission. - Ruby
That is a way of avoiding dealing with the evidence that has been offered.
Jgnat presented an excellent article on the foundations of human morality.
I offered an explanation of the differences between absolute, relative and objective morality.
A personal insult is not an honest response.
Simon says:" The problem with that argument is that there are clearly degrees of both slavery and racism.
A lynchmob and someone clutching their purse more tightly when a member of another race approaches are both manifestations of racism.
I would suggest that one is a more "mild" form and one is not."
I said it was a slippery slope (clearly an over-used expression, which makes me wonder why I used it). By claiming that there are mild forms of something bad or wrong, yes, different degree is implied.
But we are talking about pedophilia. And I used racism and slavery as examples because they, like pedophilia, are unacceptable in ANY form.
To the less religiously inclined - This is all about your boy Mr Dawkins, and so all of a sudden we're drawing fine lines. I'll say it again - if the Watchtower published an article and categorized a form of pedophilia as "mild" you'd all be blowing a gasket - NO ONE would be defending the Watchtower. And if some JW apolgist were to try to draw the same fine line, you'd all be jumping all over him/her.
Dawkins' statement in no way affects his scientific credentials, or evolution theory, for that matter, so what are you so worried about?
slippery slope (clearly an over-used expression, which makes me wonder why I used it
Not just over-used, but often a fallacy, rocketman.
We live in a world where most things are neither black nor white.
We contrive logic to make it so, as it is easier to do so...
The "Excluded Middle" principle.
[Aside for the "Doofus" Class: The above's originally Aristotle, who is not Focus (third person). Those with a modicum of sense know that every time I use a well-known quote or argument - there's very little new under the sun - it doesn't behoove me to say where it came from. Those who should know, do know, and the rest couldn't care. So when I remind you about the fulfillment of an eye for a slur, I don't need to say it isn't Ex. 21:24. I'm sure you'll soon get the point. And if I put it in a chart, it might be (c) Focus. As ideas can't be copyrighted - aside from the fact that almost all copyrights lapse - but charts can.]
__
Focus
("Gasket" Class)
I think we touch on something very important here on human value systems, and the imaginary beleif that these values are universal. I think that this also pervades in the judicial system and the forms of punishment it hands out to offences in this particular moral "crime". It really isn't attacking the problem logically and is in need of some out of the box thinkers to offer a better paradigm that recognizes this fact.
But being the excellorated rate at which our veiws are changing do too more data I think the change will come relativaly soon and perhaps too soon in the minds of some.
