cofty

Joined

• started 464 topics
• posted 24,957 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by cofty

• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  How is that possible without abortion

  In vitro fertilisation.

  Your absolute morality - based on an anti-scientific dogma about a soul - forbids it.

  In my world it is a wonderful moral good.
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  If you are correct then you should be able to demonstrate that your system is superior. It should demonstrably lead to more reliable moral decisions. - Me

  I think this is an oversimplification. - John Mann

  You keep using this phrase as an excuse to ignore every one of my arguments. Why? If I misrepresent your views correct me. I have accumulated many, many evidence-based arguments in this thread which you have not even attempted to answer.

  There is nothing simplistic about my challenge.

  Your Position
  You assert that our moral decisions ought to be rooted in the character of a good god. Your morality is "top-down". You start with things that you believe to be true about this absolute model of perfect morality, and then measure every possible action against that standard.

  My Position
  I propose that we can better make good moral decisions with a "bottom-up" method. We begin by gathering objective facts about the impact of our proposed actions. Our decisions are then based on how we can best enhance the well being of conscious creatures.

  This method makes no reference to any ultimate or absolute standard or the supposed wishes of an almighty law-giver.

  Let's imagine the lowest possible valley in the "moral landscape". This represents the maximum, pointless suffering for the maximum number of conscious beings. Please don't be tempted to obfuscate here, I am not describing suffering for a better purpose, just pointless, hopeless, abject misery for all.

  All of our moral concerns are about moving away from this nadir.

  Of course there will be times that we need to descend in order to reach a higher place - the temporary suffering of medical treatment for example - but a moral good is one that moves to a higher place in the moral landscape. One that contributes to the sum-total of well being.

  I do not know any other way to make the distinction between absolute and objective morality more clear.

  The Challenge
  If your system of morality is superior to a secular one that takes no account of god then you should be able to powerfully demonstrate that this is so.

  It is a perfectly simple challenge. One that I very much look forward to taking up later this evening.

  Anyway we are already talking about abortion as an example of application/demonstration of our views on morality. We can continue to use this moral dilemma. You know my position I'm totally against abortion.

  Actually we have not been talking about abortion at all. I have no interest in defending abortion.

  We have been talking about stem-cell research and I am happy to use that as a good example of the difference between the practical results of morals based on an absolute perfect god and the one I am defending.

  Over to you.
  
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  That is so true Konceptual99. It well illustrates why we need an objective basis for our moral decisions.

  Often it is very difficult. I suspect that is why people are often happy to settle for "god says.... the end".

  It is infantalising - deliberately so. Jesus said that christians must become like little children, The epistles frequently address its readers in those terms.

  It's past time to outgrow simplistic answers to moral questions. It belongs to the infancy of our species. Science has a lot to offer in terms of objective facts that we ought to take into consideration when making moral decisions. Answers based on evidence-free dogma do not deserve a hearing unless they can be reworked in terms of real consequences. Making god sad doesn't count.

  John - thanks for your response. I will respond shorty.
• 
  5

  pre historic man..

  by zeb in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a poster had a line about early man before humans... i recall a doco sorry cant remember details where neanderthal graves were found in spain.

  these graves had been laid down with artefacts' and care by the way the deceased were positioned.

  now the finders took material and from the graves and come up with dna.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Homo neanderthal cared for their aged and their sick and buried their dead with ritual.
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  I will be delighted to answer the question in detail later this evening. I look forward to it.

  You agreed that morality is about how our actions effect the well being of conscious beings. You advocate a top-down model based on an absolute standard. I propose a bottom- up method based on objective evidence.

  If you are correct then you should be able to demonstrate that your system is superior. It should demonstrably lead to more reliable moral decisions.

  This is your opportunity to explain how this is so.

  Please note, I don't accept that our differences are simply alternative opinions. There is a true and false answer. Let's see if we can get there.
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Thank you for those resources WOY.

  I am currently reading The Blank Slate by Pinker where he surveys a lot of that evidence.

  John you are still ignoring my question. How is your "top down" system of morality based on the character of a perfectly good god better than my "bottom up" morality?
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Sorry - "Well being".

  Stupid phone!
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  That's progress. Let's go back to my question now if we may. In what way is theistic morality better than based rationally on the we being of conscious creatures?
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Until you see the evidence that "jungle rule" and "moral rule" can be the same thing you will continue to struggle with this. Your problem is a basic misunderstanding of evolution.
• 
  210

  Morality Without Deity

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

  it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

  christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  cofty

  Evolution explains very well why we should display empathy and cooperation. It is the winning strategy if we wish to benefit from living in successful social groups.

  We are all descended from many generations of ancestors who had the capacity for what we now call morality or ethics. Rudimentary versions of these capcities can be found in other social species.

  Survival of the fittest in our case includes moral intelligence. We all understand what contributes to our own well being and how that can be best achieved in cooperation with others.