As I was watching this cool Sam Harris video:
this cool Sam Harris video
a thought occurred to me as he was discussing the double standard of christians waving away the problem of evil and suffering by appealing to god's mysterious intentions: it's not only that this excuse is unconvincing, it's also completely irrelevant. It's just a deflection to avoid talking about the real issue, because motives aren't the sole determining factor when deciding moral issues.
An insane psychopath randomly murders eight people and refuses to speak once caught: his motivations for the acts he's committed are, to the outside observer, just as inscrutable and mysterious as god's. Is he allowed to go free? Are no charges brought against him? Does the judge simply shrug and dismiss the case: "Oh, his ways are mysterious, we cannot possibly judge them!"? No. The fucker is rightly judged by the effects of his actions and thrown in prison, or at least psychiatric care.
Conversely, a man driving his car on his way to volunteer at the puppy orphanage swerves to help an old lady cross the street, and hits and kills a man in the process. This is a scenario for which the actors motivations are entirely known and, indeed, benevolent, and yet he would still be charged with manslaughter for his inattention.
Now consider a man with good intentions who didn't cause a death and, for some reason when he's in court, steadfastly refuses to comment on what was going on. He remains utterly silent, even as the evidence comes in and it becomes more and more clear, to the outside observer, that this man committed the crime. Is his silence an excuse? Good intentions or not, would you consider this a get out of jail free card for him? And could you fault the jury for using the incomplete information at their disposal to find the man guilty?
Motive may be considered as a part of a moral determination, but it's not the be all and end all that christians pretend it to be where god is concerned. Appealing to some vague, speculative ur-motivation that you just think the actor has isn't just completely irrelevant, it's also entirely ineffective even within the premises of the argument.
this cool Sam Harris video
a thought occurred to me as he was discussing the double standard of christians waving away the problem of evil and suffering by appealing to god's mysterious intentions: it's not only that this excuse is unconvincing, it's also completely irrelevant. It's just a deflection to avoid talking about the real issue, because motives aren't the sole determining factor when deciding moral issues.
An insane psychopath randomly murders eight people and refuses to speak once caught: his motivations for the acts he's committed are, to the outside observer, just as inscrutable and mysterious as god's. Is he allowed to go free? Are no charges brought against him? Does the judge simply shrug and dismiss the case: "Oh, his ways are mysterious, we cannot possibly judge them!"? No. The fucker is rightly judged by the effects of his actions and thrown in prison, or at least psychiatric care.
Conversely, a man driving his car on his way to volunteer at the puppy orphanage swerves to help an old lady cross the street, and hits and kills a man in the process. This is a scenario for which the actors motivations are entirely known and, indeed, benevolent, and yet he would still be charged with manslaughter for his inattention.
Now consider a man with good intentions who didn't cause a death and, for some reason when he's in court, steadfastly refuses to comment on what was going on. He remains utterly silent, even as the evidence comes in and it becomes more and more clear, to the outside observer, that this man committed the crime. Is his silence an excuse? Good intentions or not, would you consider this a get out of jail free card for him? And could you fault the jury for using the incomplete information at their disposal to find the man guilty?
Motive may be considered as a part of a moral determination, but it's not the be all and end all that christians pretend it to be where god is concerned. Appealing to some vague, speculative ur-motivation that you just think the actor has isn't just completely irrelevant, it's also entirely ineffective even within the premises of the argument.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
