Login

**Neo-Scholastic** · January 2, 2014 at 8:39 pm

@Simon, you really didn't answer the questions. Which group of rational critical thinking people? The upper class? The self-selected elite? Who exactly and how do you know who they are?

**Neo-Scholastic** · January 2, 2014 at 10:48 pm

@Simon, you really didn't answer the questions. Which group of rational critical thinking people? The upper class? The self-selected elite? Who exactly and how do you know who they are? Moreover are you prepared to submit to their rule over you?

**Esquilax** · January 3, 2014 at 12:24 am

(January 2, 2014 at 10:48 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: @Simon, you really didn't answer the questions. Which group of rational critical thinking people? The upper class? The self-selected elite? Who exactly and how do you know who they are? Moreover are you prepared to submit to their rule over you?

I ain't gonna speak for Simon, but for me, that group of people would simply be those who can rationally approach the world. I mean, look at the parameters he posted: the people who believe death, and sickness, and pain are preferable over and above their opposites, they aren't really around to participate in the process of determining morality, are they?

**Neo-Scholastic** · January 3, 2014 at 10:50 am

Let me try this another way. What clearly defined group do you feel represents the consensus of which you speak?

Fidel_Castronaut · (This post was last modified: January 3, 2014 at 11:17 am by Fidel_Castronaut.)

/posted in error

**Esquilax** · January 3, 2014 at 10:44 pm

(January 3, 2014 at 10:50 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Let me try this another way. What clearly defined group do you feel represents the consensus of which you speak?

The short answer is that I don't. The long one is that your question is malformed, since this is in no way merely about the consensus of people, but about the extent to which that consensus reflects reality, and can bend to take new information and context into account. It's not just about the people, but the world they live in.

Simon Moon · January 4, 2014 at 10:15 am

(January 3, 2014 at 10:50 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Let me try this another way. What clearly defined group do you feel represents the consensus of which you speak?

Why would it have to be a clearly defined group?

The consensus that brought an end to slavery in the US were not clearly a defined group of people. They were simply people in all walks of life that came to the moral conclusion that enslaving another group of people was immoral.

The way they came to this conclusion was a combination of empathy, rationality, and critical thought.

**Neo-Scholastic** · January 4, 2014 at 10:46 am

In reference to the OP is something good because the chemistry of the consensus wills it or does the chemistry of the consensus will it because it is good?

Your feeble explanations fail for the same reason pagan moral systems do.

MindForgedManacle · January 4, 2014 at 11:19 am

(January 2, 2014 at 10:46 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Why don't you start by demonstrating that anything of moral value does not derive from the intrinsic value of life and love...with or without God.

"Intrinsic value" is a contradiction in terms.

**Neo-Scholastic** · January 4, 2014 at 11:27 am

Finally! someone with a brain. Please elaborate.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Turning the Euthyphro Dilemma around on atheists	Vincenzo Vinny G.	43	15055	November 30, 2013 at 7:16 am Last Post: genkaus
	Another Atheists Dilemma	Jay1982	16	2448	October 19, 2011 at 11:26 pm Last Post: Kayenneh
	Atheists' Dilemma	chris	25	3466	October 18, 2011 at 5:12 pm Last Post: 5thHorseman