By what standard should we judge what is and what is not right?

(May 4, 2011 at 11:06 am)lilphil1989 Wrote: By what standard should we judge what is and what is not right?

Well, in Christianity God's nature is the objective moral standard. What is it on your view?

Greetings one who has been saved.

Welcome Nathanael. Looks like you've herded cats before. Good job!

Quote:Well, in Christianity God's nature is the objective moral standard.

Ah....so that's why the altar boys have stretched assholes, is it?

Thanks fr0d0 and Statler Waldorf. I find the best way to herd cats is to place them delicately onto my "Ignore" list.

(May 4, 2011 at 8:34 am)Nathanael Wrote: Thanks Maria, LastPoet, lilphil1989 and Boreasos.

LastPoet, lilphil1989, Boreasos: If I consider one of the things you say in the future to be ridiculous, will it be right for me to ridicule you for holding those views?

Boreasos, from your "Religious Views": What is the difference between a critical atheist and an uncritical (or non-critical) atheist?

Of course you are as entitled to ridicule the ridiculous as anyone else.

I am an atheist, as are many on this board, but it's a very broad term. Some atheists just don't believe, others actively oppose theism (closer to anti theist) and others occupy the entire spectrum in between. Being a critical atheist means I go a step further than a simple lack of belief, but not quite as far as to openly and actively opposing theism. I find that theism, or the belief in a god/gods is irrational (as there is no evidence to support the notion) and should ideally be rejected by all, though I freely admit that the existence of a god/gods isn't impossible.

(May 4, 2011 at 6:02 pm)Boreasos Wrote: Of course you are as entitled to ridicule the ridiculous as anyone else.

I'm not really talking about "entitlement" or "rights", but whether it is morally right to ridicule someone you believe to be ridiculous.

Quote:I am an atheist, as are many on this board, but it's a very broad term. Some atheists just don't believe, others actively oppose theism (closer to anti theist) and others occupy the entire spectrum in between. Being a critical atheist means I go a step further than a simple lack of belief, but not quite as far as to openly and actively opposing theism. I find that theism, or the belief in a god/gods is irrational (as there is no evidence to support the notion) and should ideally be rejected by all, though I freely admit that the existence of a god/gods isn't impossible.

Thank you for a very clear explanation of your view. I am a bit puzzled as to why you choose the word "critical" to describe it, but that is neither here nor there. Why do you think that theism is irrational, and what is "irrationality" on your view (is it a normative standard of right-thinking that all humans are held to, for example?)? And given that you believe it to be an irrational belief (and obviously one that is widely held) why do you not actively oppose it?