(January 6, 2015 at 1:36 am)*steve* Wrote: In my view there is an ultimate basis for value, grounded in God.

What makes you think God choose to follow the ultimate moral code(s)? God could of choose to be partically moral. If God decides what is moral, then the ultimate morallity is might-is-right. God is the mightiest so she decides on what is moral, right?

(January 6, 2015 at 1:36 am)*steve* Wrote: So, I think the best we can do is open ourselves up to the divine depth within us and let it try to inform our moral decisions, realizing our fallibility. It ain't perfect and it must constantly be tested by results and realities.

"tested by results and realities" doesn't make sense. The results are compared to what ought to be when it comes to morality. How would you determine what ought to be when the results only tell you what is.

(January 6, 2015 at 1:36 am)*steve* Wrote: I think I understand some things about atheism but our discussions have mainly been about the conflicts in science and religion, philosophy of mind, and consciousness.

But you don't understand it at all if you don't understand it's simply a lack of belief in a deity/ deities.

(January 6, 2015 at 2:32 am)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 1:36 am)*steve* Wrote: I think I understand some things about atheism but our discussions have mainly been about the conflicts in science and religion, philosophy of mind, and consciousness.

But you don't understand it at all if you don't understand it's simply a lack of belief in a deity/ deities.

Surely judging from the many thousands of comments in the forums there is more to atheism than just a definition.

(January 6, 2015 at 2:32 am)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 1:36 am)*steve* Wrote: I think I understand some things about atheism but our discussions have mainly been about the conflicts in science and religion, philosophy of mind, and consciousness.

But you don't understand it at all if you don't understand it's simply a lack of belief in a deity/ deities.

Theist wrap their worldview so tightly around god that everything falls apart if she wasn't there. A good analogy would be if you meet someone who doesn't believe in gravity and trying to understand them.

---

(January 6, 2015 at 2:46 am)*steve* Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 2:32 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: But you don't understand it at all if you don't understand it's simply a lack of belief in a deity/ deities.

Surely judging from the many thousands of comments in the forums there is more to atheism than just a definition.

Nope.

(January 6, 2015 at 2:46 am)*steve* Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 2:32 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: But you don't understand it at all if you don't understand it's simply a lack of belief in a deity/ deities.

Surely judging from the many thousands of comments in the forums there is more to atheism than just a definition.

You should browse around a little. Our conversations rely more heavily on things having nothing to do with the null position of atheism.

(January 6, 2015 at 2:46 am)*steve* Wrote: Surely judging from the many thousands of comments in the forums there is more to atheism than just a definition.

Like, perhaps a community of people?

(January 6, 2015 at 2:30 am)Surgenator Wrote: If God decides what is moral, then the ultimate morallity is might-is-right. God is the mightiest so she decides on what is moral, right?

True. But we subjugate ourselves to the mightiest all the time, often believing it is in our best interest or the interest of others. As children we do it, albeit maybe with some rebellion from time to time. For those who live in the US, most would accept the ultimate authority of the Supreme Court in determining what is lawful and what is not; an essential part of preserving the benevolent aspects of the Constitution. However, when it is felt this subjugation is not benign, rebellion often occurs.

Personally I don't have a problem with God determining what is moral and what is not. This is based on a belief in God's benevolence to creation.

(January 5, 2015 at 10:57 pm)*steve* Wrote:

(January 5, 2015 at 10:52 pm)Forsaken Wrote: There is nothing such "atheist ethics".

From your previous post "Atheist ethics fills in the blank with something in this world"

You assert there is something to be filled in for. You seem to assume that there is homogeneity among us with how we answer the meaning/ethics/whatever questions. If in fact there is much agreement would come as a complete surprise for me.

For one thing I don't go around sorting things into "things of this world" and "other". I also do not have any use for a "supernatural" category. None of that is of any concern to me. I assume that everything that can be experienced is natural. I find nothing to motivate an alternate category. The effort is forced as well as useless.

(January 6, 2015 at 3:04 am)*steve* Wrote: Personally I don't have a problem with God determining what is moral and what is not. This is based on a belief in God's benevolence to creation.

Cool. Now gather your fellow moral absolutists together and try to reconcile your differences, not based on reasoning and empathy (the true source of morality), but on what each of you "feel" is God's idea of benevolence.

One more thing.

Good luck.

(January 6, 2015 at 3:04 am)*steve* Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 2:30 am)Surgenator Wrote: If God decides what is moral, then the ultimate morallity is might-is-right. God is the mightiest so she decides on what is moral, right?

True. But we subjugate ourselves to the mightiest all the time, often believing it is in our best interest or the interest of others. As children we do it, albeit maybe with some rebellion from time to time. For those who live in the US, most would accept the ultimate authority of the Supreme Court in determining what is lawful and what is not; an essential part of preserving the benevolent aspects of the Constitution. However, when it is felt this subjugation is not benign, rebellion often occurs.

Personally I don't have a problem with God determining what is moral and what is not. This is based on a belief in God's benevolence to creation.

Someone else determining what is moral doesn't make them absolute. It doesn't matter that she is the biggest baddest person around. It just makes them as arbitrary as society dictating what is moral. Plus, you have no way of knowing that god is benevolent if god decides what is good or not. He will still be benevolent if he decides to rape you.

The supreme court doesn't arbitrary decide what the law suppose to be. They determine what is constitutional. The constitution dictates what ought to be that is agreed upon by the american people.