(October 8, 2010 at 6:23 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Not entirely contingent. In addition to naturalistic motivations. Additionally, I am not tied to those conditions: I have to choose to.
Ok.
fr0d0 Wrote:You might want to act morally, but your justification for doing so sans PJ has to be illogical in places.
That's completely false, I want to make the world a better place, and I believe that such a state of affairs is one where more and stronger desires are fulfilled than they currently are, and because a moral action is one that tends to promote more and stronger desires than it thwarts I therefore ought to act morally.
If I ought to act in a certain way then I have reason for action (As Kant said, you cannot ought to do something you have no reason to do). If I have reason to do something then I am justified in doing it. That is all the reason I need. There is no illogic at all.
Quote: How do you treat injustice?
As something that is undesirable, how else?
Quote: Do you need to see justice served or are you content to take a God perspective and realise the frailty of mankind and give every person the chance to redeem themselves without resorting to penal measures but applying love instead?
False Dichotomy. I do not NEED justice to be served, I desire to see justice served because justice being served is a deterrent to immoral acts, a way of conditioning desires in others - The use of our moral tools of praise and condemnation helps us lessen the appeal of wrong actions and raise the appeal of right actions, thus making the world a more moral place, which is the entire point. This again falls to the question of "does the fear of worldly justice AND PJ combined have a statistically significant effect on than the effect of worldly justice alone?" And the answer to that, as we have gone over again and again, is a resounding NO.
So while carrying out justice is essential as a deterrent for wrong actions, there is no advantage gained by fear of PJ.
The idea that PJ is more effective at condemning (and thus preventing) wrong actions is an empirical claim, and thus can be affirmed by evidence. The evidence shows no such correlation exists (it's actually negative), the actions that are deemed wrong independently of moral theory (such as rape) are not affected by belief in PJ.
Also, you speak as if letting people 'redeem themselves' is something that happens in your system. Are you saying people in hell get to redeem themselves? That is in stark contrast to the traditional idea of hell, and it makes the motivation of fearing PJ even more irrelevant. There would be no difference in redemption after serving the punishment in either system in that regard.
Quote: I don't think you can apply God logic all the way without actually invoking God at somtheVOID' pid='98033' dateline='1286485616e point. The logical conclusion has to be acknowledged at some point.
Your reasoning is fucked mate, PJ provides no advantage in my moral system because moral oughts are determined prior to justice, as are the reasons for acting morally (that being you want to be moral). Instead, justice is a form of condemnation, and condemnation (along with praise) are tools for moral conditioning, all with the intention of making the world a better place.
Quote:Just an observation... you always seem to look at positive examples when examining your own moral actions, and negative examples when examining a Christian's moral actions.
Example? If I did It wasn't intentional, though I don't see how it's relevant. My intention was to demonstrate that fear of PJ wasn't a statistically significant deterrent for committing immoral acts, nor is it necessary for establishing moral oughts (and thus reason for action). That is what I did.
If you are referring to the examples of rape used then that was because it is a common example in ethics and I applied them to either scenario.
Quote:There is no possible way to assess independently the actual motivations taking place in any person at any time.
Of course not, but we can rightly say that if the motivations to perform good actions and restrain from wrong actions is sufficiently higher in PJ then we should see this play out in the statistics, which it does not.
Quote:You cannot establish and neither can I bias either way, so it's fallacious of you to claim that you can. All we have here is the reasoning, which I claim to be clear in favour of increased effect factoring in fear and love of PJ.
That is not true, such a claim is empirical in nature, and the evidence plainly disagrees with your conclusions.
Quote:An impossible ask for the reasons outlined above.
Your reasons are wrong. Your motivations (such as the desire to not face PJ for immoral actions, or the desire for reward from PJ) contribute to your likelihood of acting in a certain way. If the PJ motivation was significant then there should be a statistically significant effect of belief in PJ towards moral behaviour. This is not the case.
You can't use an argument that is empirical in nature and then continue to use it when the evidence does not support your claim.
Quote:I'm sure there are many reasons a person would think rape was justified to themselves. Isn't the #1 cause: power - reason? The consensus on rape is that it's never justified, so I think it's a bad example for this purpose. A legal judge considering rape would never condone it, but judge it instead to be "not rape".
This makes absolutely no sense.
If you want to make the world a better place, you ought to act morally. Rape is immoral and thus a person who rapes does not care all that much about making the world a better place, their desires, such as that for the power gained through rape, are clearly not those of a moral person.
What did you mean by "instead judge it to be not rape"? I don't see what you are getting at.
Quote:Show me how the stats can support anything.
I've clarified that in response to the same question above.
Quote:Well we can try our best to be open to new ideas, and your openness is respected and returned.
Good to hear.
Quote:I think that's because evidential proof isn't possible, only logical proofs. I don't think we need more than a logical model to demonstrate the truth of this.
I've covered this above by pointing out that claims about behaviour are empirical (because behaviour is psychological and psychology is an empirical science). Thus if behaviour is positively affected by PJ there will be evidence for it.
Quote:I've been to a few music festivals too, and I can assure you that it's a different atmosphere by a royal mile. Conversely: communal positivity is similar if not of equal degree.
Not just music festivals, psychedelic festivals. It's extremely positive and friendly and communal, the whole point is about being pure and human, getting away from politics and stress and competition that we face in the world, sharing food and drinks with strangers, talking to new people all that stuff. I imagine they are quite similar, and while there are a lot of 'spiritual' people at these events, there are also many many naturalists and it makes no difference in that regard.
Quote:I know some extremely nice people who aren't Christians that are great people. Sometimes they get very twisted and untrusting... because their logical framework also allows them to be negative.
In the same vein: Christian friends I have forget their Christianity and devolve into selfish thinking.
You're trying to suggest absolutes again where absolutes cannot exist.
No, I agree with you completely. In my experience there is no real difference between the groups, they all have their ups and downs and they seem to be pretty much equal, at least in my culture. In fact because many of the pacific and Maori populations here are majority Christian there would be a big difference between criminal behaviour between theists and non-theists in general, the majority of crime being committed by theists, but that, I am sure, is because of cultural factors beyond religious views, namely poverty and historical racism.
Quote:Our instinctual desires might come out tops sometimes. I don't think you're right in being so confident in your self control. I'm sure with extreme external force your intellect would take a back seat.
And i'm sure that would apply equally to theists.
On side not, i'm fairly sure this is the best conversation i've had with you
ever so props for not being the usual goat.
