(October 25, 2016 at 11:58 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Euphyro is only compelling (either way) to people who have (even if only half-heartedly) drunk to god koolaid. The idea that piety and divinity are even -related- comes from left field, it's a non-issue...to me.
If god's a giant dick, I don't care that it exists. If gods a lovable loser who can't effect good..but desires and defines it, I still don't care. It's unremarkable either way. If good is good because it is good, who cares? If good is good only if/when commanded, who cares? Will you, for example, act differently either way? I won't.
I think in a world where this jerk of a god exists, things would be different, as in, our perception and logical constructs would fit around that reality. Kant comes to mind, how he thinks morality is nothing more than an agent acting rationally. If we for a second entertain that idea as being the true interpretation of morality, then a world where a seemingly trivial god with seemingly ammoral rules exists, we would come to the rational conclusion that it must be "good". All of this is based on the assumption that since this god created that universe, it also set in place its ammoral metaphysics as being *the* abstract truths.
As far as worship goes, I don't know if I would bow down in a religious way, but I would definitely revere and acknowledge it? Much like a scientists reveres physical laws. Much like a mathematician reveres axioms. Much like an artist reveres beauty where ever it's found.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
