RE: Where do atheists get their morality from?
August 31, 2012 at 7:10 pm
(This post was last modified: August 31, 2012 at 7:12 pm by Boccaccio.)
Pages pass because I am in a very different time zone, so please forgive me for going back a few given I think it would be incorrect of me not to respond to something asked by Stephen directly of me. By the way, did I think I should answer because it is written in the bible, or because some verse might be made to allude to it, or because I think the best strategy for getting questions answered is to demonstrate integrity by completing one's own side of the transaction? My, it sounds almost like the rule common to every single society which recorded such things.
Stephen asked where do I get my morality. That has already been adequately described by some other people and is contained in part in my earlier post. I have moral objectives related to staying alive and breeding and taking pleasure in the exercise of my senses and abilities and, remarkably enough, these objectives prove best satisfied by treating other people well rather than by casual murder or abuse. The theist notion that radiating circles of interest lead inexorably to mutual destruction is just plain silly really. Does that really need to be discussed?
My strategies include those I mentioned in that earlier post. You can toss a bit of Kant into the following although I am not trying to be rigorous here.
In answer to genkaus, Stephen wrote
Meanwhile, you have made no reply to my questions. I expect that this is because of your keenness (already expressed a couple of times) to limit the discussion to what you call moral ontology, question-begging to the extent it assumes an objective morality rather than moral objectives, and not keen at all to talk about your moral epistemology. So, I ask again:
Incidentally, chocolate or vanilla, pie or cake, are not moral questions as you well know, Stephen, so why did you pretend such a question was pertinent to moral decisions without a god? Are you being misleading or merely misled?
Stephen asked where do I get my morality. That has already been adequately described by some other people and is contained in part in my earlier post. I have moral objectives related to staying alive and breeding and taking pleasure in the exercise of my senses and abilities and, remarkably enough, these objectives prove best satisfied by treating other people well rather than by casual murder or abuse. The theist notion that radiating circles of interest lead inexorably to mutual destruction is just plain silly really. Does that really need to be discussed?
My strategies include those I mentioned in that earlier post. You can toss a bit of Kant into the following although I am not trying to be rigorous here.
(August 31, 2012 at 9:06 am)Boccaccio Wrote: What are your moral objectives, stephen?
If you can identify that then you can measure the success of strategies toward those objectives using principles of utility and consequences, for example.
In answer to genkaus, Stephen wrote
stephenmills1000 Wrote:Are you really saying, Stephen, that the determinant of whether something is objectively moral depends on it being dependent on something which is independent of you? If so, I can provide you with a perfectly objective morality, not dependent on any mind beyond that you have agreed to follow the rules emerging. To say the only objective morality comes from a deity is false. To say morality comes from a deity serves only the purpose of absolute followership, like any dictatorship, and strips your moral judgement from you leaving you only to follow orders.(August 31, 2012 at 9:42 am)genkaus Wrote: If they are rooted in anyone's command or nature, then they are dependent upon that entity and therefore are not objective.They are dependent upon that entity yes, but that entity is independent of me, therefore is by definition objective.
Meanwhile, you have made no reply to my questions. I expect that this is because of your keenness (already expressed a couple of times) to limit the discussion to what you call moral ontology, question-begging to the extent it assumes an objective morality rather than moral objectives, and not keen at all to talk about your moral epistemology. So, I ask again:
(August 31, 2012 at 9:06 am)Boccaccio Wrote: If [you obtain your morality from] the bible, how do you determine what is true or literal, symbolic or false, or human error in the transcription?
If [from] godly commands, by what means do you receive them?
Incidentally, chocolate or vanilla, pie or cake, are not moral questions as you well know, Stephen, so why did you pretend such a question was pertinent to moral decisions without a god? Are you being misleading or merely misled?
