RE: On the Sensus Divinitatis
June 12, 2013 at 3:30 am
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2013 at 3:33 am by FallentoReason.)
(June 12, 2013 at 2:13 am)fr0d0 Wrote:(June 11, 2013 at 7:51 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: I just realised that you're using the word "sense" wrong. The S.D. is a sense just like eye sight is one of the 5 senses. We're not talking about e.g. a "sense" of fashion.
No it's not like fashion sense lol. This sense isn't reasoned at all. It's innate. I reject your objection.
I agree. It's in our instinct to behave morally. So what?
Quote:Do you think that criminals lose their moral compass or that they override it?
Since my view is that morality is subjective, I'd have to say that they have partly found reasons to justify whatever action they decided on. This reminds me of my workplace (I like staying anonymous here, so I'll just say it's a pizza place) where our employer let us know that there was an in-store thief. On the surface of it, I'm sure we can both agree that it's downright immoral to be stealing from your own workplace. As more information finally surfaced though, I couldn't help but feel sympathetic for the "criminal". It turned out that it was this girl who I knew had recently been kicked out of home and had no choice but to start renting. She was stealing out of a basic need to survive.
In short, I think the answer is neither. The above real-life scenario demonstrates that our relationship with what we call "morals" is in the grey area. I have no doubt in my mind that this girl would otherwise not have been stealing.. but given the circumstances..
Quote: You can see from the Christian idea of forgiveness for all that we believe that everyone can be good. No one is bad/ without this 'sense'.
In the greater scheme of things, I still fail to see how morality is a sense that reveals God. I still think you're misinterpreting Calvin's original thought, and even if morality was somehow tied to it, then in practicality, your argument accomplishes nothing; everyone has a fairly good "sense of morals" and yet it's not the case that this has provided a religious encounter with any god(s), like how the sensus divinitatis allegedly would.
I think what's required here, is a somewhat detailed argument explaining why we should expect mere morals to give rise to an encounter with the divine, because that's what I'm objecting to: the claim that there is some part of us (call it whatever you will) that can sense the divine.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle