RE: Morality
June 15, 2013 at 2:12 pm
(This post was last modified: June 15, 2013 at 2:17 pm by max-greece.)
(June 15, 2013 at 5:12 am)fr0d0 Wrote: (let's say) A car is a box with wheels and seats. Anything which fulfills those criteria is fully a car. It can't be more of a car. It is a car, absolutely.
(June 15, 2013 at 3:10 am)cato123 Wrote: Must I, really? Replace the word 'God' for the word 'car' in your previous argument. If you do this you must conclude that God =/= perfection.
Right. I think you misunderstood.
I don't claim that the concept of God can't be improved. I see xtianity as the currently last evolutionary step.
We were not discussing what is morality (the car) we were arguing for an absolute standard for morality (the perfect car) by which all others are measured.
I cannot see why this is so difficult to understand.
In the meantime if we are going to get into what defines "car-ness" a box with wheels and seats includes a horse drawn carriage, a baby buggy, a train carriage, a motorcycle sidecar......
Not a very good attempt - have another go.
(June 15, 2013 at 6:25 am)crud Wrote: sorry, I don't even understand what point this car talk is about any more...
"We are discussing absolute perfection"
no I was discussing an "absolute moral standard"
"Objective truth? You are joking aren't you. Do we really need to work through this as well. No, of course it doesn't exist."
So some truth is not objective? "The earth revolves around the sun"...is this not an objective truth?
How does an absolute moral standard differ from absolute (moral) perfection?
The earth revolves around the sun is an objective truth as long as the universe is not virtual - a program running on a giant computer system somewhere. As it appears that the universe is digital that's not such a far fetched concept. If that were the case the earth doesn't actually exist, neither does the sun. Have another go.