RE: Atheism and morality
July 7, 2013 at 7:02 pm
(This post was last modified: July 7, 2013 at 7:13 pm by simplexity.)
Inigo, all you are doing is making up a definition of morality, even though that is not how most people use the word, and then based on YOUR definition, say that only an agent can provide these instructions. Only an agent can want. Fine, but so what? How do we know what this agent wants is moral? Why are these instructions morality. Just because if you don't follow these 'instructions' you are screwed, does not mean it is moral or morality. Morality only has to be what is right and wrong for us, nothing more. And even if these instructions from this god are moral, where is this god getting it's morality from, if morality is defined by you to be instructions from an agent? If this god can have an internal morality that is not provided by an agent or this god somehow embodies morality, then it follows that we as agents can have the exact same thing and we don't need the god in the first place. Your argument completely defeats itself.
Basically this is entire thread is you trying to prove your own point from a made up definition of morality. It's ridiculous. Morality does not need to come from something that wants. It only needs to have instructions. I don't nor do most others here care what YOUR made up definition is. It's worthless. Morality can have instructions and can cause instruction indirectly as perceived by the agent, as explained multiple times by multiple posters on this thread, including myself. It only needs to be what we perceive subjectively that we should or should not do, indirectly based on these built in instructions. Through a desire to not suffer, morality does indirectly instruct people to do what is right. Some people don't have any morality, and they are a detriment to society. Simple as that.
Basically this is entire thread is you trying to prove your own point from a made up definition of morality. It's ridiculous. Morality does not need to come from something that wants. It only needs to have instructions. I don't nor do most others here care what YOUR made up definition is. It's worthless. Morality can have instructions and can cause instruction indirectly as perceived by the agent, as explained multiple times by multiple posters on this thread, including myself. It only needs to be what we perceive subjectively that we should or should not do, indirectly based on these built in instructions. Through a desire to not suffer, morality does indirectly instruct people to do what is right. Some people don't have any morality, and they are a detriment to society. Simple as that.
