Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: October 31, 2024, 7:40 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How is the validity of this?
#10
RE: How is the validity of this?
(March 23, 2010 at 3:50 am)tackattack Wrote: How is the first response to this OP in anyway tiresome or pretentious.. it's fine no worries. I wasn't really looking for a point counterpoint.. more of a criticism of the logical validity and structure. I'll bat the ball for a little though.
So you're saying the idea of a moral absolute isn't useful to humans anymore? That a definitive and absolute Good is flexible. Did you mean reality can be used to demonstrate mathmatical concepts? How would you demonstrate tangibly from something intangible? We know there are "gray areas" in reality so wouldn't Math be less useful for excluding those? Wouldn't they be variables?

I bet if I asked arcanus and Fr0d0 to sum up a God definition in a two word phrase we'd all pretty much come to the same conclusion. How is that different interpretations? By rejecting any possibility of Moral absolutes yet accepting mathmatical absolutes, isn't that hypocritical? What is an absolute? Is it having no restriction, exception, or qualification and being the sum of undiluted purity? If that doesn't define what others and I have defined on this forums as God, I don't know what is.

I was hoping to avoid being pedantic, not saying anything else was.

I say that religion is not nessacary for a moral absolute anymore, religion is like a jello mold, and the jello has set.

Using reality, I can demonstrate math. For example, if I have six apples and four apples, if I combine them I get 10 apples. I cannot demonstrate god using tangible reality.

With math, you know that you know what you know. With a math problem, the awnser may be a range of numbers, a single number, or some kind of variable. but you know that all of the possible awnsers work, and you can figure out the pattern for all possible awnsers. A grey area would be to say that you get perhaps a range of numbers, and some of them might not be awnsers, but there is no way to tell.

The basic idea that there is some kind of god is nearly universal among religion, however how god is interpreted varies, and inside of one interpretation of god, all the details of the religion are open to interpretation. The meaning of the bible stories is constantly disputed...

Contending that one area is not as well defined and universally standard as another is not to say that standards do not exist. Everybody has a different set of ethics. In our society, what is considered right and wrong is widely accepted, but not absolute, as any number of moral justifications are used to make something moral to that individual. Math however, there are rules that when broken the numbers dont work out, and you get the wrong awnser. Math and ethics do have common aspects, as with any two areas of thought, but they function in very different ways, as morality is a purely emotional thing, and math is purely factual and emotionless.

God is an idea, from a strictly anthropological point of view, religion is a very usefull tool in the right circumstances, and todays society is not the right circumstances; however from the religious aspect, god is a pre-defined entity, and depending on which part of which religion you ask, those definitions will vary.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P.J. O'Rourke

"Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher

"Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success." - Christopher Lasch

Reply



Messages In This Thread
How is the validity of this? - by tackattack - March 23, 2010 at 12:20 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by theblindferrengi - March 23, 2010 at 2:01 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tackattack - March 23, 2010 at 3:50 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tavarish - March 23, 2010 at 12:26 pm
RE: How is the validity of this? - by Zhalentine - March 23, 2010 at 12:46 pm
RE: How is the validity of this? - by theblindferrengi - March 23, 2010 at 7:38 pm
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tackattack - March 24, 2010 at 5:44 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tavarish - March 24, 2010 at 9:43 pm
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tackattack - March 25, 2010 at 2:02 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tavarish - March 26, 2010 at 1:18 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by Tiberius - March 23, 2010 at 7:12 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by fr0d0 - March 23, 2010 at 6:33 pm
RE: How is the validity of this? - by libraryowl - March 23, 2010 at 8:18 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by RedFish - March 23, 2010 at 10:19 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tackattack - March 26, 2010 at 3:00 am
RE: How is the validity of this? - by tavarish - March 26, 2010 at 9:33 am



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)