(August 1, 2014 at 3:05 am)Esquilax Wrote:(August 1, 2014 at 2:46 am)GodsRevolt Wrote: So what happens when people disagree about something based on moral grounds?
Argument and evidence can be produced based on the reality we live in as to which moral stance produced the maximum benefit to conscious entities. It's exactly what you'd expect in a world without some unconnected law commander on high; a world where people don't get everything right immediately, but learn better moral values by reasoning them out.
A short look at our history shows that this is also the world we live in, surprisingly enough.
Maximum benefit?
Morality is based on the largest amount of gain? Such as killing one man to save a thousand?
What about killing one baby to save two elderly yet healthy people?
I think I am a bit leery of the the idea of "benefit" in morality.
". . . let the atheists themselves choose a god. They will find only one divinity who ever uttered their isolation; only one religion in which God seemed for an instant to be an atheist." -G. K. Chesterton
