RE: If beauty doesn't require God, why should morality? (Bite me Dr. Craig.)
August 1, 2014 at 10:18 am
(This post was last modified: August 1, 2014 at 10:20 am by archangle.)
(July 24, 2014 at 12:29 pm)whateverist Wrote: If beauty can be explained in terms of evolution, why not morality and ethics? The idea expressed by Christian apologists that morality only makes sense if you can ground it in an objective source for oughts looks lame when applied to beauty. What would we say? That beauty only exists if what we claim to be beautiful is deemed so by an objectively infallible judge of beauty? Psssh.
the assumption here is that god did not evolve. That has less probability of being true than its counter part. but, to play the game of our bullshit is better than theirs ...
Beauty to humans in locked into a frame work. Thus morals may have to be locked into a human frame work. This frame work would be the human brain. I would say that the meaning of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" means to try and think of these things in the frame work in the mind's eye of that individual or group.
Thus this no god of yours would be in your mind's eye. No more or no less true than their stance.
