What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Catholic_Lady]

I did not ask the question to help any of my ideas. Just asked because I wanted to know your views.

To be fair, your thread title is "What IS good, and how do we determine it?" Given that "we" is the plural first-person, your views on the matter are certainly open to discussion.

I mean, I get it, you're uncomfortable discussing the supernatural origins of your morality, because that's a pretty hard sell. I wouldn't want to subject such fragile arguments to questioning either, if I held them.  But that doesn't mean you get a pass. If you're not going to answer questions put to you, you're not going to be pulling your weight in this discussion.

I meant "we" as in humanity. How do you all, as athiests, believe that us humans can determine morality?"

And Parker's Tan, I'm not uncomfortable at all discussing my views. In fact, I'd LOVE to talk to you guys about it if you genuinely wanted to know. But I just feel like the minute I posted that question to you guys, instead of hearing your answers, a lot of you just immediately jumped to asking me questions in return. And maybe I'm wrong, but they didn't feel like questions in the form of genuine curiosity and discussion, they felt like hostile questions. That's why I had to say a few times, "hey guys, just answer my post lol, don't be so distracted by me and what I believe!"

[Thumpalumpacus]

Morality is something that is actually a reality rather than just a subjective thought or idea that can change from person to person.

Where does it exist? What does it look like? How do humans access this objective existence?

Simply saying something doesn't make it true. You'll need to demonstrate your claim.

[The Grand Nudger]

You question has been asked many times, your objections have been heard many times.  Residual hostility, most likely (and that's ignoring that a significant portion of it may just be -perceptual-). Going down this "hostile atheists" road is, also..something that's been done before......but so what if the audience is hostile...are they wrong?

[Huggy Bear]

[Catholic_Lady]

What happened, why did the morality of the divine change?  Why was this correction required?  All of those people acting with divine moral righteousness, extracting eye for an eye justice, where they somehow transformed into immoral people because of this later correction?  Was this change in -their- status as moral actors retroactive?

Rhythm, like I said. Morality never changed. God never changed. The OT was simply not perfect and not complete. Jesus came partly to show us what God is really like, because we didn't have it perfectly right before that.

[Kitan Etos]

That's the problem, don't you think?

Logically, society progresses and changes.  If god doesn't, that means he's myth.

[The Grand Nudger]

I understand that you believe that, I don't...and whether or not you believe that the divine morality changed - it is simply not up for discussion that those men believed very deeply in the moral commands of their god...and that the morality of that god as related to us -has changed-.....regardless of how mistaken they may have initially been.  I would not, if I were you, go down that road...because I would only ask you how you know that you are not -those men-.  

The more interesting consideration would be whether or not those men, deeply moved by what they had as much reason to believe were the desires of your god as you do now.....obedient to the words of that god as related to them...were "bad"?  Were they morally wrong?

@Huggy, good for you buddy, go wash yourself in the blood, ghoul. :washes hands:

[Catholic_Lady]

I posted that earlier in the thread but think it may have gotten lost in the discussion.

Did Jesus himself not ignore his own turning the cheek rule?

He got mad and overturned tables.

Do you know why?

He was human.
 
Pure and simple.   

Humans are not meant to be perfect.  We are not meant to reach for these absolutely ridiculously retarded ideals religious people impose based on a book that is perfectly imperfect.

Just to distinguish the difference here, He overturned tables because he was defending his Father. Note that when he himself was being attacked, he never objected to it or hit anyone back.

I agree humans are not perfect, but I do not see anything wrong with striving to be your best and being humble when you've done wrong.

---

Perhaps "god" is allegory?  How do you know which parts are and which parts aren't...I wonder?

Personally I think all of it is. All the stories in the Old Testament.

[Kitan Etos]

Personally I think all of it is. All the stories in the Old Testament.

Major facepalm.

[The Grand Nudger]

Don't tell that to your parish priests.