Another obvious post. It is very simple and anymore explanations would make it a laughable absurdity. I will avoid "social contract" because this may confuse non-political scientists.
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: March 26, 2025, 10:15 am
| Poll: The acts of Virtues derive from a Soul or social obligation? This poll is closed. |
|||
| Derives from a social obligation. | 5 | 83.33% | |
| Derives from a Soul. | 0 | 0% | |
| Virtues and Vices do not exist! Moral Relativism is the norm. | 1 | 16.67% | |
| Total | 6 vote(s) | 100% | |
| * You voted for this item. | [Show Results] |
Thread Rating:
|
The acts of Virtues derive from a Soul or social obligation?
|
I think you are missing a few poll options, options 1 and 3 are not mutually exclusive, and your language is not precise enough. What do you mean by "vice and virtue derive from".
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
 RE: The acts of Virtues derive from a Soul or social obligation?
September 11, 2015 at 10:24 am
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2015 at 10:25 am by Alex K.)
(September 11, 2015 at 8:50 am)CristW Wrote:(September 11, 2015 at 2:59 am)Alex K Wrote: I think you are missing a few poll options, options 1 and 3 are not mutually exclusive, and your language is not precise enough. What do you mean by "vice and virtue derive from". I can't propose poll options as long as you don't pose a precise, well-defined question. What exactly is the question?
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
I like the inherent assumption that we're not familiar with the concept of the social contract, haven't read Rousseau.
But I agree... WTF does "The acts of Virtues derive from a Soul or social obligation?" even mean? Strikes me as one of those "Hey atheists, have you stopped beating your wives, yet?" questions. Look, theists, we love to debate. If you want to debate us, cool! Welcome. But don't come in here with trick, "gotcha" questions in an attempt to make us look bad, or in an attempt to fool people into making poorly-worded answers to poorly-worded questions so you can justify your prejudices against us to yourself. It's transparent and asinine.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.  RE: The acts of Virtues derive from a Soul or social obligation?
September 11, 2015 at 2:21 pm
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2015 at 2:22 pm by Tartarus Sauce.)
Actually avoiding the use of social contract was a wise choice not for just not excluding non-political scientists, but because social contract theories tend to make the mistake of assuming that humans aren't social creatures by nature. So I'd say our virtues derive from social obligations which we are hard-wired to follow (although what those obligations are vary by culture).
freedomfromfallacy » I'm weighing my tears to see if the happy ones weigh the same as the sad ones.
(September 11, 2015 at 2:21 pm)Tartarus Sauce Wrote: Actually avoiding the use of social contract was a wise choice not for just not excluding non-political scientists, but because social contract theories tend to make the mistake of assuming that humans aren't social creatures by nature. So I'd say our virtues derive from social obligations which we are hard-wired to follow (although what those obligations are vary by culture). Exactly, thank you. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
