Another apologist with his "clever" questions

[FallentoReason]

Euphyro is only compelling (either way) to people who have (even if only half-heartedly) drunk to god koolaid.  The idea that piety and divinity are even -related- comes from left field, it's a non-issue...to me.

If god's a giant dick, I don't care that it exists.  If gods a lovable loser who can't effect good..but desires and defines it, I still don't care.  It's unremarkable either way.  If good is good because it is good, who cares?  If good is good only if/when commanded, who cares?  Will you, for example, act differently either way?  I won't.

I think in a world where this jerk of a god exists, things would be different, as in, our perception and logical constructs would fit around that reality. Kant comes to mind, how he thinks morality is nothing more than an agent acting rationally. If we for a second entertain that idea as being the true interpretation of morality, then a world where a seemingly trivial god with seemingly ammoral rules exists, we would come to the rational conclusion that it must be "good". All of this is based on the assumption that since this god created that universe, it also set in place its ammoral metaphysics as being *the* abstract truths. 

As far as worship goes, I don't know if I would bow down in a religious way, but I would definitely revere and acknowledge it? Much like a scientists reveres physical laws. Much like a mathematician reveres axioms. Much like an artist reveres beauty where ever it's found.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think in a world where this jerk of a god exists, things would be different, as in, our perception and logical constructs would fit around that reality.

Why?  More god koolaid. People think and say things like "if god existed, the world would be more or less of x" without ever explaining why...wihout ever voicing all of those silent assumptions. Allow me to propose an alternative..no matter what god is, or isn't..the world would be exactly -as- it is.

Kant comes to mind, how he thinks morality is nothing more than an agent acting rationally.

I'd disagree heartily with that, morality and rationality are rarely, if ever, the same things.  We can rationally act upon moral precepts, we can rationalize over moral precepts...but where is the reason in any specific moral precept?

If we for a second entertain that idea as being the true interpretation of morality, then a world where a seemingly trivial god with seemingly ammoral rules exists, we would come to the rational conclusion that it must be "good".

Why? What's rational in the sentence above, connect the dots?

All of this is based on the assumption that since this god created that universe, it also set in place its ammoral metaphysics as being *the* abstract truths. 

What does the ammoral have to do with the moral?  

As far as worship goes, I don't know if I would bow down in a religious way, but I would definitely revere and acknowledge it?

Why would you, is the question?  If you had a father who beat the shit out of you, would you "revere and acknowledge" that?  

Much like a scientists reveres physical laws. Much like a mathematician reveres axioms. Much like an artist reveres beauty where ever it's found.

Pointless equivocations.  We're talking gods, not physics, maths, art...or any of the various practitioners.  If god was a dick, would you "acknowledge and revere" it?  I wouldn't.  I couldn't care less.  There are plenty of dicks that exist irl, I;m neither acknowledging them specifically nor am I revering them.  If they all jumped off a cliff like the proverbial swine of christ - I wouldn't bat an eyelid. Should it be different if the dick in question were a god? How about a "nice guy" god, a buddy christ? What's the relevance, who cares, why? Good god, bad god, neutral god, what's the difference?

[FallentoReason]

I think in a world where this jerk of a god exists, things would be different, as in, our perception and logical constructs would fit around that reality.

Why?  More god koolaid.  People think and say things like "if god existed, the world would be more or less of x" without ever explaining why...wihout ever voicing all of those silent assumptions.  Allow me to propose an alternative..no matter what god is, or isn't..the world would be exactly -as- it is.

It's not that simple. God being god, he can make whatever proposition true. In the universe next door, the resident God said 2 + 2 would equal 5, and they tell me it's logical over there. 

Kant comes to mind, how he thinks morality is nothing more than an agent acting rationally.

I'd disagree heartily with that, morality and rationality are rarely, if ever, the same things.  We can rationally act upon moral precepts, we can rationalize over moral precepts...but where is the reason in any specific moral precept?

I'm sure you're familiar with Kant's imperatives..? Suppose you need to really badly pass an exam. You will it that selling cheat sheets is universally acceptable. Now cheat sheets are the norm, which means the lecturers have to change the way exams are done to remove the problem, I dunno, a unique set of questions for each student on the computer. Your universal rule didn't logically help you achieve your will, and coincidentally it's often regarded that cheating is wrong. Logic + morals = pretty good explanation.

If we for a second entertain that idea as being the true interpretation of morality, then a world where a seemingly trivial god with seemingly ammoral rules exists, we would come to the rational conclusion that it must be "good".

Why?  What's rational in the sentence above, connect the dots?

That the source of morality must be good? If achieving your will is a good thing for oneself, then the logic behind it must be inherently good. That inherent good resides with the creator of such logic and rules and abstract truth.

All of this is based on the assumption that since this god created that universe, it also set in place its ammoral metaphysics as being *the* abstract truths. 

What does the ammoral have to do with the moral?

Sorry, I think I used the wrong word. What I mean is trivial morals - roll the dice and those are the morals you get in that universe. 

As far as worship goes, I don't know if I would bow down in a religious way, but I would definitely revere and acknowledge it?

Why would you, is the question?  If you had a father who beat the shit out of you, would you "revere and acknowledge" that?

No, because a father that would do that doesn't seem to get Kant, and therefore cannot be God.

Much like a scientists reveres physical laws. Much like a mathematician reveres axioms. Much like an artist reveres beauty where ever it's found.

Pointless equivocations.  We're talking gods, not physics, maths, art...or any of the various practitioners.  If god was a dick, would you "acknowledge and revere" it?  I wouldn't.  I couldn't care less.  There are plenty of dicks that exist irl, I;m neither acknowledging them specifically nor am I revering them.  If they all jumped off a cliff like the proverbial swine of christ - I wouldn't bat an eyelid.  Should it be different if the dick in question were a god?  How about a "nice guy" god, a buddy christ?  What's the relevance, who cares, why?

If god was a dick, I think that universe actually has no god. Unless the trivial logic in that universe lines up with the trivial self-portrayal of its god, then any apparent god that exists is either lacking in god-like attributes, or is made up.[/quote]

[The Grand Nudger]

It's not that simple. God being god, he can make whatever proposition true. In the universe next door, the resident God said 2 + 2 would equal 5, and they tell me it's logical over there. 

Patently impossible and illogical, but hey, we -are- talking god....so?

I'm sure you're familiar with Kant's imperatives..? Suppose you need to really badly pass an exam. You will it that selling cheat sheets is universally acceptable. Now cheat sheets are the norm, which means the lecturers have to change the way exams are done to remove the problem, I dunno, a unique set of questions for each student on the computer. Your universal rule didn't logically help you achieve your will, and coincidentally it's often regarded that cheating is wrong. Logic + morals = pretty good explanation.

Meh, it exposes tacit assumptions about both morality and logic that are understandable for Kant, as a person of a time and place, but that's as far as it goes for me.

That the source of morality must be good? If achieving your will is a good thing for oneself, then the logic behind it must be inherently good. That inherent good resides with the creator of such logic and rules and abstract truth.

Yes, for exactly that.  Firstly, the notion that a god is a source of morality is an undemonstrated assumption..secondly, why couldn;t an evil god -also- be a source of morality?  We, as parent;s, know all about this.  "Don't do what I did son".  There's no logic in your statements above, only convenience.

Sorry, I think I used the wrong word. What I mean is trivial morals - roll the dice and those are the morals you get in that universe. 

Do you think our morals are something other than a roll of the dice? If we were different our morals would be too.

No, because a father that would do that doesn't seem to get Kant, and therefore cannot be God.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, or you're just not making an ounce of sense..but plenty of shitty dads managed to produce awesome sons.  ????

If god was a dick, I think that universe actually has no god. Unless the trivial logic in that universe lines up with the trivial self-portrayal of its god, then any apparent god that exists is either lacking in god-like attributes, or is made up.

If god was a dick, god would be a dick..all other things would remain unchanged.  The world would still be as it is.  The sun would still rise in the east and set in the west. The notion that god exists is arguable, the world as it is is not.  Gods -are- made up, even if some god exists somewhere.

[FallentoReason]

It's not that simple. God being god, he can make whatever proposition true. In the universe next door, the resident God said 2 + 2 would equal 5, and they tell me it's logical over there. 

Patently impossible and illogical, but hey, we -are- talking god....so?

But perfectly logical as a concept. 

I'm sure you're familiar with Kant's imperatives..? Suppose you need to really badly pass an exam. You will it that selling cheat sheets is universally acceptable. Now cheat sheets are the norm, which means the lecturers have to change the way exams are done to remove the problem, I dunno, a unique set of questions for each student on the computer. Your universal rule didn't logically help you achieve your will, and coincidentally it's often regarded that cheating is wrong. Logic + morals = pretty good explanation.

Meh, it exposes tacit assumptions about both morality and logic that are understandable for Kant, as a person of a time and place, but that's as far as it goes for me.

And yet, to this day it leaves one of my contemporaries without a response

That the source of morality must be good? If achieving your will is a good thing for oneself, then the logic behind it must be inherently good. That inherent good resides with the creator of such logic and rules and abstract truth.

Yes, for exactly that.  Firstly, the notion that a god is a source of morality is an undemonstrated assumption..secondly, why couldn;t an evil god -also- be a source of morality?  We, as parent;s, know all about this.  "Don't do what I did son".  There's no logic in your statements above, only convenience.

Undemonstrated assumption?? Please Rhythm! I can only type so much, but I will repeat myself, this time in code:

[God]

 var global.morality as integer

if (global.morality == 0) {
     print "you are bad"
}

if (global.morality == 1) {
     print "you are good"
}

[/God]


and re:evil god - because the opposite of "good", whatever it may be, will contradict the will. 

Sorry, I think I used the wrong word. What I mean is trivial morals - roll the dice and those are the morals you get in that universe. 

Do you think our morals are something other than a roll of the dice?  If we were different our morals would be too.

And they would be different in yet another universe. Yes.

No, because a father that would do that doesn't seem to get Kant, and therefore cannot be God.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, or you're just not making an ounce of sense..but plenty of shitty dads managed to produce awesome sons.  ????

It's not logical to treat someone badly if you want them to be good. E.g. you want to teach your son that doing the dishes is good. For some unknown reason (which is precisely why I disagree) you want to achieve this by treating him badly. Will it that every son who does the dishes gets smacked. Your son refuses to do the dishes. Logic does not compute.

If god was a dick, I think that universe actually has no god. Unless the trivial logic in that universe lines up with the trivial self-portrayal of its god, then any apparent god that exists is either lacking in god-like attributes, or is made up.

If god was a dick, god would be a dick..all other things would remain unchanged.  The world would still be as it is.  The sun would still rise in the east and set in the west. The notion that god exists is arguable, the world as it is is not.

I agree.

 Gods -are- made up, even if some god exists somewhere.

That's quite the contradiction you've got.

[The Grand Nudger]

But perfectly logical as a concept. 

When something is patently impossible and illogical..that kind of rules it out as a logical concept, lol.

And yet, to this day it leaves one of my contemporaries without a response

Hookers and blow leave me breathless.  I wouldn't read too much into things that your contemporaries don't respond to, whomever they are, whatever they are.

Undemonstrated assumption?? Please Rhythm! I can only type so much, but I will repeat myself, this time in code:

[God]

 var global.morality as integer

if (global.morality == 0) {
     print "you are bad"
}

if (global.morality == 1) {
     print "you are good"
}

[/God]


and re:evil god - because the opposite of "good", whatever it may be, will contradict the will. 

-and it remains an undemonstrated assumption.  Why would the opposite of "good" contradict "the will" and, of what?

And they would be different in yet another universe. Yes.

Not necessarily.  A creature like ourselves in any universe would be likely to share our morals.  Pragmatism.

It's not logical to treat someone badly if you want them to be good. E.g. you want to teach your son that doing the dishes is good. For some unknown reason (which is precisely why I disagree) you want to achieve this by treating him badly. Will it that every son who does the dishes gets smacked. Your son refuses to do the dishes. Logic does not compute.

Why not?  We treat bad people badly on exactly that notion...that they'll get tired of being shit upon and act right.  Maybe your god is fucking with us, torturing us, for our betterment..as it sees it? 

I agree.

-all understanding is built open a single point of agreement..glad we've found ours.

That's quite the contradiction you've got.

That's quite the inability to comprehend nuance you've got there. Let me spell it out for the obtuse; if there's a god floating around "up there" - no human being has yet described it, for all our attempts. I'm trying to be generous, giving god the benefit of the doubt. Proposing that the amatuerish attempts (look at that bullshit you tried to fob off above...really?) to project humanity unto the divine are not informative with regards to any existent god, heretofore unknown.

[FallentoReason]

When something is patently impossible and illogical..that kind of rules it out as a logical concept, lol.

Oh, my apologies. I didn't see any counter claim to do with another universe having 2 + 2 = 5 as a rule.

-and it remains an undemonstrated assumption.

Your refusal to accept that ideas can be created isn't my problem.

Why would the opposite of "good" contradict "the will" and, of what?

I'm not liking this game...

remember how we failed that exam?

Not necessarily. A creature like ourselves in any universe would be likely to share our morals. Pragmatism.

Not unless that universe was coded differently... I mean, if you're into that sort of stuff.

Why not? We treat bad people badly on exactly that notion...that they'll get tired of being shit upon and act right. Maybe your god is fucking with us, torturing us, for our betterment..as it sees it?

Smacking your son for *doing* the task is something I've never heard of.

[The Grand Nudger]

Oh, my apologies. I didn't see any counter claim to do with another universe having 2 + 2 = 5 as a rule.

I'd hoped I wouldn't have to bicker over identity and definition. I can see that's where you're diving.  A universe in which 2+2=5 isn;t a logical universe, and so cannot be a logical concept.  Simple stuff, right?

Your refusal to accept that ideas can be created isn't my problem.

Hmn, first I'd heard of this refusal.  It's almost like you're inventing bullshit just to disagree......

I'm not liking this game...

remember how we failed that exam?

-calls the orderly-

Not unless that universe was coded differently... I mean, if you're into that sort of stuff.

You;re not earnestly assessing condition.  In any universe, a creature like us is likely to share our morality.  The differences of universe don't matter, the similarities of subject do.  The subject of our morality is human beings, not universes. 

Smacking your son for *doing* the task is something I've never heard of.

You're spent...lol, already?

[FallentoReason]

I'd hoped I wouldn't have to bicker over identity and definition. I can see that's where you're diving. A universe in which 2+2=5 isn;t a logical universe, and so cannot be a logical concept. Simple stuff, right?

Don't be silly. We both know you can't use brains from this universe to crunch logic from another universe! Apples and oranges.

Hmn, first I'd heard of this refusal. It's almost like you're inventing bullshit just to disagree......

I proposed God, being God, can do godly things, and code a universe into existence with it's own paradigms. You shook your head, without uttering anything. *shrugs* sorry man...?!

-calls the orderly-

Eh? I don't know what's happening anymore...

You;re not earnestly assessing condition. In any universe, a creature like us is likely to share our moralities. The differences of universe don't matter, the similarities of subject do. The subject of our morality is human beings, not universes.

I'm not sure how to explain different universes to you, because I can't. I'm limited to the realities that exist here, with the axioms of language that exist here, with the mind's eye that is conditioned by physical possibilities here.

Don't be a boring god! *Anything* is possible when creating universes.

You're spent...lol, already?

I'll refresh your mind:

...Will it that every son who *does* the dishes gets smacked.

[The Grand Nudger]

Don't be silly. We both know you can't use brains from this universe to crunch logic from another universe! Apples and oranges.

......so stop calling such things "logical concepts"...maybe?

I proposed God, being God, can do godly things, and code a universe into existence with it's own paradigms. You shook your head, without uttering anything. *shrugs* sorry man...?!

Oh, well, that clears it up.  When god gods the gods it gods god.  Jesus christ........

I'm not sure how to explain different universes to you, because I can't. I'm limited to the realities that exist here, with the axioms of language that exist here, with the mind's eye that is conditioned by physical possibilities here.

Don't be a boring god! *Anything* is possible when creating universes.

-and yet not but a moment ago you felt comfortable doing just that.  Get your shit together.

...Will it that every son who *does* the dishes gets smacked.

Maybe god hates bootlickers who do the dishes just because they're told to, out of a desire to please, or because they think it;s the "right" thing to do.  You don't know....... and that's why you're unqualified to comment.

"Look at all those uppity monkeys down there with their right and wrong, god says this, if there was a god it would be that, HA!" -hence botflies. Or, maybe, just maybe, it's all a crock of shit. A desperate search by desperate creatures for an order they can understand and appeal to, a familiarly human order.