Theists: Hitchens Wager

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

For starters, if I had 100 million I'd give like 90 million to charity just because I don't need all that money.

Please contact me for information regarding your $90 million donation to the Save The Boru Foundation.  All contributions are tax deductible.

Boru

[henryp]

"Everyone else should behave according to the same moral system I do"

Anyone can state that.

Of course anyone can state it.  Hitchens' point wasn't that atheists could say the same words as christians.  It was that all christian moral conclusions can also be arrived at through reason by an Atheist.

It's debatable whether my 'statement' fits the parameters set by Hitchens.

An atheist can easily come up with a reason why murder is immoral (which is what Hitchens was getting at).  But an atheist can also come up with reasons why murder isn't immoral.  The shortcoming of atheistic morals, is that they carry no authority over the behavior of others.

[chimp3]

Anyone can state that.

Of course anyone can state it.  Hitchens' point wasn't that atheists could say the same words as christians.  It was that all christian moral conclusions can also be arrived at through reason by an Atheist.

It's debatable whether my 'statement' fits the parameters set by Hitchens.

An atheist can easily come up with a reason why murder is immoral (which is what Hitchens was getting at).  But an atheist can also come up with reasons why murder isn't immoral.  The shortcoming of atheistic morals, is that they carry no authority over the behavior of others.

Perhaps the point is that all morality is human morality.

[henryp]

Of course anyone can state it.  Hitchens' point wasn't that atheists could say the same words as christians.  It was that all christian moral conclusions can also be arrived at through reason by an Atheist.

It's debatable whether my 'statement' fits the parameters set by Hitchens.

An atheist can easily come up with a reason why murder is immoral (which is what Hitchens was getting at).  But an atheist can also come up with reasons why murder isn't immoral.  The shortcoming of atheistic morals, is that they carry no authority over the behavior of others.

Perhaps the point is that all morality is human morality.

I'm almost certain that was not his point.

[chimp3]

Perhaps the point is that all morality is human morality.

I'm almost certain that was not his point.

Do you think he believed some morality was of supernatural origin?

[Edwardo Piet]

For starters, if I had 100 million I'd give like 90 million to charity just because I don't need all that money.

Please contact me for information regarding your $90 million donation to the Save The Boru Foundation.  All contributions are tax deductible.

Boru

Look, I like you, you're a nice guy, and I don't have many friends. If I had 100 million and you had PayPal you wouldn't be getting nothing.

---

Anyone can state that.

Of course anyone can state it. 

So that's a moral statement that anyone can make, including atheists.

Hitchens' point wasn't that atheists could say the same words as christians.

Actually that was one of his points. He said that no theist could make a moral statement that an atheist couldn't. See the OP.

  It was that all christian moral conclusions can also be arrived at through reason by an Atheist.

Actually he didn't speak about coming to moral conclusions. He spoke of moral actions and statements. He was speaking from a consequentalist point of view: An atheist can do and say all the good things that a theist can.

It's debatable whether my 'statement' fits the parameters set by Hitchens.

Nope. Not debatable. Anyone can say that statement.

An atheist can easily come up with a reason why murder is immoral (which is what Hitchens was getting at).  But an atheist can also come up with reasons why murder isn't immoral.  The shortcoming of atheistic morals, is that they carry no authority over the behavior of others.

No that wasn't his challenge. You can say all you like "that's what Hitchens way getting at". It's not what he said. He was saying that there's no moral action or statement that a theist can make that an atheist can't.

His point was that theists aren't more moral than atheists in any way and that all morality is entirely secular: Has absolutely nothing to do with God.

By saying that you know what he was really getting at, when that's not what he actually said, you sound like the theologian who claims to know what God "really meant".

---

Of course anyone can state it.  Hitchens' point wasn't that atheists could say the same words as christians.  It was that all christian moral conclusions can also be arrived at through reason by an Atheist.

It's debatable whether my 'statement' fits the parameters set by Hitchens.

An atheist can easily come up with a reason why murder is immoral (which is what Hitchens was getting at).  But an atheist can also come up with reasons why murder isn't immoral.  The shortcoming of atheistic morals, is that they carry no authority over the behavior of others.

Perhaps the point is that all morality is human morality.

Yes that is the point.

---

Perhaps the point is that all morality is human morality.

I'm almost certain that was not his point.

Well, we don't care about your certainty.

---

I'm almost certain that was not his point.

Do you think he believed some morality was of supernatural origin?

He's clearly missed Hitchens point if he thinks it's debatable whether the statement he gave is up to Hitchens's challenge or not.

It was rhetorical. The point is that no theist can meet his challenge. To make the point that morality is secular.

[henryp]

This forum never disappoints.

[Edwardo Piet]

Actually it often does, and you're one of the disappointing ones.

[henryp]

Actually it often does, and you're one of the disappointing ones.

I'll let you get back to chatting up all these intellectuals who overwhelmingly believe Khemikal is the best debater then.

[Edwardo Piet]

Actually it often does, and you're one of the disappointing ones.

I'll let you get back to chatting up all these intellectuals who overwhelmingly believe Khemikal is the best debater then.

^ one of the biggest disappointments right there.