Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Objective Morality


Overcame Faith

Recommended Posts

I am just curious about this. If god is the author of "objective morality," then how does a person get in touch with it? As a practical matter, where does a person who wishes to apply this god-given "objective morality" find it? Where does a person go to learn what this god-given "objective morality" is so they can apply it in their day-to-day lives so they can make moral decisions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

God's moral lessons are outlined in the Bible and the Koran (Quran, Qur'ān, Al-Coran, Al-Qur'ān, whateverthefuck).

 

There you may see whom to kill, how to beat your wife, what parts of the body to mutilate, how to handle your slaves, and many other moral behaviors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God's moral lessons are outlined in the Bible and the Koran (Quran, Qur'ān, Al-Coran, Al-Qur'ān, whateverthefuck).

 

There you may see whom to kill, how to beat your wife, what parts of the body to mutilate, how to handle your slaves, and many other moral behaviors.

 

That's what I always learned as a christian. That it's in the bible. But for the reasons you stated, surely that can't be where this "objective morality" is. I thought maybe some apologist had some other answer. If the bible is the source of "objective morality," then why is so much of its "morality" rejected by Christians today when so many of them say that the things you pointed out were a reflection of the culture of the times? It seems to me that a true "objective morality" would apply for all times and in all cultures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

*puts apologist cap on*

 

Objective morality is the morality that all people abide by, and some fail to abide by, and us christians are the closets to it via the power of the holy spirit.

 

*takes apologist cap off and burns its*

 

*takes 2 hour shower to get the stench off*

 

I would guess that is what the apologist would say objective morality is.

 

I wonder, then why is it that moral codes are so different among cultures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just curious about this. If god is the author of "objective morality," then how does a person get in touch with it? As a practical matter, where does a person who wishes to apply this god-given "objective morality" find it? Where does a person go to learn what this god-given "objective morality" is so they can apply it in their day-to-day lives so they can make moral decisions?

Three ways: (according to religion)

 

1) scripture

2) tradition

3) revelation

 

By scripture when reading and interpreting the word. By tradition when listening to other (older) preachers, teachers, and pastors and hear what they say is right. Or by listening to parents, family, or following cultural heritage. And lastly revelation when listening to the Holy Ghost speaking in your head and telling you what to do (like mental problems).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just curious about this. If god is the author of "objective morality," then how does a person get in touch with it? As a practical matter, where does a person who wishes to apply this god-given "objective morality" find it? Where does a person go to learn what this god-given "objective morality" is so they can apply it in their day-to-day lives so they can make moral decisions?

 

I think objective morality [outside of our opinions] would be shown through consequences. If there is an objective morality then certainly there would be some sort of observable consequences [repeatable through science] that we could observe. To be "real" it needs to affect the world somehow, and to be "objective" it needs to be outside ourselves.

 

Its possible you might find some. It would depend on your definitions though. Like what a "consequence" is..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way, don't do shit that causes trouble. Don't touch or take other people's shit, dont lie because it causes others to distrust you, don't break the law because you will pay for it. Do what works for the general social good but that doesn't take away your ability to think for yourself. Even without the bible it makes sense to treat others the way you would like be treated, it's not rocket science. But sadly even the xians who seem to think they own the golden rule can't manage to live by it, so who knows?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "objective" morality is a myth. Even if it were to come from a god, how can it not come from that god's subjective perception of right and wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no objective morality. Only morals that work best for the society we have created and even those are constantly evolving. For example, same sex marriage and abortion are becoming more exceptable. They are transitioning from wrong to exceptable(I can't say right because that would imply that it is something everyone should do) and we are in that period in between where they are contraversial. Capital punishment is going the other way from right to wrong and we are in the transition period were it is done in some areas and not in others. Marijana use is perhaps in the early stages in transitioning from wrong to exceptable, while tobacco use is going in the opposite direction. Like an evolutionary process the next generation holds some things as more exceptable and some as less exceptable than the previous generation. Creationist like to say things like murder and stealing have always been wrong, therefore objective morality, but they fail to acknowledege the fact that murder, by definition, encompasses all wrongful killing. What evolves is, "What consitutes murder?" A century and a half ago a duel to the death was considered a civilized, even gentlemenly, means of settling a dispute. Now it is considered murder. I've heard apologist say that, "Well how come no society has tried to make the best liar or the best thief?" The reason is that in any evolutionary process the selective preasure is not in the means but in the end, which in this case is the survival of the society. If lying and stealing do not lead to that end they will not be selected for and no society will evolve towards that survival strategy. That would be like asking, "Why don't some organisms evolve to be the best prey?" Because that doesn't equal survival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those like William Lane Craig say that absent god there can be no objective morality. If objective morality depends on god, then I must say there is no objective morality. However, if by objective we mean outside of ourselves, then I don't see where objective morality must come from god. It seems to me that if, as I tend to believe, the underpinnings of our morality comes from evolution, then that would be objective because it comes from outside of ourselves.

 

Then there is the impact of the law. The law certainly imposes morality upon us since it's illegal to murder, steal, etc. That's objective in the sense that what the law imposes is outside of each of us on the individual level.

 

I think the argument that it is only through god that we can have objective morality, is the belief that we are totally independent moral agents and that everything we do is a choice on our parts. In other words, that we have perfect free will. However, there is a growing body of evidence that we do not have the free will that many suppose we do have.

 

Here is a simple example of what I am talking about. I know someone who was adopted and never met his biological father. This person was able to find family menbers of his biological father and, though his biological father had died, he did meet family members who were very close with his biological father. Those family members were amazed when they met their long lost relative because he had a number of mannerisms which were exactly like his biological father. This adopted person was also amazed because he wasn't aware he was doing the things that were exact replicas of his biological father's mannerisms. Obviously, this person was not doing these things out of free will. There must have been some genetic component to those mannerisms.

 

I don't believe we have perfect free will and thus we are not a clean slate when it comes to morality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those like William Lane Craig say that absent god there can be no objective morality. If objective morality depends on god, then I must say there is no objective morality. However, if by objective we mean outside of ourselves, then I don't see where objective morality must come from god. It seems to me that if, as I tend to believe, the underpinnings of our morality comes from evolution, then that would be objective because it comes from outside of ourselves.

 

Then there is the impact of the law. The law certainly imposes morality upon us since it's illegal to murder, steal, etc. That's objective in the sense that what the law imposes is outside of each of us on the individual level.

 

I think the argument that it is only through god that we can have objective morality, is the belief that we are totally independent moral agents and that everything we do is a choice on our parts. In other words, that we have perfect free will. However, there is a growing body of evidence that we do not have the free will that many suppose we do have.

 

Here is a simple example of what I am talking about. I know someone who was adopted and never met his biological father. This person was able to find family menbers of his biological father and, though his biological father had died, he did meet family members who were very close with his biological father. Those family members were amazed when they met their long lost relative because he had a number of mannerisms which were exactly like his biological father. This adopted person was also amazed because he wasn't aware he was doing the things that were exact replicas of his biological father's mannerisms. Obviously, this person was not doing these things out of free will. There must have been some genetic component to those mannerisms.

 

I don't believe we have perfect free will and thus we are not a clean slate when it comes to morality.

 

I used to be utterly convinced of objective morality- not now... kind of reminds me of Plato's Dialogs I think its in Euthephro where the question is prestented: "Is it good because the gods declare it, or do the gods declare it because it is good?"

 

If its good because god declares it then god makes good.

 

If it is declared because it is good then god is held to the same standard-- it is outside of and sovereign from god. Big difference... One you can judge god and one you can't. People will usually try to sneak around it by saying both, but it is clearly two different things.

 

Consider this-- if objective morality was like 3 dementional then what is right would look different depending on what angle you look at it but that would not mean that it changing. It is the view point that is changing. A tear drop would look like a point on one end and round on the other but you would not be able to see both view points at the same time. Soo... if there is an objective reality there may be a absolute moral system.

 

Why would the cosmo's give a crap? Probably doesn't.. but there is polarity- the ultimate first cause.. so the universe works in positive and negative attractions-- almost binary code if you will, so there may be right or wrong by default of what is functional and what is not for society.

 

I know.. Im a nerd. Im trying hard to deal with that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three ways: (according to religion)

 

1) scripture

2) tradition

3) revelation

 

By scripture when reading and interpreting the word. By tradition when listening to other (older) preachers, teachers, and pastors and hear what they say is right. Or by listening to parents, family, or following cultural heritage. And lastly revelation when listening to the Holy Ghost speaking in your head and telling you what to do (like mental problems).

In other words...it's all subjectively determinded by the hearer. I think it's pretty obvious that it all comes down to people deciding. If it was geniunely objective, it would be something that is just floating around in the air somewhere and we could be able to sniff it out like a dog. I don't think two different dogs would smell the same piece of bacon and one of them think they are smelling dirty socks. They would both know what it is and what to do with it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.