...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
SolarCross wrote:Too simple, at the very least you need to include a definition or criteria for what constitutes "good" and "evil".
SolarCross wrote:Nope, we actually all do have different ideas of what is good and evil
Sivad wrote:No, we don't. We all have an innate sense of good and evil, some of us choose to ignore it for various reasons, even codifying our rationalizations into religious commandments, but we all know that good is whatever is constructive and benevolent and evil is whatever is destructive and malevolent.
The other part destructive / constructive falls down because everyone recognises some destruction as good and some construction as bad.
Sivad wrote:No, it's not circular, it's just stating that the value of an act is determined by intention as much as outcome.
Sivad wrote:Not really, you're just equivocating on the relative and the absolute. Some acts are relatively destructive but are overall or ultimately or on the whole or by and large or all things considered, constructive. The constructive is whatever ultimately makes us stronger, freer, more robust, expansive, and substantive people.
SolarCross wrote:It is circular because bad and good remain undefined except by themselves.
I am saying that there is no absolute moral values
and the closest one can come to it is by invoking a supreme being and trusting "Him" to be truly objective and also somehow obtaining a credible communication of that objective standard.
Why should the rabbit feel good about his flesh being used to construct healthier wolves?
Sivad wrote:Benevolence is defined as charity, compassion, kindness, generosity, selfless altruism, nothing circular there. Malevolence is intending pain, harm, injury, or destruction for selfish ends.
Sivad wrote:That's just obviously false, some people try to deny it but the overwhelming majority of us recognize that there is definitely an absolute and objective moral law that we are all bound to.
Sivad wrote:Morality can be successfully grounded without appealing to a supreme being and moral knowledge doesn't require divine revelation or any sort of supernatural faculty.
Sivad wrote: We are morally obligated to make sacrifices for the greater good and morally prohibited from using others as a means to our own selfish ends.
Sivad wrote:No I don't, we all know what good is, some people are just evil fucks who use religion to rationalize their depravity. And all religions are abused in that way, not just Islam.
Mercenary wrote:@Scheherazade idea of civilized is my idea of savagery.
MrWonderful wrote:Well, Emily, that is two people out of a few million. Don't forget that atheists are always eager to point out how EVIL many Christians are. Not the group as a whole, mind you, but SOME of them. That is supposed to make the entire Christian category evil, but a small number of atheists being what you consider to be good whitewashes all of them? This does not remotely follow. They are generally arrogant, vulgar, condescending, and rude. Why not. They have absolutely no basis for morality. None.
Whatever you say of Atheists is true of everyone!
July 22, Monday Dismay over Bull Run or Manassa[…]
We could stop it, if we made an actual effort. B[…]
Just going to put this here. https://twitter.co[…]
I'll say it again. I predict that Marianne Willia[…]