The crisis in Morality

[Gordon]

I think there is an initial point to be made before we get onto a more philosophical sociological and perhaps psychochemical approach to the question namely:

''Any fucking moron that bangs on loudly about what is good and bad, what people ought and ought not to be doing and comes on here with no concrete idea of why that is so or an at the end of the day it's all relative is a fucking moron''.

That's a fair point: it may be that the person 'banging on', as you describe, isn't sufficiently aware of the various philosophical approaches to morality so as to allow an informed discussion. 

My own position is we should love God and love our neighbour.

Is the the extent of your approach to morality?

[Outrider]

Why is it immoral? Yes there is a bit of paper but there could be a bit of paper that says it's ok. Which would be moral?

Because we, collectively, as humanity, have identified what we consider to be moral, and that doesn't conform to it.

Still nothing on your stance?  Sniping from the sidelines still?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Have you ever read the Bible and seen the terrible deeds attributed to it.?

Mankind has several terrible deeds attached to it in fact we live in terrible deedsville some deeds more terrible than others. What I glean from the bible is the world was a kind of a  Garden and we wanted it to be different. I see no reason to deviate from those understandings.

[Roses]

Mankind has several terrible deeds attached to it in fact we live in terrible deedsville some deeds more terrible than others. What I glean from the bible is the world was a kind of a  Garden and we wanted it to be different. I see no reason to deviate from those understandings.

If god exists it is responsible for everything that is wrong in this world, as it  supposedly created human nature.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Because we, collectively, as humanity, have identified what we consider to be moral, and that doesn't conform to it.

I wasn't personally privy or involved in the production of those documents and neither  were you. They may well have identified them to be moral but why? Not everybody is a signatory and some of those who were wish to opt out of this type of thing.

Not sniping....... just engaging in socratic dialogue.

[Outrider]

Mankind has several terrible deeds attached to it in fact we live in terrible deedsville some deeds more terrible than others.

I think LR means the terrible deeds apportioned to the god, like the eternal punishment of some for the temporal 'sins' of others, the slaughter of the entirety of humanity except for one family, killing a woman for looking, subjecting a man to torture as a test of faith and the killing of the firstborn of an entire nation... the little things, you know.

What I glean from the bible is the world was a kind of a  Garden and we wanted it to be different.

God made us curious, but not wise, then failed to secure access to a source of wisdom from the curious beings without wisdom he'd allegedly made then punished the curious humans for their manifesting the curiosity he gave them and not manifesting the wisdom he didn't give them... But hey, what was I saying about the problems that arise from equally valid interpretations of scripture?

I see no reason to deviate from those understandings.

The Vorlons say 'Understanding is a three-edged sword: your side, their side and the truth.'

O.

[Outrider]

I wasn't personally privy or involved in the production of those documents and neither  were you.

So far as you've revealed so far - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - you weren't involved in the Bible that you're putting forth as an alternative source?

They may well have identified them to be moral but why?

Because it's our best current effort at defining a set of rules that make people's lives better, as determined by the people who want better lives.

Not everybody is a signatory and some of those who were wish to opt out of this type of thing.

There's a mechanism for updating it; is there for your source?

Not sniping....... just engaging in socratic dialogue.

Once or twice is 'Socratic dialogue'; near-continuous use is sniping.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If god exists it is responsible for everything that is wrong in this world, as it  supposedly created human nature.

It isn't necessary to see it that way, I see it this way. It's like if the council gave me a council house and I'd trashed it up I could hardly blame the council.

[Outrider]

It isn't necessary to see it that way, I see it this way. It's like if the council gave me a council house and I'd trashed it up I could hardly blame the council.

Except if the council told you that you weren't allowed to use the vlert, but only after you'd made your way outside told you that 'vlert' was the type of door they'd fitted to your council house, and because you'd broken that rule all of your descendants that would ever live were threatened with eternal punishment, even the ones that didn't know about the council, let alone the rule...

It's like that. Only worse, because you EXPECT local councils to be inept.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So far as you've revealed so far - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - you weren't involved in the Bible that you're putting forth as an alternative source?

Where have I put forth the bible as an alternative source? That I think is rather in your head. Firstly the bible isn't the end all of the Christian experience. It doesn't hold the same significance as the Old testament does for Jewish believers or the Koran has for Islam. There is the law, the legal, yes, but there is also the sprit or the spirit of the law So now I am not putting laws arrived between peoples as an alternative to the bible or visa versa.

Because it's our best current effort at defining a set of rules that make people's lives better, as determined by the people who want better lives.

But in terms of morality what have you got against those who think there lives would be better with slavery, Lebensraum, sweated labour, persecution, pogrom, apartheid and ghetto for others? Other than a bit of paper?

[Outrider]

Where have I put forth the bible as an alternative source?

In your pushing Christianity, generally.  Not specifically in this thread, obviously, because gods forbid you actually take a stance and contribute rather than simply sniping.

Firstly the bible isn't the end all of the Christian experience.

It's the start, though.

It doesn't hold the same significance as the Old testament does for Jewish believers or the Koran has for Islam.

For your particular stance on Christianity, perhaps.  If you aren't referring to the New Testament, though, then what have you got... nothing.  You've got 'how you feel' or possibly even 'how you think Jesus would feel', which is still about what you think.  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is just lots of people's accumulated sense of 'what they think the best of us should do'.

But in terms of morality what have you got against those who think there lives would be better with slavery, Lebensraum, sweated labour, persecution, pogrom, apartheid and ghetto for others? Other than a bit of paper?

The collective wisdom of a humanity that's attempting to learn from those mistakes - which are mistakes because of the pain and misery they caused - and move humanity forward.

Given that your system (whether or not you consider to be dependent, reliant upon or merely vaguely interested in the scriptures) has both promoted and rejected each of these horror show that you've cited, but hasn't come up with anything clear on a code or way forward, what's your better alternative?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Except if the council told you that you weren't allowed to use the vlert, but only after you'd made your way outside told you that 'vlert' was the type of door they'd fitted to your council house, and because you'd broken that rule all of your descendants that would ever live were threatened with eternal punishment, even the ones that didn't know about the council, let alone the rule...

I've just about got all that. If you've mucked up your house, It was not the council housing department that sent the Housemuckerupper round was it? First of all the council have been sent a kind of a social worker who we can either tell to shove of or invite in.

Since you bring up the question of descendents? Will their environment and upbringing lead them to try to improve their legacy? Accept help? Maintain the house in the order the original ancestors left it in? Or make an even bigger hash of it ....keeping the curtains closed with a smog of fag smoke or even worse setting fire to the house or knocking down an important wall to extend the kitchen/diner?

[Outrider]

I've just about got all that. If you've mucked up your house,

Not mucked up the house, used a part of the house for the function it was designed for, but against the poorly enforced and communicated wish of the council.

It was not the council housing department that sent the Housemuckerupper round was it? First of all the council have been sent a kind of a social worker who we can either tell to shove of or invite in.

Your council worker is telling us we can either join his cult of homophobic misogynists (he isn't one, but his management team are implementing those policies) or we can still burn in hell because great granddad used the inconvenient door.

Since you bring up the question of descendents? Will their environment and upbringing lead them to try to improve their legacy? Accept help? Maintain the house in the order the original ancestors left it in? Or make an even bigger hash of it ....keeping the curtains closed with a smog of fag smoke or even worse setting fire to the house or knocking down an important wall to extend the kitchen/diner?

Maybe - which bit of those temporal crimes are they allegedly being punished for?  Oh, they aren't, they're being punished for the 'Original Sin' of not understanding a poor instruction from a second rate designer...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In your pushing Christianity, generally.

Your misunderstanding of Christianity is shocking for someone on a religion ethics board and yet I'm the one getting Dunning Kruger and courtiers reply.

Please read my description of Christianity. The Bible does not hold the same place in Christianity as the OT does in Judaism or the Koran does in Islam. In fact, the NT isn't official until a couple of centuries later. That is what you should be taking on board.
You see in those centuries there wasn't really a document to be pushed. Christianity therefore must be something different to what you are supposing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not mucked up the house, used a part of the house for the function it was designed for, but against the poorly enforced and communicated wish of the council.

Your council worker is telling us we can either join his cult of homophobic misogynists (he isn't one, but his management team are implementing those policies) or we can still burn in hell because great granddad used the inconvenient door.

Maybe - which bit of those temporal crimes are they allegedly being punished for?  Oh, they aren't, they're being punished for the 'Original Sin' of not understanding a poor instruction from a second rate designer...

We burn in hell because that's how we like it. That is why we get drunk smoke and set fire to the mattress so we burn and so do the kids.(are you beginning to savvy? vis a vis original sin?)

Also I think you are beginning to see yourself as more moral than God and religious people. Do I have you right there?

[Roses]

It isn't necessary to see it that way, I see it this way. It's like if the council gave me a council house and I'd trashed it up I could hardly blame the council.

You are not comparing like with like.

[Outrider]

Your misunderstanding of Christianity is shocking for someone on a religion ethics board and yet I'm the one getting Dunning Kruger and courtiers reply.

You appear to think that Christianity is set and understood, and that anyone whose interpretation of it differs from yours is not really understanding; the reality is that there are almost as many variations of Christianity as there are Christians, and in the absence of much of anything actually verifiable most of them are pretty much absolutely unchallengeable.

Please read my description of Christianity.

I've read it.  It sounds lovely. Look at Christianity in the world; it's not the same.

The Bible does not hold the same place in Christianity as the OT does in Judaism or the Koran does in Islam.

For you it doesn't.  For, for instance, American Evangelicals it seems to be far more important than any wishy-washy sense of 'what would Jesus do'?

In fact, the NT isn't official until a couple of centuries later. That is what you should be taking on board.

I know.  They don't care.

You see in those centuries there wasn't really a document to be pushed.

If any of this is true, then that's part of the problem.  You'd think an all-knowing god might have seen that sort of thing coming.

Christianity therefore must be something different to what you are supposing.

No, it mustn't, because it's not a logical enterprise, it's an enterprise collated from the collective fears, paranoia, superstition, wonder, charity, love, spite, awe, malice, anger and forgiveness of millions of people woven to varying degrees of looseness or tightness around varying translations of various edits of various allegations of one magician/teacher/demigod/prophet...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In your pushing Christianity, generally.  Not specifically in this thread, obviously, because gods forbid you actually take a stance and contribute rather than simply sniping.
For your particular stance on Christianity, perhaps.  If you aren't referring to the New Testament, though, then what have you got... nothing.  You've got 'how you feel' or possibly even 'how you think Jesus would feel', which is still about what you think.  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is just lots of people's accumulated sense of 'what they think the best of us should do'.

Yeh, I'm glad we've gone from ''humanity's'' to ''lot's of people's'' for the sake of keeping it real. What we shouldn't get into though is thinking that Christians are not humanity and these documents are necessarily atheist or secular humanist

The collective wisdom of a humanity that's attempting to learn from those mistakes - 'which are mistakes because of the pain and misery they caused - and move humanity forward.

But we could be talking technology or intellectual progress here. Do bits of paper move humanity forward morally? Why, getting back to the subject, are they moral? How do they move individuals forward morally considering say most people who voted in Britain voted Tory, arguably the most toxic, immoral, pernicious and /or cowardly variety and those that didn't vote do anything to stop them and evangelical christians in America are supporting a man who is the most unchristlike person ever who thinks he's God( I think i've given clues as to that one to which we can add prosperity gospel,replacementism, dominionism and manifest destiny)

Given that your system (whether or not you consider to be dependent, reliant upon or merely vaguely interested in the scriptures) has both promoted and rejected each of these horror show that you've cited, but hasn't come up with anything clear on a code or way forward, what's your better alternative?

Here we go. Christians are against international law?....I suspected we'd get there....given that there are lots of christians around, are you suggesting that Christianity has had no hand whatsoever in the formulation of international law?

In any case we seem merely to be at the stage where what is moral is only moral because somebody or a group says it is. Why is it really moral? And what role do you have personally in making moral decisions?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You are not comparing like with like.

Of course I am.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I've read it.  It sounds lovely. Look at Christianity in the world; it's not the same.

.

It certainly isn't what you've chosen to focus on Namely The Nazi positive christians, Prosperity Gospellers, Bible belters, televangelists and Lateran councillors of the 13th century.

[Roses]

Of course I am.

No you are not.

[Enki]

How do you think that would help you come to a decision on the morality of a situation?

Even if I feel and think that I am correct in my moral thoughts in any given situation there might be important points which I have dismissed or overlooked. However if it was demonstrated to me that some particular moral thought or action of mine was wrong, then I would try to analyse why it might be wrong, and if then I was convinced of this wrongness, I would try to adjust accordingly. That seems to me to be a rational way forward.

How do you arrive at your moral decisions?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No you are not.

OK Let's do this your way. The world was comfortable enough to promote the evolution of intelligent apes called humans. Who is it who has brought the world to climate catastrophe? Who is it that has fought wars etc.? Who is it who has made species upon species extinct?

[Roses]

OK Let's do this your way. The world was comfortable enough to promote the evolution of intelligent apes called humans. Who is it who has brought the world to climate catastrophe? Who is it that has fought wars etc.? Who is it who has made species upon species extinct?

IF god exists it is all down to that entity, by creating human nature it should have known exactly how they would behave. However, as its existence is highly unlikely it is humans who are responsible for climate change and all that is wrong in the world.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Even if I feel and think that I am correct in my moral thoughts in any given situation there might be important points which I have dismissed or overlooked. However if it was demonstrated to me that some particular moral thought or action of mine was wrong, then I would try to analyse why it might be wrong, and if then I was convinced of this wrongness, I would try to adjust accordingly. That seems to me to be a rational way forward.

How do you arrive at your moral decisions?

Sometimes I don't arrive at the moral decision. Sometimes I find reasoning doesn't help me sometimes I act on the spur of the moment because I have to. I find myself contemplating morality far more as a Christian than when I was an unbeliever and then it was chiefly others and not my own. I consider the moment I decided for whatever reason that something was absolutely and convincingly morally wrong and totally repugnant as an awakening to what morality entails and moral relativism had no answer to what I had witnessed. A year or so after that I had become a Christian.