So you're an atheist. Ok, what next?

[plumjam]

It's funny you should say that, because remember post #125? Here, I'll repeat some of it for you.


The whole premise of your contention is based on a false embedded assumption. If you release the assumption that morality derives from God, then your whole argument collapses like a house of cards.

false embedded assumption, in your opinion

 

[anticonspiracy911]

for example, raping then murdering a child purely for fun is morally wrong.. there you go, an objective moral truth



like I've said at least a dozen times, by cultivating and examining your individual moral conscience.
you know how it's done too; you do it dozens of times a day.. just like I don't need to explain to you a methodology for looking at a chair I don't need to explain to you how to examine your conscience.

Are you sure you even know what 'objective' means? Objective means treating or dealing with facts without distortion by personal feelings or prejudices. Or it could mean existing outside and independent of the mind. Examining your conscience is far from being objective.

 

[anticonspiracy911]

in other words 'none'... correct answer


really, huh? I guess you never heard about the whole race/IQ controversy then

You do realize that IQ scores have become an obsolete method of determining intelligence?

 

[plumjam]

That we're all from the same race, homo sapiens? Just a guess.

why should it follow from that that all individual members of homo sapiens are deserving of equal treatment?

 

[Tricky]

false embedded assumption, in your opinion

I've given you several examples where evidence showed that this assumption was incorrect. Yeah, it's my opinion, but based on the evidence that there are a number of theists systems that are not, by our standards, moral.

 

[anticonspiracy911]

why should it follow from that that all individual members of homo sapiens are deserving of equal treatment?

Why should it follow that only some homo sapiens deserve exclusive treatment?

 

[plumjam]

Are you sure you even know what 'objective' means? Objective means treating or dealing with facts without distortion by personal feelings or prejudices. Or it could mean existing outside and independent of the mind. Examining your conscience is far from being objective.

examining your individual visual perception is similarly far from being objective, but you use faith in order to connect that subjective perception to an assumed external objective reality
the same is true of morality

 

[Pardalis]

false embedded assumption, in your opinion

You still haven't proved it adequately. You got as far as "intuition", which seems to be to you the proof that there is something within us that makes us objectively moral.

Yet you still refuse to define it.

 

[plumjam]

You do realize that IQ scores have become an obsolete method of determining intelligence?

why obsolete? because perhaps they came back with results that would require a non-empirical (i.e. spiritual) view of the value of human beings in order to justify viewing humans as deserving of equal treatment?

 

[joobz]

I see we've hit the part in the thread where Plumjam cracks jokes to avoid answering uncomfortable questions.

 

[anticonspiracy911]

examining your individual visual perception is similarly far from being objective, but you use faith in order to connect that subjective perception to an assumed external objective reality
the same is true of morality

So what you're saying is, if I dropped a billion objects out of my hand and they all fall to the surface then my conclusion that there was some force keeping objects and me from flying into space would just be mere faith under your terms of thinking?

 

[plumjam]

You still haven't proved it adequately. You got as far as "intuition", which seems to be to you the proof that there is something within us that makes us objectively moral.

Yet you still refuse to define it.

i've explained it to you.
it's what happens inside you when you ajudge something to be morally right/wrong/neutral.
next you'll be insisting I instruct you how to breathe.

 

[Pardalis]

i've explained it to you.
it's what happens inside you when you ajudge something to be morally right/wrong/neutral.
next you'll be insisting I instruct you how to breathe.

The phenomenon of breathing can be explained, we can understand how the process of the lungs and the alveoli and the transfer of gases works.

How do you explain intuition?

 

[anticonspiracy911]

why obsolete? because perhaps they came back with results that would require a non-empirical (i.e. spiritual) view of the value of human beings in order to justify viewing humans as deserving of equal treatment?

Actually it has more to do with statistical analysis than any spiritual mumbo jumbo.

 

[plumjam]

I see we've hit the part in the thread where Plumjam cracks jokes to avoid answering uncomfortable questions.

Joobz if you're proposing that the thread becomes a derailed discussion of the moral status of gay marriage... well, I propose you start a new thread on it.
Maybe you'll get some offers

It's entirely tangential to the subject of atheism/exclusive materialism and its effects on the life of the individual who holds to that kind of belief system.

 

[joobz]

i've explained it to you.
it's what happens inside you when you ajudge something to be morally right/wrong/neutral.
next you'll be insisting I instruct you how to breathe.

Wow, are you saying that there may be some inherent biological system that functions inside us to direct morality? much like the autonomic nervous system which directs breathing?

I can think of several evolutionary cognitive neurologists who would agree with you.

 

[PixyMisa]

i've explained it to you.
it's what happens inside you when you ajudge something to be morally right/wrong/neutral.

Intuition: A careful and objective evaluation of the consequences of an action.

Got it.

 

[Olowkow]

well, you'll be familiar with the genius idea of the 'selfish gene'.. and if there's no objective morality what is stopping someone who believes in that kind of materialist theology coming along and encouraging all men to be serial rapists?

remember, if there's no objective morality, that system is exactly equally as 'good' as any other.

"Objective morality" is a non starter. "Do no unnessary harm", pretty much sums it up.

If you read Dawkins, you must have been either genuinely interested in learning something from him, or you read it merely to critique. Not sure which. He is a scientist, and as such, he makes claims which are scientific, not emotion laden, and not tongue-in-cheek. The "selfish gene" is an hypothesis that deserves some investigation, in a scientific manner. You need to study some psychology or sociology. People are interested in this sort of thing in these fields.

Dawkins is not some stupid fellow that does not understand human nature, nor are you I suspect.

So let's quit this BS of the straw man arguments. It has all been tried before and never works. What really roils me is when you use "serial rapist" as if it is something that all men would be if they "but had the opportunity". This is insanity, and frankly, if you are in that boat, I am glad for you that religion is keeping you from carrying out this fantasy.

Personally, I don't need a god to keep me from senselessly harming others. Can you honestly say the same?

Much of what you say is laden with sarcasm and perhaps your take on "wittiness", such as "genius idea", etc. This is not witty. It means you don't understand what Dawkins meant at all. Such prose gets in the way of taking what you say seriously.

 

[joobz]

Joobz if you're proposing that the thread becomes a derailed discussion of the moral status of gay marriage... well, I propose you start a new thread on it.
Maybe you'll get some offers

It's entirely tangential to the subject of atheism/exclusive materialism and its effects on the life of the individual who holds to that kind of belief system.

It's an illustrative example of why "the god's needed for morality" argument is nonsense.

 

[plumjam]

The phenomenon of breathing can be explained, we can understand how the process of the lungs and the alveoli and the transfer of gases works.

How do you explain intuition?

how do you bring your first school into memory?
you have no idea how you do it, but for you it's easier than falling off a log... and in no way could you instruct someone who didn't know how to do it how to do it.
the same with intuition