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

[Stitch]

well, for example, all theistic belief systems which affirm the reality of objective morality... As far as I'm aware that would be all of them.

OK, Deists believe in a god, so that would make them as subset of theists. Show me where deists believe in objective morality.

 

[Furi]

almost everyone will perceive the chair as red, some won't
the chair remains objective



the "less extreme" examples, if you examine them, are ones in which various moral truths are situationally put together, and it is up to the individual to perceive via conscience the exact nature of this nexus

that in no way means those moral truths are not objective

science does this all the time, for example when trying to discern the relative strength of various causal factors

Interesting example Is the office chair I sit on Green Blue or Grey.

I can tell you that technically and by general concensus it is green. However I see it as blue in daylight, and I see it as grey if only under these horrid fluorescents, is my conclusion correct or incorrect, is my perception flawed or are the others all lying to me (they always lie I can hear them).

Please PJ, please tell me would religion correct my subjective perception of the chair colour, and make my blue chair green...

 

[jond]

So, as an atheist, I live an empty life?

Are you married? Do you have children? If yes to either you will understand just how full to the brim my life is. At least you should. Given your history here I am convinced that you will refuse to see this.

BTW, this is how "empty" my life is:

FZ-

I noticed that our arrogant Plum has ignored this. But I wanted to mention that as cool as the high chair days are, you will certainly appreciate what may be coming in future years. I've begun playing in a band with my two boys (11 and 14), along with my old drummer from 25 years ago who just returned to the drums last year. We're slamming out the Chili Peppers, Porcupine Tree, Police, and much more, having the time of our lives. And, while it's always fun throwing it down with some good players, imagine the joy of playing with your kids! (The elder is a bassist, and in 2 years is Flea Jr, the younger has been playing guitar for a while, but is just reaching the maturity required to play in a band.) It's amazing, and absolutely inspiring. And, there's no god anywhere.

As for Plum: "look here brother, who you jivin' with that cosmic debris?"

 

[Darat]

use your general knowledge

...snip...

My general knowledge of major theistic religions is probably greater than most of the population however I do not know of any that have an objective morality as part of their belief system. As I mentioned the major ones such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism and even some forms of Hinduism all have a clearly stated subjective morality as part of the their belief system.

So again I'll ask you which theistic belief system are you wishing to compare to "exclusive materialism"?

 

[SonOfLaertes]

Sure. Put 10,000 mothers in an auditorium. One by one bring out their children onto the stage, and have someone rape then murder the child. Then do a survey of the mothers, asking whether what they just saw was morally right, morally wrong, or morally neutral. I predict that the results will be statistically highly significant, in fact, to a degree rarely found in 'purely physical' science.

The children wouldn't even have to be their own, and I'd predict almost identical results.


(Sorry folks, if that was a bit of an extreme example.. but it illustrates the point)

It illustrates the point of an objective physical truth. Humans (and many animals) are hard-wired to care for and about their young. It is this trait in fact, coupled with modifications such as the placenta and live birth, which make class mammalia currently the most successful class in the animal kingdom. Really, Plumjam, one could easily see the benefits in nature of a species which helps their young make it to maturity, and to deny that this behaviour is not a product of millions of years of selective adaptation stretches credulity.

BTW, did anybody else get the impression that Plumjam's spiritual guiding light is actually a moonlighting Ron Jeremy?

 

[plumjam]

OK, Deists believe in a god, so that would make them as subset of theists. Show me where deists believe in objective morality.

Kidding, right?
Where did all those "inalienable rights" come from, if not the Deists?
That is moral objectivity.

 

[plumjam]

Please PJ, please tell me would religion correct my subjective perception of the chair colour, and make my blue chair green...

Did anyone else think of Crystal Gale when reading that?

If I'm correct in my interpretation of what I think you're getting at, the answer would be that a spiritual view of man will help you to see the chair better than a material view of man.
That can happen within religion, without religion.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

False analogy, again.

your subjectively held opinions, to have any power or interest to anyone else necessarily have to reach out beyond subjectivity and make claims about the objective world
when you claim that if you let go of a brick it will fall to the ground, that is your subjective claim reaching out beyond subjectivity and making a claim about the objective world (physical)
it is the same when you claim that murder is wrong, your subjective opinion reaching out beyond subjectivity to make a claim about the objective world (moral)

to not do this would be limiting yourself to the belief that bricks only fall for you, and that murder is only wrong for you

just because something in your experience is not perceived through the five senses does not mean it has no objective existence
that's just a form of fundamentalism
anyway... not going to labour this point any more

No, you’re just continuing being infantile here. Denotations aren’t the same thing as connotations (as already pointed out to you many times). There’s still no “objective morality” to be found, not even in your platonic La La land, because it’s not real. You see, I can point at the thing I call brick. Can you point at an objective moral truth? Can you point to the comfort of my chair?

 

[plumjam]

FZ-

I noticed that our arrogant Plum has ignored this. But I wanted to mention that as cool as the high chair days are, you will certainly appreciate what may be coming in future years. I've begun playing in a band with my two boys (11 and 14), along with my old drummer from 25 years ago who just returned to the drums last year. We're slamming out the Chili Peppers, Porcupine Tree, Police, and much more, having the time of our lives. And, while it's always fun throwing it down with some good players, imagine the joy of playing with your kids! (The elder is a bassist, and in 2 years is Flea Jr, the younger has been playing guitar for a while, but is just reaching the maturity required to play in a band.) It's amazing, and absolutely inspiring. And, there's no god anywhere.

As for Plum: "look here brother, who you jivin' with that cosmic debris?"

Jond, I genuinely congratulate you. That sounds wonderful. I wish I could do that with my family, it would be a blast.
Do you ever wonder where musical enjoyment comes from? What is it about certain arrangements of sounds that can be so beautiful and can so inspire? Where is that beauty? Is it out there or only inside of you?
If it's only inside of you how come your family/band members are enjoying it in such a very similar way to yourself?

IMO beauty/aesthetics, as well as morality, are objective realities


(btw: Foster is the only person on my ignore list)

 

[plumjam]

My general knowledge of major theistic religions is probably greater than most of the population however I do not know of any that have an objective morality as part of their belief system. As I mentioned the major ones such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism and even some forms of Hinduism all have a clearly stated subjective morality as part of the their belief system.

I'm not sure what you're talking about, care to elaborate?

So again I'll ask you which theistic belief system are you wishing to compare to "exclusive materialism"?

I already told you, AFAIK all of them

 

[Furi]

Did anyone else think of Crystal Gale when reading that?

If I'm correct in my interpretation of what I think you're getting at, the answer would be that a spiritual view of man will help you to see the chair better than a material view of man.
That can happen within religion, without religion.

I thought of Crystal Gayle Just after I typed it.

so if I get this right, the spiritual man by helping me see the chair as green, would be explaining that my own perception is incorrect and that I should take it on faith that it is green because the common belief is that it is green.

A more materialistic person (like myself) might suggest that I get a Tintometer or similar so that I could see the resultant reflected spectral spikes, and work out that due to deuteronopia I do not see the latter half of the Green elements as they are overtaken by the Blue Component, and the perception of differing colours under various lighting, is due to the differing incident light and that the grey comes from Isochromatic values due to the lesser quantity of Blue emitted blue light from these disgustingly cool coloured fluorescents.

I see now (well as long as it isn't Green)

 

[Roadtoad]

BTW, did anybody else get the impression that Plumjam's spiritual guiding light is actually a moonlighting Ron Jeremy?

No. Ron Jeremy has more class than Plumjam.

Roadtoad, please keep in mind that your membership agreement requires civility toward other members of the forum. Attack the argument, and not the person making the argument.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer

 

[jond]

Jond, I genuinely congratulate you. That sounds wonderful. I wish I could do that with my family, it would be a blast.
Do you ever wonder where musical enjoyment comes from? What is it about certain arrangements of sounds that can be so beautiful and can so inspire? Where is that beauty? Is it out there or only inside of you?
If it's only inside of you how come your family/band members are enjoying it in such a very similar way to yourself?

IMO beauty/aesthetics, as well as morality, are objective realities


(btw: Foster is the only person on my ignore list)

In my case, I'm quite certain that there's a considerable genetic component. My mother's side has a long line of musicians involved.

But, no, beauty is in no way objective. In fact, in my experience, it's completely subjective. There are pieces of mine for which people have told me they were very moved by, thought them very beautiful; and yet the same piece had many people repulsed by it. Sorry, doesn't wash. We hear sound, we process according to how our brains handle those sounds, and in context of all that we've heard to that point. We get it, or we don't. My wife, doesn't. My kids do. Some of my friends do. Some don't. It's all subjective.

 

[zooterkin]

I would never deny that there are bad theists.

You use it as a get-out. Theism good, atheism bad. Theist doing bad things? Bad theists. Atheists doing good things? Atheists acting as theists.

Anyone, theist or atheist, doing something good is tuning into objective moral truth.

Well, they can't be, since objective moral truth does not exist.

certain arrangements of sounds that can be so beautiful and can so inspire? Where is that beauty? Is it out there or only inside of you?
If it's only inside of you how come your family/band members are enjoying it in such a very similar way to yourself?

Because we share the same cultural and genetic heritage.

IMO beauty/aesthetics, as well as morality, are objective realities

Oh, dear. You're not related to Bubblefish, aka Tumbleman, are you? He had the same difficulty comprehending the difference between objective and subjective.

Beauty is subjective.

 

[zooterkin]

BTW, did anybody else get the impression that Plumjam's spiritual guiding light is actually a moonlighting Ron Jeremy?

Do you mean his forum (as opposed to spiritual) avatar? It looks like John Barrowman under a plate of spaghetti to me.

 

[Stitch]

Kidding, right?
Where did all those "inalienable rights" come from, if not the Deists?
That is moral objectivity.

1) What inalienable rights?
2) Please show me the deists handbook or whatever that shows that they believe in moral objectivity.

 

[plumjam]

False analogy, again.



No, you’re just continuing being infantile here. Denotations aren’t the same thing as connotations (as already pointed out to you many times). There’s still no “objective morality” to be found, not even in your platonic La La land, because it’s not real. You see, I can point at the thing I call brick. Can you point at an objective moral truth? Can you point to the comfort of my chair?

Fond of your detonations and constipations aren't you

You're persisting in the mistaken assumption that for something to be objectively real it has to be perceived through the senses.

Are the truths of mathematics or logic perceived through the senses? No, so does that mean they are merely subjective? No. They are objectively true. It's just that they are perceived in a different way than is, say, a chair.

 

[Darat]

I'm not sure what you're talking about, care to elaborate?

How can I elaborate on your claim? After all you are the one that is making the claim i.e. that there are some/many/all theistic belief systems that have an objective morality as part of their belief system, all I am doing is asking you to name them.

I already told you, AFAIK all of them

Yet I've already named four of the major theistic belief systems that do not have an objective morality, so again I am asking you which theistic belief system or systems do you wish to compare to "exclusive materialism"?

 

[plumjam]

1) What inalienable rights?
2) Please show me the deists handbook or whatever that shows that they believe in moral objectivity.

you are the one who brought up the deists - it should be you who has the handbook.
Nevertheless, from here
http://www.moderndeism.com/html/deism_defined.html

one of its 'tenets'

7. Belief in the principle of Natural Law that states that all men and women are created equal to each other with inherent freedom and liberty so that no human has more worth than another. Essentially, each human is equal in terms of the freedoms that they have and in the eyes of the law.

That is a moral objective statement that in no way could be supported by empirical evidence.

 

[plumjam]

How can I elaborate on your claim? After all you are the one that is making the claim i.e. that there are some/many/all theistic belief systems that have an objective morality as part of their belief system, all I am doing is asking you to name them.




Yet I've already named four of the major theistic belief systems that do not have an objective morality, so again I am asking you which theistic belief system or systems do you wish to compare to "exclusive materialism"?

Darat, this is getting rather silly.
If you want to argue that those religions you mentioned affirm that morality is subjective rather than objective, then be my guest, make your case.

To me it is absolutely obvious that that is not the case. I'm not going to waste my time making an argument for a thing that is entirely obvious.