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

[plumjam]

One of the serious flaws in plumjam's objective morality argument that almost never gets discussed is that the moral standards are arbitrary. There's no inherently good reason that they are good, except that most of us collectively agree that they are subjectively a good thing and agree to abide by them for the good of all.

Hi John, good to see you. I enjoyed our discussion yesterday.

My take is that moral standards are not arbitrary. This is because moral standards derive their value in direct relation to the meaning of life. Like I said yesterday, the meaning of life is the journey of consciousness.

At the human level what we call morality is that which advances us along the path in this journey of consciousness. So, unselfishness in all its forms is what weakens our identification with the individual ego/mind/body, expanding our consciousness and furthering us along the way to infinite consciousness (God realisation).

This is where the real meaning of morality lies.

 

[Furi]

No. I thought you were using the colour of the chair as a way of talking about morality. Seems I misinterpreted you.
My reply to you was to indicate that a spiritual view of man will aid the individual in perceiving moral truth.

The Crystal Gale thing was cool though, huh? Maybe we'd get on well.

I was using it wondering how the spiritual person would take this question of differing viewpoints, either the perceived colour of the chair in comparison to its actual colour, or survival based morality or divine morality.

The spiritual man has faith that it is green, others have told him so, and he knows it is green because he has seen it.

I believe it appears blue most of the time blue but due to the inconsistant colour decide to check. I find out that it is actually green through physical measurement and that the colour appeared to change due to a personal visual anomaly and the properties of varying incident light, I then question the mechanisms of Light, colour detection and adjust my perceptions of colour accordingly in future according to surrounding referance colours of known hue so that in future I don't need to measure things unless I need to be really certain. I also found out some really cool stuff on the way

The spiritual man knows it is green, but I can prove it.

 

[Foster Zygote]

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.

I got Teddy (that's my sprog) a cheap little miniature $30 acoustic because he was always going for my expensive guitars. He completely ignored it until I hit on the idea that I had to play it for him to take an interest in it. I found it amusing that I was using my $200 nut files on a $30 guitar to make it playable, but now he sits and bangs on it as I play. I ask "Teddy, do you want to jam?" and he goes and gets his guitar. I can't wait 'till he's old enough for a little 22" scale Ibanez Micro. I don't intend to push anything on him, I want to encourage him to pursue his interests, but I hope that he retains the same interest in music and motor racing that he shares with me now.

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

Now that's weird. I was just listening to that song a few nights ago and it made me think of Plumjam.

The price of beef has just gone up
And your old lady has just gone down

 

[the PC apeman]

no, I see no problem in there being visually impaired people either

(of course I'd prefer they had 20/20 vision)

Of course. It's yet another arbitrary measure.

 

[plumjam]

Could you explain what you mean? What moral system has society reverted to, and what was the prior one?

Sure. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries there were attempts to base moral systems on a material understanding of man. It was most 'successful' in terms of level of adoption, in communism and nazism. In the west too, social darwinism was tried to some extent, in the eugenics movement and such like.. but its level of adoption luckily wasn't as great as in the east.
After the ensuing human disaster the material view of man is discredited, and on an international level there has been a reversion to a spiritual view of man, enshrined in things like the universal declaration of human rights, which although not a religious document essentially asserts a spiritual view of man (non-evidenceable equality etc..)

 

[Foster Zygote]

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)

That's OK. At least you didn't make a joke about killing children...

 

[Foster Zygote]

No, you claimed that ALL theists AFAYK held the belief in objective morals. I gave an example of a sub group of thesists and asked if you could show that it held true for that group. If not it obviously follows it doesn't hold for ALL theists.



Way to cherry pick!! Shall we see what it says at the beginning of that list??


(my bold)

So there are no universally accepted tenets of Deism then, tell me again about how they all believe in moral objectivity.

You've caught Plumjam in a lie of omission.

 

[Nogbad]

Could you explain what you mean? What moral system has society reverted to, and what was the prior one?

That baffled me slightly too as PJ lives in the UK and I can't see much difference between the ethos of Maggie and the that of New Labour. The rich are still getting richer.

 

[Foster Zygote]

it means that some individuals do not perceive beauty as well as others, just as some people do not perceive morality as well as others

This is almost comically arrogant. Hitler felt the same way about people who preferred Jazz over Wagner. I'd love to know which forms of art are objectively more beautiful than others.

 

[H'ethetheth]

no, I see no problem in there being visually impaired people either

(of course I'd prefer they had 20/20 vision)

So quite possibly, in the case of music, many people are more or less aesthetically impaired.
What if that goes for morals too? What if you are morally impaired? What if everyone is similarly morally impaired? How can anyone ever be absolutely sure that this is or is not the case? There could be a cruel god that makes our consciences say different things every few hundred years. In fact, there is ample evidence for this.

 

[plumjam]

I was using it wondering how the spiritual person would take this question of differing viewpoints, either the perceived colour of the chair in comparison to its actual colour, or survival based morality or divine morality.

The spiritual man has faith that it is green, others have told him so, and he knows it is green because he has seen it.

I believe it appears blue most of the time blue but due to the inconsistant colour decide to check. I find out that it is actually green through physical measurement and that the colour appeared to change due to a personal visual anomaly and the properties of varying incident light, I then question the mechanisms of Light, colour detection and adjust my perceptions of colour accordingly in future according to surrounding referance colours of known hue so that in future I don't need to measure things unless I need to be really certain. I also found out some really cool stuff on the way

The spiritual man knows it is green, but I can prove it.

Aaaaghhh ! Furi, my head hurts now
I'm trying to see what point you're making... something about what... the difference between subjective 'measurement' and objective 'measurement'?
Please help me out.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

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

My bad - I was referring to the link Plumjam provided to meher baba in post #780. I wasn't being facetious - the resemblance is uncanny, at least with the image on the web page.

 

[plumjam]

So quite possibly, in the case of music, many people are more or less aesthetically impaired.
What if that goes for morals too? What if you are morally impaired? What if everyone is similarly morally impaired? How can anyone ever be absolutely sure that this is or is not the case? There could be a cruel god that makes our consciences say different things every few hundred years. In fact, there is ample evidence for this.

well if you're going to demand absolute certainty, plus invoke the notion of a cruel God.. things aren't going to turn out well... you could apply those two to absolutely anything in order to cause problems

I agree with your first sentence, and the same goes for morals. For morally impaired people go look in a high security prison (not absolutely all of them will be), for morally less impaired people go see charity volunteers. For aesthetically impaired people go to a techno rave , for aesthetically less impaired people go to a Mozart piano concerto recital.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

This is almost comically arrogant. Hitler felt the same way about people who preferred Jazz over Wagner. I'd love to know which forms of art are objectively more beautiful than others.

Yes, this is puzzling to me as well. In some situations I prefer Venetian Snares (noisy breakcore) to the Beatles, in other situations it's the other way around. That must mean, since plumjam is equating preferring anything to the Beatles to being sensorily impaired, I must be alternately more or less deaf. And yet I can hear just fine whatever music I prefer at any given moment.

Since the argument that started this thread is what happens when ad populum tries to breed with horror vacui, your point with Kabuki theater being better than the Beatles is enough to put it out of its misery. You see, plumjam either has to admit that Kabuki theater is objectively more beautiful than the Beatles, or that the majority cannot always be used to discern the Objective Truth™ - in which case we can never know the objective truth!

Oh, and rock on.

 

[plumjam]

a nice poetical interlude for us all

This We Have Now ..by Rumi

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=SfUFskuN9es

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

Even better:

Vache, by Venetian Snares.

 

[Darat]

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.

I have no case to make - remember it is your claim that we are trying to clarify. Again I'll ask you to name which theistic belief system or systems you wish to compare with "exclusive materialism".

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.

at least you've convinced yourself.

 

[thaiboxerken]

No it can't. You have to simply believe that they are objective. Them being 'objective' is an interpretive schema you project onto them yourself.

You are wrong. No matter what a person believes, gravity still effects them in the exact same way it affects everyone else, the same goes for inertia, friction, thermodynamics etc. How you perceive those effects may be subjective, but the effects themselves, and the laws, are the same for all.

 

[plumjam]

Even better:

Vache, by Venetian Snares.

definitely not shaving music

 

[plumjam]

I have no case to make - remember it is your claim that we are trying to clarify. Again I'll ask you to name which theistic belief system or systems you wish to compare with "exclusive materialism".



at least you've convinced yourself.

stuck record, mate