You know very little.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
God is not intelligent, or, why I am a pantheist
- Thread starter Publius
- Start date
You really are stupid.If you take Nietchze, Sartre, or Freud at their word, there is no absolute right and wrong.
In that sense, what Hume wrote as a diehard atheist made some sense to me.
"Nietzsche"I understand that according to the relativist there is no absolute but even within their own relativist bubble they personally have right and wrong actions.
It’s relative at the population level. But presumably even Neitzsche thought he should take one action over another in a given situation.
Daylight63
Verified User
"Nietzsche"
Apologies. I'm never good at typing out his name. I just start hitting the "Z", "C", "S" and "H" keys in random order and hope for the best! LOL.
So I'm still curious about your ethical system that has no "moral edicts". Do you have actions that are "correct" and "incorrect" in that sort of system?
I do not have your God dictating to me how I should act.Apologies. I'm never good at typing out his name. I just start hitting the "Z", "C", "S" and "H" keys in random order and hope for the best! LOL.
So I'm still curious about your ethical system that has no "moral edicts". Do you have actions that are "correct" and "incorrect" in that sort of system?
Daylight63
Verified User
I do not have your God dictating to me how I should act.
Nor did I say you did. I simply asked about YOUR ethical system.
Is there "correct" and 'incorrect" actions or do you simply decree that whatever action you take is by definition "correct"?
I'm genuinely interested in your ethical system.
I am not seeing a problem.Nor did I say you did. I simply asked about YOUR ethical system.
Is there "correct" and 'incorrect" actions or do you simply decree that whatever action you take is by definition "correct"?
I'm genuinely interested in your ethical system.
Daylight63
Verified User
I am not seeing a problem.
OK, let me try to explain better:
When you are faced with a choice, like helping someone or not helping them and they are in need. Is there an action that is MORE correct in that situation?
Let us take it one step further:
If someone reaches out to you in kindness is it "correct" to slap their hand away?
Maybe I should ask one clarifying question: do you believe in "free will"? That will definitely have an impact on your response.
I help those who I need to help.OK, let me try to explain better:
When you are faced with a choice, like helping someone or not helping them and they are in need. Is there an action that is MORE correct in that situation?
Let us take it one step further:
If someone reaches out to you in kindness is it "correct" to slap their hand away?
Maybe I should ask one clarifying question: do you believe in "free will"? That will definitely have an impact on your response.
If someone reached out to me that I do not like, yes I slap their hand away.
I believe in free will. Yet I think it is mostly a meaningless concept.
Daylight63
Verified User
I help those who I need to help.
Are you always right in deciding whom you need to help? You are clearly making a "choice" based on what you perceive your need to be.
It almost sounds as if your definition of "right and wrong" in YOUR OWN PERSONAL ETHICAL SYSTEM is really defined by what action you take. By definition your action is merited as you have determined it to be. So you only help those whom you feel you need to help. Whatever action you choose is the "Right" action.
That actually makes some sense. I will be honest and say it's kind of unsettling but at least you are being open about your position. I will also say I haven't met many people with that particular ethos so it's really kinda neat to see that.
Thank you for the explanation.
I believe in free will. Yet I think it is mostly a meaningless concept.
I'd like to understand what that means but I'll shelve it for a later time.
Thanks again!
Yes.Are you always right in deciding whom you need to help?
Daylight63
Verified User
Yes.
Thanks!
I will admit I'm kind of jealous of someone who has NO self-doubt and cannot conceive of making the wrong choice. In some respects that sounds almost unbelievable but it highlights how differently people can perceive reality.
However, my one minor critique of a moral system in which whatever the person chooses to do is "ipso facto" correct it could sound a bit solipsistic. It wouldn't work for me, personally, because I can conceive that in the wrong hands it could lead someone to doing truly appalling things but calling them "good".
Ethics is empirical. Christians hate that.Thanks!
I will admit I'm kind of jealous of someone who has NO self-doubt and cannot conceive of making the wrong choice. In some respects that sounds almost unbelievable but it highlights how differently people can perceive reality.
However, my one minor critique of a moral system in which whatever the person chooses to do is "ipso facto" correct it could sound a bit solipsistic. It wouldn't work for me, personally, because I can conceive that in the wrong hands it could lead someone to doing truly appalling things but calling them "good".
Daylight63
Verified User
Ethics is empirical. Christians hate that.
I don't see that in the ethics you just said you have. You have described an ethics in which the only measure of good or bad is literally whatever you choose to do and that is the "good".
I'm not sure how that is in any way empirical. I'm pretty sure I've got a TON of examples from my own life in which my own actions turned out to be "wrong". I was able to learn from that but that is because my ethical system is at least moored in the society I live in, not just in myself.
I can definitely see how really strict moral systems like a religion would definitely "hate" your version of self-decree morality since it is an almost perfectly relative system. It bears no relationship to anything other than your personal choice.
On the "up side" it is a great solution to Euthyphro! LOL!
Seriously, though, this is utterly fascinating. Thanks again for explaining your position more thoroughly. I'm sure I've got far too many questions. I'll keep myself in check though.
God tells you how to act?I don't see that in the ethics you just said you have. You have described an ethics in which the only measure of good or bad is literally whatever you choose to do and that is the "good".
Daylight63
Verified User
God tells you how to act?
No, not at all. I'm not a Christian. Not sure I mentioned that before.
My morality is based on what helps provide a safe and stable social network. I'm pretty basic....more along the lines of what others have been talking about here. That many of our senses of what is the right and wrong action to take in a given situation is based on instincts built into us as animals. These actions in a social group like we live in tend to confer an advantage to us as a species.
So my morality is not based on any sort of supernatural thinking or feeling. It is based on what helps confer a biological advantage to us as a species. It IS relative in that it is relative to US.
Sounds utilitarian.No, not at all. I'm not a Christian. Not sure I mentioned that before.
My morality is based on what helps provide a safe and stable social network. I'm pretty basic....more along the lines of what others have been talking about here. That many of our senses of what is the right and wrong action to take in a given situation is based on instincts built into us as animals. These actions in a social group like we live in tend to confer an advantage to us as a species.
So my morality is not based on any sort of supernatural thinking or feeling. It is based on what helps confer a biological advantage to us as a species. It IS relative in that it is relative to US.
Daylight63
Verified User
Sounds utilitarian.
Yeah, I suppose it is. It DEFINITELY biases a choice of action toward the largest positive impact from the action.
It's not fun facing the Trolley Problem, but overall and in the fullness of time it seems to generally work out for the species.
Yeah, the Trolley Problem is stupid.Yeah, I suppose it is. It DEFINITELY biases a choice of action toward the largest positive impact from the action.
It's not fun facing the Trolley Problem, but overall and in the fullness of time it seems to generally work out for the species.
Daylight63
Verified User
Yeah, the Trolley Problem is stupid.
Well, with your moral system it's actually SUPER easy to solve. Whatever choice you make is the RIGHT one by definition!
To some degree your moral system is the easiest one of all!