tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post7162720237605925092..comments2024-03-28T15:39:28.239-04:00Comments on Vital Remnants: Atheists with judgmentalism issuesMartin Cothranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16452612266051351726noreply@blogger.comBlogger87125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-13115913209670802742014-01-29T08:55:46.950-05:002014-01-29T08:55:46.950-05:00Martin, I think I was saying the same thing or som...Martin, I think I was saying the same thing or something similar, but of course, you said it better.<br /><br />You can't prove morality. But you can show that, through their statements and their behaviors, that even morality deniers believe in it.<br /><br />Because someone denying that it exists has given up any right to use it to argue for their other positions.<br /><br />E.g., "Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-73334189914867638002014-01-29T08:53:46.482-05:002014-01-29T08:53:46.482-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-58469840703481523812014-01-28T23:44:07.024-05:002014-01-28T23:44:07.024-05:00The moral argument assumes that the person to whom...The moral argument assumes that the person to whom it is being made already believes in morality. It is basically a conditional argument the antecedent of which is the belief in morality. <br /><br />I'm sure there are people who claim they don't believe in morality, but I highly doubt they really do. I have yet to meet a person who has never used the terms "should" or "Martin Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16452612266051351726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-27457738326245256752014-01-28T19:50:32.516-05:002014-01-28T19:50:32.516-05:00You do know that the moral argument is without any...You do know that the moral argument is without any substance if the person using it does not show that morality exists and that, absolutely, no nontheistic account of morality can satisfactory ground it? It pretends to say that morality is incoherent with nontheism, but until that is argued for, it is simply an assertion. This is what Craig failed to do against Shelly Kagan, and why he lost the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-85576522313184749752014-01-28T19:49:32.515-05:002014-01-28T19:49:32.515-05:00You do know that the moral argument is without any...You do know that the moral argument is without any substance if the person using it does not show that morality exists and that, absolutely, no nontheistic account of morality can satisfactory ground it? It pretends to say that morality is incoherent with nontheism, but until that is argued for, it is simply an assertion. This is what Craig failed to do against Shelly Kagan, and why he lost the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-33752709436891532342014-01-28T13:46:57.084-05:002014-01-28T13:46:57.084-05:00> An atheist can believe in an absolute moralit...> An atheist can believe in an absolute morality without it following from atheism.<br /><br />I know that. One flavor of thought consists of the thoughts of Ayn Rand -- so-called Objectivism.<br /><br />What I want to know is how they explain why it exists. So far as I can tell, Objectivists prove that morals are objective by banging on the table when they say it is so.<br /><br /><br />>Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-55213516588740380892014-01-28T11:46:04.479-05:002014-01-28T11:46:04.479-05:00> Moral realism is the position that morality i...> Moral realism is the position that morality is in some way real.<br /><br />You mean, as in objective?<br /><br />> If someone wants to use the moral argument for God's existence then they will have to show that morality exists, and that all possible accounts of nontheistic morality theories fail for grounding that morality. <br /><br />Sounds like the way you construct the Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-31616418120423592332014-01-28T09:49:52.470-05:002014-01-28T09:49:52.470-05:00Moral realism is the position that morality is in ...Moral realism is the position that morality is in some way real.<br /><br />A nontheistic account of morality tries to ground morality in a way that does not appeal to a God. <br /><br />If someone wants to use the moral argument for God's existence then they will have to show that morality exists, and that all possible accounts of nontheistic morality theories fail for grounding that Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-17194685812557775422014-01-28T09:44:44.414-05:002014-01-28T09:44:44.414-05:00After all, a secular moral code would have to be b...After all, a secular moral code would have to be based on some form of consensus, would it not? Probably some of that consensus would form around instinct, other parts of it around reason, but ultimately a sustained majority becomes convinced one way or the other and then holds that view until they change their minds again.<br /><br />But if the majority opinion is always right, that fact has Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-16791858707637360272014-01-28T09:35:34.275-05:002014-01-28T09:35:34.275-05:00> However, for a person to argue that there is ...> However, for a person to argue that there is no morality without God would have to show that all nontheistic accounts of morality fail to ground moral realism and that all future nontheistic accounts of morality fail as well. <br /><br />What does "realism" mean when morality is merely a matter of human opinion?<br /><br />I think it would be on the atheist to define "moral Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-65331729368168188492014-01-28T09:32:02.520-05:002014-01-28T09:32:02.520-05:00I think Shelly kagan did a find job during his enc...I think Shelly kagan did a find job during his encounter with Craig. However, for a person to argue that there is no morality without God would have to show that all nontheistic accounts of morality fail to ground moral realism and that all future nontheistic accounts of morality fail as well. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-47676869438176007652014-01-28T08:45:43.682-05:002014-01-28T08:45:43.682-05:00> I feel like we are going around in circles.
...> I feel like we are going around in circles.<br /><br />Maybe you are, Ky.<br /><br />> Because the Constitution of the U.S. requires you to respect other people's rights.<br /><br />If there are no absolutes, what makes the Constitution absolute?<br /><br />> If you don't want to respect them because that's the best way to protect your own rights, then you can be compelled Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-41698697240931435862014-01-28T08:38:04.834-05:002014-01-28T08:38:04.834-05:00> Didn't the Yale professor show to Craig t...> Didn't the Yale professor show to Craig that God was not necessary for morality? Thus meaning there was no logical incoherence with nontheism and moral realism?<br /><br />It depends on what you mean when you use the term 'morality', and on the nature of that morality.<br /><br />If you mean simply a set of rules that society as a whole adopts for the sake of order and an Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-7825740992728576322014-01-28T08:21:16.004-05:002014-01-28T08:21:16.004-05:00Didn't the Yale professor show to Craig that G...Didn't the Yale professor show to Craig that God was not necessary for morality? Thus meaning there was no logical incoherence with nontheism and moral realism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-53465777126028141562011-11-09T19:16:01.793-05:002011-11-09T19:16:01.793-05:00Lee,
"I just want to know why you believe an...Lee,<br /><br />"I just want to know why you believe anyone is obligated to respect rights, when they are mere conventions, not endowed by our Creator. Why is nothing absolute, except the obligation to respect someone else's rights?"<br /><br />I feel like we are going around in circles. Because the Constitution of the U.S. requires you to respect other people's rights. If youKyCobbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-45100209937773067082011-11-09T14:19:38.932-05:002011-11-09T14:19:38.932-05:00'We come to know things by their natures.'...'We come to know things by their natures.'<br /><br />How do we figure out what the 'nature' of genocide is? <br /><br />Tomato, tomato, Francis. <br /><br />I choose my moral standard arbitrarily, you pick the 'nature' of things arbitrarily and then derive your moral code from those 'natures'. <br /> <br />'Genocide is what it is regardless of what a Singringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02180277470418724600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-22475720195972651472011-11-09T14:03:27.017-05:002011-11-09T14:03:27.017-05:00'Well, that's fine with me, because it ill...'Well, that's fine with me, because it illustrates my point. Go ahead and assume the absolute worst about me. '<br /><br />Lee, isn't it you who keeps making these 'your view - not mine' allegations? <br /><br />If you object to my assumption - tell me where I'm wrong - if God commended you to treat blacks and women with disrespect - would you do that?<br /><br />If Singringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02180277470418724600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-41436074807698262992011-11-09T13:01:18.927-05:002011-11-09T13:01:18.927-05:00Francis J. Beckwith said...
But since I already kn...Francis J. Beckwith said...<br /><i>But since I already know that some acts are intrinsically wrong and some ends are intrinsic to the nature of things (e.g., knowledge is better than ignorance), I know that nominalism is false.</i><br /><br />Thak you for explaining how your arbitrary determination of the natural purpose of something, and therefore morality concerning it, is so much superior to One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-28668751091919162532011-11-09T10:11:56.588-05:002011-11-09T10:11:56.588-05:00"if we are talking about genocide as it is de..."if we are talking about genocide as it is defined today by the UN"<br /><br />Bingo. <br /><br />So, if the UN "defined" genocide as pulling flowers, then that would become genocide? Of course not. We come to know things by their natures. Genocide is what it is regardless of what a powerful political body says it is. If you think that the latter is the way we know things, Francis Beckwithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03765632359220115150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-53720610024217395142011-11-09T09:01:40.455-05:002011-11-09T09:01:40.455-05:00> That's pretty obviously not my view, so I...> That's pretty obviously not my view, so I have to assume you haven't read anything I've written on this thread for comprehension, since you omitted the "enlightened" part before "self-interest."<br /><br />All I did was remove the question-begging epithet. The word "enlightened" in this context, can mean anything you want it to mean. And therefore,Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-28704231604160465962011-11-09T08:51:44.870-05:002011-11-09T08:51:44.870-05:00> So if it wasn't for God ordering you to d...> So if it wasn't for God ordering you to do so, you wouldn't treat women and blacks with respect?<br /><br />I knew you would have something to say about this. Pavlov's dog, meet Singring.<br /><br />> I don't think that needs any further elaboration.<br /><br />You mean, other than that you are willing to always assume the worst possible interpretation of what I (or Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-23960418471094126152011-11-09T07:38:07.765-05:002011-11-09T07:38:07.765-05:00Lee,
"I think you settled the issue: since t...Lee,<br /><br />"I think you settled the issue: since this is not a question of morality, therefore, nobody is obligated to extend what you think are "rights" to anyone. There are only practical considerations to consider, not moral ones. We (that is, the collective "we") do what we're forced to do, until we have the upper hand.<br /><br />Your view, not mine."<KyCobbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-1880742212095863892011-11-09T05:16:58.748-05:002011-11-09T05:16:58.748-05:00'So I extend (for example) a recognition of th...'So I extend (for example) a recognition of the rights of blacks and women not because I think there's something in it for me, but because God has bestowed these rights on them, same as me, and He obligates me to treat them with respect.'<br /><br />So if it wasn't for God ordering you to do so, you wouldn't treat women and blacks with respect?<br /><br />I don't think Singringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02180277470418724600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-72286193549571436182011-11-08T23:17:14.824-05:002011-11-08T23:17:14.824-05:00I think you settled the issue: since this is not ...I think you settled the issue: since this is not a question of morality, therefore, nobody is obligated to extend what you think are "rights" to anyone. There are only practical considerations to consider, not moral ones. We (that is, the collective "we") do what we're forced to do, until we have the upper hand.<br /><br />Your view, not mine.<br /><br />If you are a Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12974887002402743628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-20704454786115663542011-11-08T20:47:51.133-05:002011-11-08T20:47:51.133-05:00Lee,
I guess I haven't been clear after all. ...Lee,<br /><br />I guess I haven't been clear after all. I call it enlightened self-interest. Most people want their rights protected, and that is likeliest to occur in a society like ours, in which we agree to protect everyone's rights. When one belongs to a despised minority, as I do, protecting the rights of other despised minorities is the same thing as protecting my own.KyCobbnoreply@blogger.com