2 of 7
2
Is Murder Wrong If There Is No God?
Posted: 20 July 2017 08:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
john76 - 02 May 2017 06:25 PM

If we are not to have moral relativism, we need to establish what the objective criteria is for judging that murder is wrong.

Nothing is wrong, if there is no Maker; not in any other way than whatever material consequences follow from actions and choices.  There is no “evil,” if there is no God.  It’s a made up concept.  You’re stuck with moral relativism.  Which most people are OK with.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 09:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1307
Joined  2005-01-14

Ah, a nihilist!  While it’s true that morality is a made up concept, I don’t think it’s a question of moral relativism.  That would imply that morals are completely random.  Society does by and large come to a certain consensus about what is moral behavior and what isn’t.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 11:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Advocatus - 21 July 2017 09:41 AM

Ah, a nihilist!  While it’s true that morality is a made up concept, I don’t think it’s a question of moral relativism.  That would imply that morals are completely random.  Society does by and large come to a certain consensus about what is moral behavior and what isn’t.

I’m a Christian, not a nihilist.

I am unaware that moral relativism implies randomness.

Society coming to consensus about morals is moral relativism.  At least, that’s what I meant by moral relativism.  If that’s improper definition, mea culpa.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 11:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1541
Joined  2012-04-25
Nihilo - 21 July 2017 11:08 AM
Advocatus - 21 July 2017 09:41 AM

Ah, a nihilist!  While it’s true that morality is a made up concept, I don’t think it’s a question of moral relativism.  That would imply that morals are completely random.  Society does by and large come to a certain consensus about what is moral behavior and what isn’t.

I’m a Christian, not a nihilist.

I am unaware that moral relativism implies randomness.

Society coming to consensus about morals is moral relativism.  At least, that’s what I meant by moral relativism.  If that’s improper definition, mea culpa.

Actually Christians are nihilists in practice. If a belief system supposedly derived from a single source can inspire people to both save and kill lives, brother that’s nihilism. Of course Christians won’t admit it, and each of the factions, the kill and the save factions, both believe their interpretation is THE correct one. Can’t believe opposite things and have the source not therefore be considered worthless.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 11:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
CuthbertJ - 21 July 2017 11:44 AM
Nihilo - 21 July 2017 11:08 AM

I’m a Christian, not a nihilist.

I am unaware that moral relativism implies randomness.

Society coming to consensus about morals is moral relativism.  At least, that’s what I meant by moral relativism.  If that’s improper definition, mea culpa.

Actually Christians are nihilists in practice. If a belief system supposedly derived from a single source can inspire people to both save and kill lives, brother that’s nihilism. Of course Christians won’t admit it, and each of the factions, the kill and the save factions, both believe their interpretation is THE correct one. Can’t believe opposite things and have the source not therefore be considered worthless.

So Christian = nihilist now?  OK . . . .

“Interpretations” are going beyond what I’ve written.  Christians believe in the RESURRECTION of Christ.  While there are today reportedly thousands of differing interpretations of the RESURRECTION, and what it means for us today in our daily lives, the RESURRECTION itself is the “central” and “crowning” truth* of the one Christian faith, and the belief thereof is what constitutes being a Christian.


* - The Catechism of the Catholic Church

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 03:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7752
Joined  2009-02-26

Is Murder Right if there is a God?

Seems to me a lot of Murders have been committed in the Name of God.

George Carlin put all this in proper perspective. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEi3Gaptaas

[ Edited: 21 July 2017 04:47 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 04:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4069
Joined  2009-10-21
Nihilo - 20 July 2017 08:41 PM
john76 - 02 May 2017 06:25 PM

If we are not to have moral relativism, we need to establish what the objective criteria is for judging that murder is wrong.

Nothing is wrong, if there is no Maker; not in any other way than whatever material consequences follow from actions and choices.  There is no “evil,” if there is no God.  It’s a made up concept.  You’re stuck with moral relativism.  Which most people are OK with.

I can remember coming across moral relativism arguments in forums years ago. At the time, I didn’t immediately form an opinion and jump in. I looked around, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt. I’m wondering if you have done any of that? Do you consider yourself an expert on moral theories? Or did you just hear the term, decide there isn’t any other option and start looking for forums where you could tell people what you discovered? Seriously, I’d really like to know what motivated you.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 July 2017 07:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Lausten - 21 July 2017 04:15 PM

I can remember coming across moral relativism arguments in forums years ago. At the time, I didn’t immediately form an opinion and jump in. I looked around, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt. I’m wondering if you have done any of that? Do you consider yourself an expert on moral theories? Or did you just hear the term, decide there isn’t any other option and start looking for forums where you could tell people what you discovered? Seriously, I’d really like to know what motivated you.

And I don’t care what you’d really like to know.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 12:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  225
Joined  2017-07-06
Nihilo - 21 July 2017 07:25 PM
Lausten - 21 July 2017 04:15 PM

I can remember coming across moral relativism arguments in forums years ago. At the time, I didn’t immediately form an opinion and jump in. I looked around, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt. I’m wondering if you have done any of that? Do you consider yourself an expert on moral theories? Or did you just hear the term, decide there isn’t any other option and start looking for forums where you could tell people what you discovered? Seriously, I’d really like to know what motivated you.

And I don’t care what you’d really like to know.

Nihilo so slavery was moral in the past as condoned by your “God” in the Bible but not now??

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 06:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  249
Joined  2017-06-25
JohnH - 25 June 2017 07:37 PM

A fundamental requirement of many animal societies is cooperation. Optimizing function of cooperating members benefits the society. Eliminating contributing members disrupts the function of society. Disapproval of murder discourages eliminating functional members of a society. Societies that disapprove of murder have a positive “fitness point” in their evolutionary favor.

That makes sense to me, and is well stated. 

But it also raises the question of whether making the case in a dry logical intellectual form like this is an adequate method of persuading vast populations to not murder.  As example, would we use the above explanation, accurate as it seems to be, to explain to children why they should not murder?  Would that explanation even be sufficient to persuade us to not murder, assuming we found ourselves in a circumstance where that option was being considered?

How important is the prohibition on murder to society?  How serious are we about having a “positive fitness point in our evolutionary favor”?  Are we serious enough to present the case in a manner which is most persuasive to the greatest number of people?  Or will we limit our presentation to those methods which we ourselves find the most agreeable?

If a God is needed as a threat to keep large populations from accepting murder as a way of life, will we accept a God?

 Signature 

Countdown To Zero - Nuclear Weapons Documentary

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 12:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4256
Joined  2014-06-20

It!s just as wrong as if there is one. It all comes doen to individual opinion. Nothing more. Just because you make up a god to support your opinion doesn’t give it any credibility. Opinion os opinion whether you make up a god to agree with you or not.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 02:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7752
Joined  2009-02-26

Humans are social animals, different from solitary predatory species.

All social animals tend to have a common cause, maintaining the social structure and common defense of the group..

This common cause incentive can already be found in hive insects, herd animals, monkeys, and other hominoids.

It is a natural survival mechanism. Nothing special about it. Even as within the group there may be competition for dominance, in times of an emergency threatening the existence of the hive, herd, or troupe, everyone pulls together.

[ Edited: 22 July 2017 03:10 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 05:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Adamski - 22 July 2017 12:54 AM

Nihilo so slavery was moral in the past as condoned by your “God” in the Bible but not now??

What?

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 06:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4069
Joined  2009-10-21
Write4U - 22 July 2017 02:14 PM

Humans are social animals, different from solitary predatory species.

All social animals tend to have a common cause, maintaining the social structure and common defense of the group..

This common cause incentive can already be found in hive insects, herd animals, monkeys, and other hominoids.

It is a natural survival mechanism. Nothing special about it. Even as within the group there may be competition for dominance, in times of an emergency threatening the existence of the hive, herd, or troupe, everyone pulls together.

Very concise and accurate. Also points out the problem of tribalism. It’s good to work together, but that sometimes means working against a rival tribe. Of course that tribe sees it as good that they are working together too.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 July 2017 07:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4069
Joined  2009-10-21
Nihilo - 22 July 2017 05:56 PM
Adamski - 22 July 2017 12:54 AM

Nihilo so slavery was moral in the past as condoned by your “God” in the Bible but not now??

What?

If the maker decides what is good, how do we judge if the maker is good?

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 7
2