Atheist Join Me Please, I need some questions answered.

a reply to: windword

Well define objective for me first so we can make sure we know what kind of truth I would need to present.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

How about....Objective Ideal (Morality): An ideal that isn't just beneficial for one person, or group of people, at any given place or time, but that is found to be universally beneficial, in any given place, at any given time under any given circumstance.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Do you think there has to be shadows?

a reply to: windword

Sure. Justice. Honest. Fairness. Loyalty. Modesty.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Sorry, not seeing it. You're going to have to be more specific. Can you show me any examples of objective justice, honesty, fairness, loyalty, modesty...?

a reply to: windword

Sorry, not seeing it. You're going to have to be more specific. Can you show me any examples of objective justice, honesty, fairness, loyalty, modesty...?

I am sorry? It seems to me we have some miscommunication. People may disagree over what is just but they will not disagree that justice is good? This is not an objective truth any ways. This is an objective moral value or principle depending on how your defining your terms. I asked you if I could give you an objective truth not an objective moral ideal?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

We've been down this rabbit hole before. I've asked you for an example of objective truth or morality and you've never been able to give me one. Justice is a concept, not a moral truth. Justice is in the eye of the beholder, just like good and evil. Same with the rest of your examples.

a reply to: windword

Ok first. A littel about me . I perceive things. I see I hear I smell I feel. We can call this the phenomena of perception. I am aware that I am perceiving . Regardless of the nature of my perceptions they are still there. So it is objectively true that perception is a phenomena in reality.

Now back to justice. I disagree with the statement that Justice is in the eye of the beholder. What is just may be disagreed upon. This does not mean the people don't strive for justice. There are no societies that value injustice over justice or dishonesty over honesty. We cannot even discuss morals if we do not have an agreement upon these moral principles. People argue about what is moral. How could you argue about what is moral if there wasn't some agreed upon standard of what your arguing. We cannot disagree upon what is just if we don't know what we mean by just.....

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You look at things from a human perspective. You say that honesty is an objective moral value, yet we find the opposite in nature, too many times to count.

What you consider to be your personal perception of what is "phenomenal" is subjective too, not objective. From a universal viewpoint, what you consider perception may be nothing more than a reactionary mechanism of a physical universe. Once the cue hits the ball, everything is already set in motion, regardless of good or evil outcomes.

Justice? As the "Good Book" says, "It is the same for all, since the same event happens to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice. As the good one is, so is the sinner, and he who swears is as he who shuns an oath."