It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You have provided a rationale for a higher authority being required for mankind to be governed by in order to exist under one, universally accepted or standard moral code. It was my assumption you meant a god figure of some sort.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by Furbs
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Furbs
Again, this is retread, and you can simply reread out discussion to see where this is going. It is your SUBJECTIVE morality that gives you the impression that murder and rape is morally wrong everywhere, just as it can be another's SUBJECTIVE morality that murder and rape everywhere is not wrong.
PRECISELY!!! That's why I specifically said that if you want a morality that is APPLICABLE to all mankind, it must appeal to an authority HIGHER THAN MANKIND. Your examples are MEN APPEALING TO MEN for authority applicable to all mankind. If men are appealing to their own subjective morality it's NOT applicable to all people, only the person themselves.
lol @ "re-read" the discussion.
There is no morality applicable to all men, only morality that YOU believe should be applicable to all men.
Okay cool, then I'd better never see another thread detailing how God is unjust, immoral, or evil. Since, after all, morality is subjective and all that jazz.
Originally posted by Garfee
reply to post by NOTurTypical
Instead, could a moral code possibly be written into our very genes? Is it possible that human beings have an inate sense of what is right and wrong and some either have mental deficiency or simply ignore it and have the stomach to deal with the consequences?
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
Sometimes with debates - beauty (and truth) is in the eye of the beholder. Same as here at ATS
No, truth isn't relative.
prove it
please
:-)
If you believe truth is relative how exactly can I "prove" anything at all to you?
Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
Ted Bundy and Subjectivism
^ Yeah, enough said about subjectivism. That breaks the rule of divine law, because objectivism being universal, one would say that someone who thinks like Ted Bundy or did what he did is pure EVIL...Trust me a lot of criminals are subjectivists...edit on 7-3-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)edit on 7-3-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)
Well apparently Dawkins must of felt that the knowledge Dr. Craig had about moral objectivism was irrefutable. Which probably means Dr. Craig had a better universal grounding. So yeah, think the video debates tell a lot as well...
The subjectivist being Dawkins, and the objectivist is being Dr. Craig... Yes it is up to discussion, but how far can this go on for until it becomes squash...
"Yesterday gravity held me on the ground, I hope gravity is the same today as yesterday, I have tons of errands to do. Please be true today gravity!"
exactly
let me ask you something - do you believe truth is absolute - or do you know it?
which team are you arguing for NOTurTypical? - I'm confused :-)
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
which team are you arguing for NOTurTypical? - I'm confused :-)
Now I'm confused, what do you mean? I was originally arguing that Dawkins is correct, no one can be certain God doesn't exist without the attributes of God Himself. After that I've been arguing Philosophy. In that fight my dog is moral objectivity or absolute truth.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
exactly
let me ask you something - do you believe truth is absolute - or do you know it?
I believe it to be so. Obviously truth could be relative in some alternate dimension or reality, but based on what I've been able to see here on Earth truth is absolute. And I see no reason at this time to doubt it's the same way throughout the universe.
so - there can be no one truth for the humans
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
so - there can be no one truth for the humans
I can think of one right off the bat. Humans require oxygen to live.
That's an absolute truth. Or are you arguing that only human morality is relative?
I don't want to assume either.
Well this is an interesting development