Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11
Results 201 to 206 of 206
  1. #201
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Either way, the one who has it right has a superior belief. And the system that exists is superior to the system that does not exist.

    And you are ok till "the system that exists is superior" ......at this point your argument fails.

    A correct "belief" has absolutely no affect on the superiority of the system, only its correct identification, nothing more.

  2. #202
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,444
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    And you are ok till "the system that exists is superior" ......at this point your argument fails.
    No, it doesn't.

    That which exists IS superior to that which does not exist.

    If you had to get somewhere fast, which would be better at helping you get - the car that exists or the car that does not exist? The car that exists is CLEARLY superior to the car that does not exist and the same principle applies here.

    And in my last post, I fully explained my rationale for holding that one is superior over the other but you did not address it so I will paste it into this post.

    Either:

    1. Morality is objective and those who forward subjective morality are misidentifying the actual source of morality and therefore, all else being equal, have an inferior moral system to those who do correctly hold that certain moral position are objectively true.

    Or

    2. Morality is subjective and those who forward that morality is based on human beings, all else being equal, have a superior moral system to those those attribute morality to something that doesn't even exist.


    As demonstrated above, that which is correct is superior to the alternative.

    So unless you have a rebuttal for what's above, it stands and therefore I've shown that whichever is correct is superior to the other.
    Last edited by mican333; August 15th, 2017 at 06:22 AM.

  3. #203
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    No, it doesn't.

    That which exists IS superior to that which does not exist.

    If you had to get somewhere fast, which would be better at helping you get - the car that exists or the car that does not exist? The car that exists is CLEARLY superior to the car that does not exist and the same principle applies here.

    And in my last post, I fully explained my rationale for holding that one is superior over the other but you did not address it so I will paste it into this post.

    Either:

    1. Morality is objective and those who forward subjective morality are misidentifying the actual source of morality and therefore, all else being equal, have an inferior moral system to those who do correctly hold that certain moral position are objectively true.

    Or

    2. Morality is subjective and those who forward that morality is based on human beings, all else being equal, have a superior moral system to those those attribute morality to something that doesn't even exist.


    As demonstrated above, that which is correct is superior to the alternative.

    So unless you have a rebuttal for what's above, it stands and therefore I've shown that whichever is correct is superior to the other.

    Ok, I give. I will endeavor to sharpen my communication skills, but in another thread, cause I just ain't getting thru in this one.

    Whatever the current state of morals in our universe may be, it is superior, as defined by the Op.
    (superior to what though, since you only allow the current state to be explored? seems quite a short list to pick from.....)

    Till we meet again sir,

  4. #204
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    30
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    From their offspring.

    Genesis 5:4 (NASB)
    4*Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    So you are forwarding that Adam had children with his daughters and/or Eve had children with their sons and/or their children had children together?
    And that all of humanity has been produced from these relationships?
    I am forwarding that Adam and Eve's children had children with their brothers and sisters. Cain married his sister and had offspring. Seth had offspring with another sister, and so on. My contention (the biblical view) is that humanity started with Adam and Eve.

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    I have found that some atheists live better lives than Christians do. The question is how they justify what they believe. I do not see their worldview as able to make sense of morality.
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If they are living "better", do they really need to "justify" it?
    No, if they are not trying to justify their belief.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Who do they need to "justifying" it to ?
    The problem arises once they seek to justify that their belief as "better." Then their system miserably falls apart. They don't have the means to justify it other than by might makes right. Why is one personal preference any BETTER than any other?

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Lot's of this doesn't make sense. Adding God does not clear it all up.
    Sure it answers some questions, but then it asks a whole bunch more.....
    How does an atheist make sense of why their relative opinion is any better than any other? If no objective reference point for "better" exists (best) then what does he compare his standard too that is meaningful? How is his system of "better" actually "Better than Hitler's or Kim Jong-un's? How does an atheist convince someone of the superiority of his belief - other than by force. He doesn't have an ultimate measure, a fixed reference point that is best. IT IS ALL RELATIVE. He is trying to convince you to accept what he LIKES, what he PREFERS. Why SHOULD you, other than he is going to force you if he is stronger than you or because you like it too? How does he get SUPERIOR other than by strength? He has nothing to compare superior to but what he likes (unless he borrows from a system of thought (the Christian worldview) that can justify itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    How did that meaning originate?
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    It originated when I was born, as with all life.
    No, it did not. The meaning was there BEFORE you were born unless you believe that you are the cause of all things but don't really understand how you did it. (^8

    Neither you nor I am necessary for morality. It did not originate from us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I think maybe ALL life has the SAME "meaning". From a bacteria to human and every other form of life that may exist anywhere.

    Whatever your personal values, you have to admit, life is a pretty damn incredible thing!
    What human ever could have imagined such a "thing"
    What meaning are you assigning all life?

    Peter

  5. #205
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,444
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Ok, I give. I will endeavor to sharpen my communication skills, but in another thread, cause I just ain't getting thru in this one.
    It's not your ability to communicate what you mean that's the problem. The problem is that you aren't addressing my argument.

    Here is my argument again:

    Either:

    1. Morality is objective and those who forward subjective morality are misidentifying the actual source of morality and therefore, all else being equal, have an inferior moral system to those who do correctly hold that certain moral position are objectively true.

    Or

    2. Morality is subjective and those who forward that morality is based on human beings, all else being equal, have a superior moral system to those those attribute morality to something that doesn't even exist.

    As demonstrated above, that which is correct is superior to the alternative.



    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Whatever the current state of morals in our universe may be, it is superior, as defined by the Op.
    (superior to what though, since you only allow the current state to be explored? seems quite a short list to pick from.....)
    Well, read my argument. What am I comparing objective morality to? What am I comparing subjective morality to? I'm comparing them to each other.

    So yes, it is a short list. There are two options. If you don't want to compare the two things that the OP and the very title of the thread is comparing, then I guess you don't really have a valid rebuttal to the OP.
    Last edited by mican333; August 15th, 2017 at 09:03 PM.

  6. #206
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    97
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Objective morality vs. subjective morality

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    I am forwarding that Adam and Eve's children had children with their brothers and sisters. Cain married his sister and had offspring. Seth had offspring with another sister, and so on. My contention (the biblical view) is that humanity started with Adam and Eve.
    Peter

    I see.
    Our DNA seems to show that we are not descended from a single parent (since Eve was "born" of Adam's rib, she would have the same DNA). It also shows that all life on this planet shares some common DNA.

    If brothers and sisters had children together today, all sorts of abnormalities become dominant. Why is this an issue today, if not in the past?

    ---------- Post added at 06:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:18 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    No, if they are not trying to justify their belief.
    I do like your attitude

    ---------- Post added at 06:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:19 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    The problem arises once they seek to justify that their belief as "better." Then their system miserably falls apart. They don't have the means to justify it other than by might makes right. Why is one personal preference any BETTER than any other?
    Mican and I have been discussing this point, but we don't seem to agree.

    ---------- Post added at 06:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    How does an atheist make sense of why their relative opinion is any better than any other? If no objective reference point for "better" exists (best) then what does he compare his standard too that is meaningful? How is his system of "better" actually "Better than Hitler's or Kim Jong-un's? How does an atheist convince someone of the superiority of his belief - other than by force. He doesn't have an ultimate measure, a fixed reference point that is best. IT IS ALL RELATIVE. He is trying to convince you to accept what he LIKES, what he PREFERS. Why SHOULD you, other than he is going to force you if he is stronger than you or because you like it too? How does he get SUPERIOR other than by strength? He has nothing to compare superior to but what he likes (unless he borrows from a system of thought (the Christian worldview) that can justify itself.
    Well, perhaps start with a premise something similar to the Ten Commandments for instance. I don't think it (always) takes force for someone to see a major positive vs a major negative.

    On another note, it very well could be we actually live in a subjectively moral universe, and yet, we still can discuss what an objective system's particular's could be. So why couldn't a subjective system, mirror an objective system

    ---------- Post added at 06:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:31 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    No, it did not. The meaning was there BEFORE you were born unless you believe that you are the cause of all things but don't really understand how you did it. (^8

    Neither you nor I am necessary for morality. It did not originate from us.
    Hmmm. I thought you meant my personal life. Prior to being born, I don't believe my life had meaning. When I was born, it then did have meaning. But if you just mean my being "born", it had the same meaning like the start of any life form.

    Apparently, fairly special, as all we can find anywhere but earth is seemingly desolate.

    ---------- Post added at 07:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    What meaning are you assigning all life?
    Peter
    I am forwarding that life here in earth seems pretty unique/special. As far as we know, unique to earth. In that, since the universe is too huge for a human to actually grasp, life is indeed special. Certainly not just human life, but all life. It matters not, if "we" (earth) are the only life in the near solar system or the only life in the universe. Life is indeed special and unique. And it should be thought of in this way.

    I don't know how to answer your question better than that.

 

 
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11

Similar Threads

  1. Objective Morality and atheism
    By CliveStaples in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: September 16th, 2012, 02:36 PM
  2. Is God Necessary for Objective Morality?
    By estill in forum Religion
    Replies: 190
    Last Post: June 14th, 2012, 09:26 PM
  3. Objective morality is effectively useless
    By mican333 in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: September 11th, 2011, 06:59 AM
  4. Subjective Morality Is Pointless
    By MyXenocide in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: September 7th, 2011, 07:00 PM
  5. Subjective Morality
    By mican333 in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: July 19th, 2011, 07:44 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •