- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 42,486
- Reaction score
- 9,148
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I already answered most of that in in post 108.
Nope, I said making something legal/illegal doesnt make it moral/immoral that doesnt mean morality cannot change it just means that legal/illegal does not mean moral/immoral.
Nowhere in that statement does it say that morals are immutable I only stated that they are not equivalent to laws.
So back to my question is slavery moral?
What philosophy, which philosopher(s)? Cite.
No a priori proof has ever been offered for the existence of a single, objective, standard of morality.
So saying that this is "just" my opinion is like saying that a disbelief in unicorns is "just" an opinion.
I'm perfectly willing to believe in objective morality if someone can prove to me that it exists.
Absent that, belief in objective morality is like belief in the Lock Ness Monster, faires, or dragons.
I'm willing to bet that your belief in objective morality is somehow tied to your belief in some religious doctrine or theology (or, much less likely, to Kant's categorical imperative, which though in itself objective is really subjective as it leaves the determination of what rules should be objectively held up to each individual).
Anyhow, you believe that some standard of morality is objective because of an appeal to what you've been told about God.
Thing is, not everyone believes in the same God or religion.
Consequently, not everyone holds the same moral standard, and it's possible for people to hold two very different moral standards and for both to claim that their standard is objective.
If two people hold differing moral standards and both claim that their standard, based on their understanding of their God/religion is objective, how do we decide who is right?
Would you say all Muslims are terrorists?
Sometimes it is for the good of society to eliminate certain groups of people.
The Nazi and those who supported Hitler understood that not only Germany, but the world will be better off without any Jews. They also included the Rom gypsies. The Nazis targetted the mentally/physically handicapped (who were viewed as useless to society), to be murdered in what they called the "T-4," or "euthanasia," program.
By your reasoning, Hitler had a justifiable reason, and his acts were not immoral.
Empathy didn't evolve. We've had empathy all along! It came along with all the other feelings.
Sympathy is the capacity to feel deeply for someone because you do, in fact, share the experience. If you got burned, you know how getting burnt must feel like. Empathy is being able to imagine what one must be going through because you've had the same or similar experience.
How can you give a label to something that doesn't give any explanation as to what it is?
How can you identify it if we don't know exactly what something looks like, or what makes it that?
They are constructs of humanity, understood through intelligence and reason. This has been the subject of philosophy for centuries now.
Empathy is associated with the animals with more sophisticated brains. It probably did evolve.
No.
This should be interesting.
If two people hold differing moral standards and both claim that their standard, based on their understanding of their God/religion is objective, how do we decide who is right?
That's what Hard Truth had claimed in another section.
I'm saying, God is the basis for all morals - it's the standard from which moral values are based.
I'd like to try to prove this. So I'd like for you to please answer this.
If I shoot a pedestrian in the face with a shotgun.......is that good or bad?
I guess you didnt read post 108
Is slavery moral?
You're conflating "why" and "what". You don't need to know "why" to know "what". You don't need to know why that mountain exists to know that the mountain exists, that it's X ft tall, that its peaks are covered with snow, that it's difficult to climb etc etc. The vast majority of people, you certainly included, actually have no idea why certain things seem to be right/wrong, but that is no barrier to them believing that they are.
Why does it have to evolve?
Empathy could also have been with them all this time, along with whatever feelings they might also possess!
I've already answered a post that brought up Biblical slavery! In Biblical times, slavery wasn't like the kind we've got in modern times. In Biblical times, it was the norm for people to voluntarily "sign up" for slavery that they can be cared for by their masters, and to indenture themselves to pay their debts.
There are laws/provisions in the Scriptures to protect slaves/indentured servants.
The scriptures DO sanction slavery.The Scriptures does not sanction HUMAN TRAFFICKING! I've already explained about this extensively in another topic way back!
Bringing up slavery is a strawman. :roll:
I've already answered a post that brought up Biblical slavery! In Biblical times, slavery wasn't like the kind we've got in modern times. In Biblical times, it was the norm for people to voluntarily "sign up" for slavery that they can be cared for by their masters, and to indenture themselves to pay their debts.
There are laws/provisions in the Scriptures to protect slaves/indentured servants.
The Scriptures does not sanction HUMAN TRAFFICKING! I've already explained about this extensively in another topic way back!
Bringing up slavery is a strawman. :roll:
It was already explained.Well explain exactly....consider me a dummy. Educate me. Give a little workshop: Explanation of "Framework" for Dummies.
Be explicit in your explanation - step by step, please. Think of me as a pre-schooler as you would explain the concept of math to me.
You seem to be putting words in my mouth.
Where did I say, "it's NEVER MORAL to kill a child?" Cite.
Ok, so were doing semantics. Anyway, where's this proof that God is the source of all morals?
Yes you don't need to know why a mountain exists, but you have to know what a mountain is.
The claim was just about harm, it didn't specify if the harm was justified or not, and that was my point.We're talking about unjustified harm. It's bad.
Characteristics of lifeforms that improve the odds of survival and/or reproduction are more likely to be passed on to their offspring, and over time, become more common. Empathy appears to help many species of animals live and work together, increasing their chances for survival. It probably helps with hunting also. Empathy isn't just a feeling, it requires significant brain processing power to make an educated guess about what another is thinking/feeling, which is why I doubt that it exists among creatures with much simpler brains.
:roll:Empathy isn't just a feeling, it requires significant brain processing power to make an educated guess about what another is thinking/feeling,
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?