| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/06/2007 02:17:39 PM · #951 |
Originally posted by RonB:
So, if I may be permitted to restate:
Any wager is made with the "assumption" ( in the mind of the one making the wager ) that either the odds or the potential gain for winning the wager is sufficient to outweigh the odds or the potential loss for losing the wager, regardless of what the stated odds or statistical probabilities are.
What do you think? Is that a more accurate statement? |
Yup :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 02:19:27 PM · #952 |
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by milo655321:
Is it a Christian principle to defend genocide and slavery as moral? Iâve seen Christians do that in defense of the commandments of the God of the Old Testament. I consider that a waste of time. Did you find that illuminating as well? |
Forget the specifics; based on what you are saying, one could deduce that you believe to choose a moral code and follow it all your days is a waste of a life...
R |
Depends upon the moral code, wouldnât you agree? |
Well, sure, but... That's not what you said/how you stated it. Your original statement was in the form of the absolute I reduced above.
R.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 02:28:43 PM · #953 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
However, I don't think that what I wrote went so far as to imply that someone develop their sense of right and wrong in a vacuum, without regarding what has gone before. I don't even think that's possible in today's world. I did suggest that someone should decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong without simply accepting what some church tells them is right or wrong, independent of their own thought.
Blind acceptance of dogma leads to people believing that that they will be divinely rewarded for strapping on an explosive vest and blowing up a school or making their kids drink the purple Kool-Aid before they themselves drink.
Do you believe that the blame for the moral chaos and fraying of society today rests on the shoulders of those who think for themselves? |
This doesn't work, though. Society itself relies on people accepting certain codes and adhering to them. The alternative is anarchy, which usually ends up translating into "might makes right". We have what, 4,000 years of Western Civilization that has evolved, largely by trial and error, the codes under which we are able to coexist. And religions, in general, have played a big part in this.
It makes no point to attempt to undermine religions, in general, by posting worst-case examples of how "blind adherence to dogma" has resulted in terrible wrongs. Anything can be corrupted, and at one time or another everything has been.
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives.
R.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 02:37:03 PM · #954 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives.
R. |
Isn't that also truth though for the roughly 1 billion or so non-believers or atheists in the world, too ?
In fact, isn't the statement basically 'by far the majority of people are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives ?'
The 2 billion or so Christians (or half that number if you want to throw the Catholics out of that group) live morally reasonable lives.
Similarly so do the 1.2 billion Muslims, The 1 billion or so Hindus, and so on ?
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 02:37:20 PM · #955 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives. |
Do you have an opinion on the majority of non-believers, that is atheists of all kinds and agnostics? Do most live morally reasonable lives in your view? |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 02:45:32 PM · #956 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Do you believe that the blame for the moral chaos and fraying of society today rests on the shoulders of those who think for themselves? |
To an equal amount as those who do not. |
If they're equal, then the net benefit to following the guidance of others would be zero. Individual thought may not lead to the right answers, but following the thoughts of others often leads to more dire results. Genocide, jihads and wars are not carried out by the people thinking for themselves, but by those who blindly follow what they've been told is the right thing to do. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:09:07 PM · #957 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Do you believe that the blame for the moral chaos and fraying of society today rests on the shoulders of those who think for themselves? |
To an equal amount as those who do not. |
If they're equal, then the net benefit to following the guidance of others would be zero. Individual thought may not lead to the right answers, but following the thoughts of others often leads to more dire results. Genocide, jihads and wars are not carried out by the people thinking for themselves, but by those who blindly follow what they've been told is the right thing to do. |
Maybe I was just giving a political response. And if there is no source for morality outside ourselves, then wouldn't EVERY decision if followed back far enough have come from someone thinking for themselves? So can't we ultimately lay all those bad things you just mentioned at the feet of individual thinkers?
Message edited by author 2007-12-06 15:09:46.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:10:54 PM · #958 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives. |
Do you have an opinion on the majority of non-believers, that is atheists of all kinds and agnostics? Do most live morally reasonable lives in your view? |
I am not sure I would say "most" do. I would state that some do and even that many do. I might even go so far as to say that most try to. However, I'm not sure how I feel about a person whose moral compass is based upon a system where no God provides a consequence. Divine Judgement, to me, is part of the morality associated with a religious belief.
edit to clarify "judgement" as divine judgement
Message edited by author 2007-12-06 15:14:28.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:15:36 PM · #959 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... wouldn't EVERY decision if followed back far enough have come from someone thinking for themselves? So can't we ultimately lay all those bad things you just mentioned at the feet of individual thinkers? |
Out of several billion peole some will have bad thoughts. But it seems it's only when large numbers of others abandon their own individual thoughts and mindlessly follow the doctrines of another that widespread societal catastrophe results.
And they'll quote you in the classroom
That it cannot happen here
But it has happened here
--Phil Ochs (1968)
Message edited by author 2007-12-06 15:16:47. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:16:37 PM · #960 |
Originally posted by Flash:
I am not sure I would say "most" do. I would state that some do and even that many do. I might even go so far as to say that most try to. However, I'm not sure how I feel about a person whose moral compass is based upon a system where no God provides a consequence. Divine Judgement, to me, is part of the morality associated with a religious belief.
edit to clarify "judgement" as divine judgement |
Doesn't that then follow that the only reason you'd do anything good or at least avoid doing anything bad, is because of some sort of divine retribution ? Do you only not kill people because you expect to be punished ?
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:20:23 PM · #961 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
I am not sure I would say "most" do. I would state that some do and even that many do. I might even go so far as to say that most try to. However, I'm not sure how I feel about a person whose moral compass is based upon a system where no God provides a consequence. Divine Judgement, to me, is part of the morality associated with a religious belief.
edit to clarify "judgement" as divine judgement |
Doesn't that then follow that the only reason you'd do anything good or at least avoid doing anything bad, is because of some sort of divine retribution ? Do you only not kill people because you expect to be punished ? |
I do not think that is a good example...because I am not so sure taking a life is bad or morally wrong. It is true, that a reason I do not pursue some certain behaviours, although I may find them fun/pleasing/enjoyable/etc, is because I am attempting to abide by a system to avoid the consequence of devine judgement for those actions.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:21:48 PM · #962 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... wouldn't EVERY decision if followed back far enough have come from someone thinking for themselves? So can't we ultimately lay all those bad things you just mentioned at the feet of individual thinkers? |
Out of several billion peole some will have bad thoughts. But it seems it's only when large numbers of others abandon their own individual thoughts and mindlessly follow the doctrines of another that widespread societal catastrophe results.
And they'll quote you in the classroom
That it cannot happen here
But it has happened here
--Phil Ochs (1968) |
Well, that simply seems to be choosing to lay the blame on the followers rather than the leaders.
The next time I hear "blindly following" do I get to bring up the individual thinker with "no more sense than a bag of hammers"? Are we all just trading worst-case scenarios?
Does everybody believe that every soldier in the German army was blindly following the Nazi regime while every soldier in the Allies army made an individual critical decision to fight?
This whole argument is completely ludicrous. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:22:04 PM · #963 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives. |
Do you have an opinion on the majority of non-believers, that is atheists of all kinds and agnostics? Do most live morally reasonable lives in your view? |
I am not sure I would say "most" do. I would state that some do and even that many do. I might even go so far as to say that most try to. However, I'm not sure how I feel about a person whose moral compass is based upon a system where no God provides a consequence. Divine Judgement, to me, is part of the morality associated with a religious belief.
edit to clarify "judgement" as divine judgement |
In other words, your moral compass is your fear. It seems odd to me that you think the majority of non-believers strive to live morally reasonable lives, yet, judging from your first statement, most are somehow immoral irrespective of this. As though the mere belief in god is the immoral part.
Edit: Gordon and I appear to be sharing a brain today. (No offense Gordon, yours is fatter than mine anyway.)
Message edited by author 2007-12-06 15:23:11. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:24:02 PM · #964 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives.
R. |
Isn't that also truth though for the roughly 1 billion or so non-believers or atheists in the world, too ?
In fact, isn't the statement basically 'by far the majority of people are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives ?'
The 2 billion or so Christians (or half that number if you want to throw the Catholics out of that group) live morally reasonable lives.
Similarly so do the 1.2 billion Muslims, The 1 billion or so Hindus, and so on ? |
Well sure, but the position I was refuting is that "religiously-derived morality is bad because atrocities have been committed by people claiming to act in God's name".
R.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:25:17 PM · #965 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does everybody believe that every soldier in the German army was blindly following the Nazi regime while every soldier in the Allies army made an individual critical decision to fight?
This whole argument is completely ludicrous. |
Amen to that.
R.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:27:47 PM · #966 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I would submit to you that, by and large, most "believers" DO follow the process of self-examination you suggest as the best way to be a moral being. IMO, by far the majority of "believers" are reasonable people living morally reasonable lives. |
Do you have an opinion on the majority of non-believers, that is atheists of all kinds and agnostics? Do most live morally reasonable lives in your view? |
I am not sure I would say "most" do. I would state that some do and even that many do. I might even go so far as to say that most try to. However, I'm not sure how I feel about a person whose moral compass is based upon a system where no God provides a consequence. Divine Judgement, to me, is part of the morality associated with a religious belief.
edit to clarify "judgement" as divine judgement |
In other words, your moral compass is your fear. It seems odd to me that you think the majority of non-believers strive to live morally reasonable lives, yet, judging from your first statement, most are somehow immoral irrespective of this. As though the mere belief in god is the immoral part.
Edit: Gordon and I appear to be sharing a brain today. (No offense Gordon, yours is fatter than mine anyway.) |
I agree that part of my moral compass includes a fear of devine retribution. I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:33:01 PM · #967 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does everybody believe that every soldier in the German army was blindly following the Nazi regime.... |
I happen to be something of an expert on this. An armchair expert, if you will. And, in a certain sense, particularly for this conversation, the answer is "Yes". Critical thinking was not an admired trait in Germany, and even education among the educated (ie university students) was almost absent-mindedly discouraged by way of state-sponsored activities. By the time a kid born in 1923 was ready for the Russian front in 1941, he'd been fed a daily diet of dessicated shit throughout his formative years, so that even pretending not to support the regime and all its actions would have been virtually impossible. The will of a monolithic humanity-devouring movement is implacable. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:33:32 PM · #968 |
Originally posted by Flash:
I agree that part of my moral compass includes a fear of devine retribution. I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most. |
So at least half a billion that don't live morally then, by your reckoning ?
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:36:06 PM · #969 |
Originally posted by Flash:
I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most. |
Then you'd better restate the following (or read my response carefully since, try=strive):
Originally posted by Flash:
I might even go so far as to say that most try to. |
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:36:32 PM · #970 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
I agree that part of my moral compass includes a fear of devine retribution. I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most. |
So at least half a billion that don't live morally then, by your reckoning ? |
The numbers are likely higher.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:38:04 PM · #971 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most. |
Then you'd better restate the following (or read my response carefully since, try=strive):
Originally posted by Flash:
I might even go so far as to say that most try to. |
|
I said that I might go so far, not that I did go so far. Arguments would be needed to sway me, and thus far they have not.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:38:50 PM · #972 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does everybody believe that every soldier in the German army was blindly following the Nazi regime.... |
I happen to be something of an expert on this. An armchair expert, if you will. And, in a certain sense, particularly for this conversation, the answer is "Yes". Critical thinking was not an admired trait in Germany, and even education among the educated (ie university students) was almost absent-mindedly discouraged by way of state-sponsored activities. By the time a kid born in 1923 was ready for the Russian front in 1941, he'd been fed a daily diet of dessicated shit throughout his formative years, so that even pretending not to support the regime and all its actions would have been virtually impossible. The will of a monolithic humanity-devouring movement is implacable. |
So you didn't talk about the other side. You don't think that any large scale operation doesn't require a lot of people "willing to go along with a minimal of questions"? England and America all made sure their soldiers "really believed in what they were doing"?
I'll tell you what Louis, I'll spot you the German side although you don't really tell me why you are an expert, but you still get a big eye roll from me.
Any large scale change, for good or bad, requires lots of followers otherwise it will quickly fall victim to the too-many-chiefs-not-enough-indians syndrome. |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:39:16 PM · #973 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
I agree that part of my moral compass includes a fear of devine retribution. I do not agree that you understood my post, as I do not believe that a "majority" of Atheists behave morally. I believe that some do and even many, but not most. |
So at least half a billion that don't live morally then, by your reckoning ? |
The numbers are likely higher. |
Do you then believe that you are moral? If so, are you moral not because you believe in your moral actions, but because you are afraid of what will happen should your actions be interpreted by God as immoral? |
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:39:31 PM · #974 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by milo655321:
Is it a Christian principle to defend genocide and slavery as moral? Iâve seen Christians do that in defense of the commandments of the God of the Old Testament. I consider that a waste of time. Did you find that illuminating as well? |
Forget the specifics; based on what you are saying, one could deduce that you believe to choose a moral code and follow it all your days is a waste of a life...
R |
Depends upon the moral code, wouldnât you agree? |
Well, sure, but... That's not what you said/how you stated it. Your original statement was in the form of the absolute I reduced above.
R. |
Iâve re-read my post, I donât think Iâm saying that following a moral code is a waste of time. The post you referenced grew out my initial point that, if a god did not exist to give a particular moral code, then following the moral code âgivenâ by such non-existent being could very well be a waste of someoneâs life. At the time of the initial statement, I donât think I was making any specific declaration regarding any moral code and I believe I was using âmoral codeâ in the most general sense.
Hereâs my initial statement from which our current discussion followed:
âFourthly, if there is no god, you could end up wasting the only life you will ever have if you believe in one and follow those ultimately manmade, not the non-existent godâs, rules. Itâs about intellectual integrity.â
|
|
|
|
12/06/2007 03:41:04 PM · #975 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does everybody believe that every soldier in the German army was blindly following the Nazi regime.... |
I happen to be something of an expert on this. An armchair expert, if you will. And, in a certain sense, particularly for this conversation, the answer is "Yes". Critical thinking was not an admired trait in Germany, and even education among the educated (ie university students) was almost absent-mindedly discouraged by way of state-sponsored activities. By the time a kid born in 1923 was ready for the Russian front in 1941, he'd been fed a daily diet of dessicated shit throughout his formative years, so that even pretending not to support the regime and all its actions would have been virtually impossible. The will of a monolithic humanity-devouring movement is implacable. |
So you didn't talk about the other side. You don't think that any large scale operation doesn't require a lot of people "willing to go along with a minimal of questions"? England and America all made sure their soldiers "really believed in what they were doing"?
I'll tell you what Louis, I'll spot you the German side although you don't really tell me why you are an expert, but you still get a big eye roll from me.
Any large scale change, for good or bad, requires lots of followers otherwise it will quickly fall victim to the too-many-chiefs-not-enough-indians syndrome. |
I admit I'm not as familiar with the other side. And I guess I don't understand what you're trying to say about the other side either. If you could provide more specifics, I'll give my opinion. No need to eye-roll, it's just a friendly discussion. |
|
