Godless morality

[JillSwift]

it doesn't take much too logic to conclude that if you like to create, creating a living object is much more satisfying than a nonliving one.  i don't think that is a very outrageous assumption.

So, you don't know it, you assume it?

[harriet_tubman]

it doesn't take much too logic to conclude that if you like to create, creating a living object is much more satisfying than a nonliving one.  i don't think that is a very outrageous assumption.

So, you don't know it, you assume it?

i would be ridiculous if i claimed to know this.

i've named the premises i start from, now let's see yours.

[JillSwift]

i would be ridiculous if i claimed to know this.

I agree, but it's the basis of your claim. Rather renders your argument unsound.

i've named the premises i start from, now let's see yours.

For which claim that I've made? Oh, wait. I've made no claims.

[harriet_tubman]

i would be ridiculous if i claimed to know this.

I agree, but it's the basis of your claim. Rather renders your argument unsound.

would you like to take the opposing view, that one who creates inanimate matter is not interested in creating animate matter?

[JillSwift]

would you like to take the opposing view, that one who creates inanimate matter is not interested in creating animate matter?

I'd like to see evidence for a creator, actually. Do you have any?

[harriet_tubman]

would you like to take the opposing view, that one who creates inanimate matter is not interested in creating animate matter?

I'd like to see evidence for a creator, actually. Do you have any?

sure, where there is a design, there is a designer.  

the universe is finely tuned.

getting back to my thought experiment where we suddenly found out we were living inside the parthenon.  i look at the parthenon and infer it's designed, you look at the parthenon and refuse to believe it's designed, mostly because you have too much emotion wrapped in your atheistic worldview.

we'll talk about synchronicity later.

[harriet_tubman]

also by the way i noticed that the smyrna church advertises on this website.  that's bizarre.  i wonder why the webmasters allow it.

[JillSwift]

sure, where there is a design, there is a designer.  

the universe is finely tuned.

getting back to my thought experiment where we suddenly found out we were living inside the parthenon.  i look at the parthenon and infer it's designed,  

Repeating an assertion does not add validity to the assertion.

you look at the parthenon and refuse to believe it's designed, mostly because you have too much emotion wrapped in your atheistic worldview.

Ad hominem.

we'll talk about synchronicity later.

My favorite album from The Police?

[Squid]

there is good destruction and bad destruction.  killing stalin, which kruschev and 3 others actually did, that was a good deed.

dropping a bomb on an afghan wedding party under the pretext of getting al qaida that's bad.

you have to measure an action's goodness by asking whether or not it contributes to the continuity of the universe, removes pain, and increases happiness.

Removes pain and increases happiness for who?  Suddenly destruction is dichotomous now?  Is there also "bad construction"? Please define "continuity of the universe".  Dealing in abstraction does nothing for progression of a meaningful conversation.

[Squid]

also by the way i noticed that the smyrna church advertises on this website.  that's bizarre.  i wonder why the webmasters allow it.

The advertisements aren't under Whitney's control.

[pinkocommie]

if you're a designer your whole modus operandi is about manipulating reality to suit your desire.  living objects can manipulate reality much more so than nonliving objects, therefore life is the agent of the designer.  life therefore is good, death bad.  joy which promotes life is good, joy which promotes death is bad. pain which promotes death is bad, pain which discourages death is necessary if not good.

Life isn't always good, death isn't always bad.  Your argument is a false dichotomy.  Also, creator again?  If you're not willing to discuss the validity of your perceived creator, why do you keep bringing it up?  Again - atheist forum.  Few here are going to simply accept your name dropping some made up entity to prove your obviously poorly thought out point.

wrong.  life is the core concern of the creator.  the earth is just a platform on which to build his more complex creation, which is life.

Gum is made of poison!  Coloring in an up and down motion is incorrect!  Mirrors capture a piece of your soul and never give it back!  What?  Oh, I thought we were making ridiculous statements without providing any proof of our claims.  Again, you've not only presented this creator without any evidence (and in fact have stated that you will not discuss the validity of your creator cuz...I don't know, that's your deal.), but now we're meant to take your word on knowing what this unproven creator's core concerns are?  Haha, do you have a direct line, or its personal email or what?  Just please, don't tell me your excuse for knowing the assumed motivations of an assumed creator are based on your own opinion of what 'makes sense'.  It's going to make sense to you, you're the one making all of it up.  Not making it up?  Then show me the proof.  Not restating your assertion, but proof.

what facts do you point to affirm your knowledge that the cosmos is an accident? post on other thread.

Did I ever say the cosmos was an accident?  You keep saying that and trying to claim that people here think it - it seems like you've already decided what our arguments are and are getting frustrated because we're not adhering to your internal script.  It's interesting to watch for sure.  

[Whitney]

also by the way i noticed that the smyrna church advertises on this website.  that's bizarre.  i wonder why the webmasters allow it.

The advertisements aren't under Whitney's control.

Harriet...why don't you try to address what people are saying instead of worrying about what I allow to be advertised on the site?

I have no issue taking a few cents from some church or religious site that wants their ads to run here; it doesn't hurt anyone (some are quite funny) and helps with hosting costs.

[Albino_Raptor]

Where right and wrong come from has been sufficently explained on this forum, just use the search button.

[EssejSllim]

by the way, essej slim, i see you refer to yourself as a rational moralist.  have you ever seen anyone call themselves an irrational moralist?  you might as well have as your title: good person.

Well, good person would've been a little too general for my taste.

anyway, the definition for what is rational is not exactly clear but let's say it means there is reason behind one's actions.  ok, what's the reason behind your moral actions?  how do come up with an irrefutable rational definition of a moral act in an accidental universe and how do you know it's the RIGHT one.

I don't come up with an irrefutable definition of morality, in fact my morals change (or are at least tweaked) quite often, like when I learn something new or someone presents an issue to me from a different point of view. Therefore, I don't know if what I consider a moral act is the right one, but then again I never claimed to. I' also never claimed that the universe is an accident. I accept that knowing that is beyond my ability (but apparently it's not beyond yours). Quite frankly (as I've said before) I couldn't care less about issues concerning the origin of life or the creation of the universe

each creature is fighting for its existence, especially the meat eaters.  how are you going to reason with the snake and say you're bad because you eat mice.  as for human morality, let's take all these primitive americans that believe that if we cut and run in afghan then the "terrorists" have won.  how do you come up with a reason to persuade them that they're wrong, especially when they believe it's kill or be killed

I wouldn't tell the snake he/she is bad, he/she is just trying to survive in a harsh world. (I don't see how this has anything to do with what I stated before). I also don't think we should cut and run in Afghanistan. We created the mess they are in now, and it's up to us to fix it. On top of that terrorism is evil and I'd like to see the entire Taliban exterminated.

Here's a question for you. How come you keep ignoring what people are actually saying to you and instead, pretend we say something else and ask us about that?

[i_am_i]

here's a more exact statement of my belief:
the criterion to which we measure an actions goodness is whether or not it promotes the cosmos' continuity and whether it decreases pain and increases joy.

Good, fine. Name one thing, one human action, just one, that has "promoted the cosmos' continuity."