To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 14733
14732  |  14734
Subject: 
Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:41:28 GMT
Viewed: 
1228 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:

So in essence, and all other impossibility questions aside, I'm asking how
believers know God to be good.

I don't understand the goal in seperating this from the question of asking how
believers know God to be.  If you accept that they know that God exists at all,
why not accept that they know God to be good as just part of the definition of
God?

otherwise, we must also accept the existence of bigfoot

I wear a 12... ;-)

3. God is morality

The benefit of 3 is that it allows God to remain the ultimate being, and it
also allows morality to be inherent in existence since exists more certainly
than something that is omnipresent, such as God.  The problem of 3 is that I
don't think anyone really believes it,

That actually kind of seems like something James said in another post in this
thread.  Is there any difference between "God is morality" and "morality is
[part of] God?"

From where do you (anyone, I guess the Daves especially) think that morality
comes?  I have a kind of knowledge that I can't account for very easily.  I
think of it as this stuff written on my heart.  I believe that I know the
"right" way to be because it is a part of me.  I try to justify, rationalize,
and explain this "innate" knowledge -- you've seen some of that here.  But even
when I can't, I ca't convince myself that my heart is wrong.  It could be a
line to God, it could be complex interaction of social experiences, it could be
my bicameral mind (or schizophrenia), or something else entirely.  Does
everyone have this?  And in many ways my moral dictates seem at root to be the
same as what most people think as 'right.'  But there are lots of
disagreements too -- sometimes even between my intellectual and emotional
notions of morality.

Chris



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
 
(...) Let's start by trying to distinguish between two slippery terms... I am uncomfortable with even the idea of "morality" (i.e. conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct) because it suggests something beyond the conduct (...) (23 years ago, 18-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
 
(...) Wow, and I didn't even have to pay him (much) to ask me that :) Phase I: Desire Humans have emotions about their state. Very basic. "Happy", "sad". (Normally I might say "good" or "bad", but that's easily equatable with morality, so I'll (...) (23 years ago, 18-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
 
(...) I can conceive of such a being in at least abstract terms, such as "that being which is not bound by our definition of logical impossibility." (...) And mine too, but I'll stand by the logical impossibility requirement. If you have any notion (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

117 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR