Would the world be better off without religion?

pswfps wrote:

Then again, you might as well ask "Would the world be better off without people?"

Probably.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

JLNobody wrote:
There are no moral facts, only moral judgements.

So are all moral judgements equally valid? Just a matter of opinion?
.

The poster did not say that all moral judgments are equally valid. He (I think JLN is a man) said that there are no moral facts. Different kettle of fish.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Asherman wrote:
As JL said, "there are no moral facts, just moral judgments".

Isn't this a distinction without a difference, if one moral judgement is better than another?

NO!!!!!!

0 Replies

Why's religions greatest defence always about morals? do theists seriously believe that religion stops violence, greed, murder, etc etc, I would say that it probably started most of it, and yes the world would be better off without religion, and i would say it will happen soon due to the amount of screwballs about trying to fulfill "end of the world" prophecies at the expence of all the normal human beings.

0 Replies

Coming from NA I'll bet you have your share of religious wackos! Care to tell us a bit about that?

0 Replies

plainoldme wrote:

real life wrote:
JLNobody wrote:
There are no moral facts, only moral judgements.

So are all moral judgements equally valid? Just a matter of opinion?
.

The poster did not say that all moral judgments are equally valid. He (I think JLN is a man) said that there are no moral facts. Different kettle of fish.

If he had said all moral judgements were (or were not) equally valid, then obviously I would not have needed to ask the question. I would have already had his answer.

I asked the question to obtain his answer. I thought that much was obvious as well.

So, POM, do you think all moral judgements are equally valid?

Is 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' morally equivalent to 'cannibalism is permissible because one animal may eat another' ?

If one position is more moral than the other, doesn't that imply a standard of absolute morality against which both are to be measured?

Or it simply a matter of opinion, nothing more, that cannibalism is immoral?

Is cannibalism inherently immoral, or is it just an opinion?

0 Replies

A better question then for the absolutists is:

"If morality is booleen in nature; that is that things can only be moral and immoral, then is there a difference in two acts that are both moral? Is their a difference in two acts that are immoral?"

EXAMPLES

Brushing your teeth, and abstinence from premartial sex are both concidered moral, but do they carry the same moral gravity?

Lying and raping someone are both immoral, do they carry the same moral measure?

If morality is going to be judged on a pass fail system, why bother defining extremes? The way religions like Christianity illustrate the universe is two polar extremes: God and Sin. The entire universe between them, and an ambigious line drawn between somewhere in the middle. Pass. Fail. The acts are irrelavant. You can be so far beyond the line, just accept Jesus as you savior, and that line can be stretched for you.

There are NO moral absolutists, the notion is obtuse.

0 Replies

By boolean you could substitute the word discrete, an adjective not applicable to moral absolutists (pun).

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

By boolean you could substitute the word discrete, an adjective not applicable to moral absolutists (pun).

pun recieved. enjoyed.

Discrete would naturally be the antonym for continuous (continuum in this case)

Either or. I'm not expecting any results from RL. He just ignores my posts. I was too much for him to handle, so now he acts like I don't post here. Sad really. Mostly pathetic. His words lacked substance, and his arguments had too many holes. I think he's mad because of all the things I got him to admit. not to meantion the blatently incorrect things he posted, that I pointed out. But I can't feel special for that, many people in S&R point that kind of thing out to him. I'm only proud, because what I said got to him.

0 Replies

Not sure if this is referred to me, but i assume NA is supposed to be NI, and yes the country is/was riddled with religious wackos who would slit your throat if they thought you where something different than them, fortunately this seems to be dieing off and as with the rest of europe people are becoming allot more secular, thank goodness, probably one of the main reasons the troubles ended was due to the lack of extremism in today's youth here, of course to the disappointment of the terrorist, and the right and left wing politicians.

Chumly wrote:

Coming from NA I'll bet you have your share of religious wackos! Care to tell us a bit about that?

0 Replies

Real life wrote:

Is cannibalism inherently immoral, or is it just an opinion?

An opinion. Ask a cannibal if cannibalism is immoral.

Is the death penalty immoral? Some Christians don't think so, other do.

Since there seems to be a conflict here we would have to conclude that what is moral or immoral is up to the individual.

Is slavery immoral? How many Christians supported slavery in the South and used the Bible and God to support their opinion. After all if God himself supported slavery who are we to condemn it.

But then that's just an opinion.

0 Replies

This was such a stupid thread to post.

0 Replies

Deism is one of many belief systems, but it allows for personal choice, so I chose it. :wink:

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Chumly wrote:
By boolean you could substitute the word discrete, an adjective not applicable to moral absolutists (pun).

pun recieved. enjoyed.

Discrete would naturally be the antonym for continuous (continuum in this case)

Either or. I'm not expecting any results from RL. He just ignores my posts. I was too much for him to handle, so now he acts like I don't post here. Sad really. Mostly pathetic. His words lacked substance, and his arguments had too many holes. I think he's mad because of all the things I got him to admit. not to meantion the blatently incorrect things he posted, that I pointed out. But I can't feel special for that, many people in S&R point that kind of thing out to him. I'm only proud, because what I said got to him.

Sure, discrete would be the antonym for analogue, at least in the context I meant it i.e. discrete electronic circuits being the equivalent of two state whereas analogue electronic circuits being the equivalent of continuous (within the parameters of the analogue circuit of course).

As for the operational parameters of a moral absolutist's circuitry, they are in a mode of self-congratulatory self-aggrandizing self-oscillation!

Diest TKO keep up the good work, I like your posts.

0 Replies

BDV wrote:

Not sure if this is referred to me, but i assume NA is supposed to be NI, and yes the country is/was riddled with religious wackos who would slit your throat if they thought you where something different than them, fortunately this seems to be dieing off and as with the rest of europe people are becoming allot more secular, thank goodness, probably one of the main reasons the troubles ended was due to the lack of extremism in today's youth here, of course to the disappointment of the terrorist, and the right and left wing politicians.

Chumly wrote:
Coming from NA I'll bet you have your share of religious wackos! Care to tell us a bit about that?

Yup I meant NI, what do you think caused the mellowing out, my guess would be in large part a more robust economy.

0 Replies

Jobs helped, but theres still high unemployment, maybe europe uniting, situation becoming more comfortable, but tbh i think people just got pissed off with it, its hard living under heavy security and not knowing one day from the next, it was hard to drive anywhere without getting stopped and searched, there has been many occassions when u just took a quick run to the shop and got stopped, had the car searched from top to bottom aswell as myself, 5 min drive took over an hour, hard to explain to someone who didn't live it, but it was unpleasant, especially when mobile phones where not in common use.

Oh and all the shootings and killings, seeing scumbags becoming powerful cause they joined a terrorist group and expecting respect, i think it was only a matter of time until the normal person rouse against them, which was happening, near the end of the troubles it was common for groups of "NON-terrorists" to give "Terrorists" beatens, then the "terrorists" would kneecap the "NON", then the "NON" would break a baseball bat over the head of the "Terrorist". I think you get my meaning. Terrorist = money = drugs = misery, they no longer protected the community, just made it miserable.

and thank god for the muslim terrorists cause us over here can now go to england and not be hated for our past, most of england now hate muslims.

Chumly wrote:

Coming from NA I'll bet you have your share of religious wackos! Care to tell us a bit about that?

[/quote]Yup I meant NI, what do you think caused the mellowing out, my guess would be in large part a more robust economy.[/quote]

0 Replies

Haha, yeah the muslims have certainly made the Irish look good again.

0 Replies

Real Life -- I agree with Pentacle Queen and take her statement one step further. The question the thread asks isn't stupid but your examples are. Posting that business about cannibalism is just plain silly.

When I was in Catholic high school (1965-69), there was a kid named Stanley who asked a similiar question during religion class. Since the priest has to drink all the communion wine, even if something falls into it, Stanley asked if a missionary was saying mass and a trantula crawled into the chalice, would he have to drink the wine? Your cannibal question is on that same level.

0 Replies

plainoldme wrote:

Real Life -- I agree with Pentacle Queen and take her statement one step further. The question the thread asks isn't stupid but your examples are. Posting that business about cannibalism is just plain silly.

When I was in Catholic high school (1965-69), there was a kid named Stanley who asked a similiar question during religion class. Since the priest has to drink all the communion wine, even if something falls into it, Stanley asked if a missionary was saying mass and a trantula crawled into the chalice, would he have to drink the wine? Your cannibal question is on that same level.

Don't call a question silly just because you don't want to answer, or can't answer it, plainoldme.

Either all moral judgements are equal, i.e. all things are 'equally moral'.......

..........or they are not.

If all moral judgements are equal, then:

Quote:

'Cannibalism is acceptable because one animal may eat another,'

is equally moral to

Quote:

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'

If all moral judgements are not equal then obviously both are measured against an absolute standard to determine which is 'more moral.'

So, which is it?

0 Replies

I'm not saying I don't want to answer it. I'm in the realm of the real. Your cannabalism statements are silly. You're probably a high school kid showing off.

0 Replies

Would the world be better off without religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know