Would the world be better off without religion?

Eorl wrote:

OK, so you and your country disagree with that. It's simply proof that such things are subjective.

If you really believed this was subjective, you would not be telling me I was wrong.

0 Replies

No, I'm telling you I THINK you are wrong. See the difference? When enough people agree that you are wrong, it becomes "Wrong". Not objectively, but by common consent.

0 Replies

So you want to define morality by majority vote?

Since most people in America think CP is right, then it must right, right?

Since most people think atheism is wrong, it must be wrong.

0 Replies

What I want seems unimportant in this context.

As you say, all those things are "wrong" to the majority of Americans.

I think you're starting to catch on !

0 Replies

You want to argue for morality by common consent, except when you disagree with it. Then you are quite the absolutist.

I've never met a relativist who truly was consistent. They all become absolutists when it comes down to it.

Moral relativism is itself inconsistent , because it allows that all conceptions of morality are equally valid --- EXCEPT for the absolutist view. THAT is totally invalid, doncha know! Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

real life wrote:

You want to argue for morality by common consent,

Not true. I'm saying it is reality, not something I want or don't want.

real life wrote:

Moral relativism is itself inconsistent , because it allows that all conceptions of morality are equally valid

Not true.

0 Replies

Would it be immoral for me to agree with everything real life posts?

0 Replies

Absolutely.

0 Replies

Is that an absolute-absolutely or a relative-absolutely?

On another un-harmonious note Steven Colbert and Willie Nelson and Richard Holbruck are all singing "On The Road Again" in abysmal three part dog's breakfast disarray.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Absolutely.

Thanks for proving my point. Laughing

real life wrote:

I've never met a relativist who truly was consistent. They all become absolutists when it comes down to it.

0 Replies

By what base logic do you uphold your belief in consistency to have merit?

0 Replies

Whatever RL, you're a liar, and you aren't that consistant.

You believe in a difference in murder and Capitol punishment. yopu rationalize it by talking about due process, but you see a difference.

You think that you are consistant by saying that "murder is wrong," you attack other's for semantics, but you sir are the semantics King.

The truth is, I don't need to convince you of anything, if you think other's should respect your consistancy, your words speak loud enough. And you speak loud and often.

Nobody is buying it.

0 Replies

The member "real life" is singing and dancing the song and dance about morality with which he has consistently polluted these fora for years now. That someone recognizes the subjective nature of moral judgments doesn't make that person, or anyone else, a "moral relativist" (a truly meaningless term, except for the very particular circumstance of those who condemn in others behavior they excuse in themselves--Christians are a good example of people with that attitude, especially when it comes to Muslims).

I recognize that morality is subjective. That doesn't mean that my preferences, my definitions of "good" and "bad," vary with circumstance. They remain the same, i just have sufficient intellectual honesty to acknowledge that all such judgments are subjective.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Eorl wrote:
Absolutely.

Thanks for proving my point.

real life wrote:
I've never met a relativist who truly was consistent. They all become absolutists when it comes down to it.

Yeah, I was being funny. (again, a subjective thing) I chose the word "Absolutely" for just that reason.

0 Replies

I can't understand anybody who is in favour of capital punishment.

Jesus would have been absolutely appalled at the idea as are all the governments of the European Union.

I read somewhere that the Chinese are considering their position on it but that might be propaganda to encourage us to keep buying the goods which are cheap due to the ferocious tactics applied to workers in which CP plays a part.

0 Replies

Can you show me precisely how CP plays a part in making China economically more competitive vis-a-vis the average worker such that if there was no CP in China than the average Chinese worker efficacy/efficiency would decline?

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

real life wrote:
Eorl wrote:
Absolutely.

Thanks for proving my point.

real life wrote:
I've never met a relativist who truly was consistent. They all become absolutists when it comes down to it.

Yeah, I was being funny. (again, a subjective thing) I chose the word "Absolutely" for just that reason.

Yes, I knew that you were being funny.

But I also know that you were stating your viewpoint candidly.

Which did prove my point.

Which makes it very funny as well. Laughing

0 Replies

Yes, Set. There are no moral facts, only moral judgements.

0 Replies

Chum wrote-

Quote:

Can you show me precisely how CP plays a part in making China economically more competitive vis-a-vis the average worker such that if there was no CP in China than the average Chinese worker efficacy/efficiency would decline?

Dead easy Chum but the question suggests that you wouldn't understand the answer. The whole human rights argument is based on loading countries with the same overheads we have so that they have to compete fairly with the likes of you and me. CP is a symbol of repression and only the most extreme aspect of it. 20 years hard labour is probably quite efficient with modern machinery. I once saw a truck full of expanding trellis which had been made in a Thai prison. Top quality stuff. Very competitively priced as is much else made in such places.

That's why the southern states were stopped from using cheap labour in the form of slaves. CP is a powerful tool in the "encouragement of others" system of government.

And there is strong evidence that China uses CP to provide organ donors for rich westerners although I don't know if that is true. I read that Mr Gilmore's organs were utilised and in a medicare for profit system one presumes they were sold.

0 Replies

You have not made your case as per:

Quote:

Can you show me precisely how CP plays a part in making China economically more competitive vis-a-vis the average worker such that if there was no CP in China than the average Chinese worker efficacy/efficiency would decline?

Remember I am not saying CP has no effect.

0 Replies

Would the world be better off without religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know