Good sci-fi is about the present

@fmf said
What "objective truth"?

Neither of us is trading "objective truths".

I am pointing to scripture you are not pointing to anything outside of your views. If we were speaking about rocks, then only those things that are true about rocks would be valid.

If Hell is real then what we think about it doesn’t change anything the object that gives us insight into Hell are the scriptures. My views about the scripture doesn’t change the reality of them anymore than my views on rocks alters the reality of rocks.

@kellyjay said
I am pointing to scripture you are not pointing to anything outside of your views.

My moral compass is formed almost exclusively by things "outside" of me. You haven't been understanding what I've been typing perhaps.

@kellyjay said
If Hell is real then what we think about it doesn’t change anything the object that gives us insight into Hell are the scriptures.

What the scriptures say gives us insight into what the scriptures say.

@fmf said
My moral compass is formed almost exclusively by things "outside" of me. You haven't been understanding what I've been typing perhaps.

If you pick and choose even from scripture you are the only source.

@kellyjay said
My views about the scripture doesn’t change the reality of them anymore than my views on rocks alters the reality of rocks.

You should use the "reality of the rocks" to demonstrate the "reality of Hell" and see if that works.

@kellyjay said
If you pick and choose even from scripture you are the only source.

Your source, in this case, isn't an objective one. As I say, chalk it up to "nurture".

@kellyjay said
If you pick and choose even from scripture you are the only source.

It doesn't make any difference to me whether you claim to use it all or only one page of it, or whether you use the Torah, or the Vedas, or Jordan Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" or only half a dozen of them. Or a hodgepodge of all these. Your resulting moral compass is the only source you have to make your decisions.

@fmf said
You should use the "reality of the rocks" to demonstrate the "reality of Hell" and see if that works.

That reality is coming to many, but I am referring to the scripture that talks about it.

@fmf said
Your source, in this case, isn't an objective one. As I say, chalk it up to "nurture".

It most certainly is an objective one; it isn't a feeling or a conclusion based upon data.

@fmf said
It doesn't make any difference to me whether you claim to use it all or only one page of it, or whether you use the Torah, or the Vedas, or Jordan Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" or only half a dozen of them. Or a hodgepodge of all these. Your resulting moral compass is the only source you have to make your decisions.

We all make decisions, not disputing that, our decisions don't change reality. If you are using the Torah, Vedas, or Jordan Peterson's 12 rules, even those are outside of yourself, but if any of them are just thoughts about this or that, it is a subjective, suggesting nothing more.

@kellyjay said
We all make decisions, not disputing that, our decisions don't change reality. If you are using the Torah, Vedas, or Jordan Peterson's 12 rules, even those are outside of yourself, but if any of them are just thoughts about this or that, it is a subjective, suggesting nothing more.

If, for you, the "reality of the rocks" is no different in terms of being just as real as the "reality of Hell", and this personal opinion - and all theist dogma attendant thereto - informs your moral compass, and if your moral compass as a consequence mostly prevents you from doing morally unsound things, then I welcome it.

@fmf said
If, for you, the "reality of the rocks" is no different in terms of being just as real as the "reality of Hell", and this personal opinion - and all theist dogma attendant thereto - informs your moral compass, and if your moral compass as a consequence mostly prevents you from doing morally unsound things, then I welcome it.

That is the thing, isn't it, the moral compass through dogma found in the scriptures. The scriptures will not alter themselves to do what I will, just because I want to, so I'm bound to it; I have a fixed direction. While without that, my compass-like yours could point anyway I choose it to go.

You rattle on about morals and nature and nurture without a fixed point; they can be whatever you want, or choose another way of looking at things, like survival of the fittest to take what you will the weak are just a hindrance to the strong. They steal resources from those that are strong, they are only weak and needy.

If there isn't a fixed point, any point will do; we cannot say this path is better than that path because they are subjective paths that work for the ones walking them. Who is to say which one is better? I've even heard it said that nature and nurture are nothing more than stolen ideas from religion because the will to survive is all that matters, and to do that, you do what you must; the cost to others is of no consequence when it comes to survival.

It plays out in numerous ways, racial purity, did you get vaccinated, those X people are so lazy, good for nothing, and on and on. How do you say one is better than another when you compare survival of the fittest to nature nurture. Those that hold to survival at any cost could think nature and nurture are a belief against nature? If it works for them, their compass points that direction; why would those of that mindset be considered better or worse than others?

@kellyjay said
That is the thing, isn't it, the moral compass through dogma found in the scriptures. The scriptures will not alter themselves to do what I will, just because I want to, so I'm bound to it; I have a fixed direction. While without that, my compass-like yours could point anyway I choose it to go.

"The scriptures" are still just "nurture" in so far as you have absorbed them into your outlook. If your supposedly "fixed direction" keeps you from doing evil things, as you have admitted it does, then that's good.

@kellyjay said
You rattle on about morals and nature and nurture without a fixed point; they can be whatever you want, or choose another way of looking at things, like survival of the fittest to take what you will the weak are just a hindrance to the strong. They steal resources from those that are strong, they are only weak and needy.

Yes, there are bad people in the world. If you would be unable to recognize that without your religious beliefs, then so be it.

@kellyjay said
If there isn't a fixed point, any point will do; we cannot say this path is better than that path because they are subjective paths that work for the ones walking them. Who is to say which one is better?

Each person must use their moral compass to evaluate the moral landscape ~ and the people in it ~ and decide what actions to take.