Hitler

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
What is your 'objective' standard that you use to differentiate between right and wrong? Is it the golden rule?

Why does it seem like you often refuse to directly address the points given in a post?

Are you of the mistaken belief that by side-stepping the points with questions, the points aren't valid?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Why does it seem like you never directly address the points given in a post?

Are you of the mistaken belief that by side-stepping the points with questions, the points aren't valid?

You said, "all one need is a concept upon which to hang decisions of morality. For example, the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought. This fact also belies the idea that morality is "completely subjective".


So I am asking you specifically do you have a concept upon which you hang morality? And do you believe this concept is not 'completely subjective'? Also if the golden rule is merely a man made concept why should everyone feel obliged to follow it?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
You said, "all one need is a concept upon which to hang decisions of morality. For example, the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought. This fact also belies the idea that morality is "completely subjective".


So I am asking you specifically d ...[text shortened]... Also if the golden rule is merely a man made concept why should anyone be obliged to follow it?

The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.

If you have a point to make, then plainly state it instead of asking questions.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.

If you have a point to make, then plainly state it instead of asking questions.

And if someone were to disagree why would they be wrong? Is it a universal truth? If it isn't then it is only your subjective opinion that it is a sound concept and not arbitrary.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And if someone were to disagree why would they be wrong?

And yet another question.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
This is nonsense.

Actually all one need is a concept upon which to hang decisions of morality.

For example, the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought. This fact also belies the idea that morality is "completely subjective".

http:/ ...[text shortened]... ird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts."
(Yoruba Proverb, Nigeria)

This list may argue that the so-called Golden Rule has had its equivalent expressions in pre-Christian times and in many other faiths.

That seems to argue for a universal standard of morality rather than against.

At best the list could be a "Gotcha!" argument demonstrating that Christ had no copyright on saying such a teaching. That particular saying's truth could have been known from every truly wise person's conscience.

Jesus was a typical man as God become a man. Why would He not also utter some universally acknowledged truths that were evident to the human conscience?
It is an expression of what ought to be.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
And yet another question.

And yet no answer. Should I only answer your questions? Why do you feel you don't have to answer mine?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And yet no answer. Should I only answer your questions? Why do you feel you don't have to answer mine?

Like I said:
"The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.
If you have a point to make, then plainly state it instead of asking questions."

Evidently you have no point to make and so continue to ask questions. I've seen enough of your posts to understand that that's the game you play as a way to not have to admit that you're wrong.

Once again, if you have a point to make then plainly state it. I'm not going to play your game.

Originally posted by sonship
This list may argue that the so-called Golden Rule has had its equivalent expressions in pre-Christian times and in many other faiths.

That seems to argue for a universal standard of morality rather than against.

At best the list could be a "Gotcha!" argument demonstrating that Christ had no copyright on saying such a teaching. That particular saying ...[text shortened]... dged truths that were evident to the human conscience?
It is an expression of what ought to be.

This list may argue that the so-called Golden Rule has had its equivalent expressions in pre-Christian times and in many other faiths.

That seems to argue for a universal standard of morality rather than against...That particular saying's truth could have been known from every truly wise person's conscience...It is an expression of what ought to be.

Maybe you can explain it to FMJ. But be prepared for a never ending onslaught of questions in lieu of rational discussion.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And yet no answer. Should I only answer your questions? Why do you feel you don't have to answer mine?

You've been sparring with FMF too long, adopting his method of "attack via questioning".

Only to do it like he does, you have to ask leading questions and tinge each question with phrases which sneer and debase the person. Then you can sit back and claim you're "just asking questions".

Originally posted by Suzianne
You've been sparring with FMF too long, adopting his method of "attack via questioning".

Only to do it like he does, you have to ask leading questions and tinge each question with phrases which sneer and debase the person. Then you can sit back and claim you're "just asking questions".

No, Fetchmyjunk has been doing that from day one.

He reminds me of my 5 year old nephew. Asks a question and I answer him, to which he replies 'why?' I precede to answer again, only for him to repeat 'why?' (This is fine in a 5 year old, but for a grown up poster it's just a lazy tactic in debating).

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Like I said:
"The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.
If you have a point to make, then plainly state it inste ...[text shortened]...
Once again, if you have a point to make then plainly state it. I'm not going to play your game.

You are saying it is possible to have an objective standard for morality without God. Yet you haven't demonstrated how that is possible. If there is no God, there is no universally correct moral system. Societies may impose their morals on the people within those societies but if two different societies had different morals how would you ascertain which society had the correct morals?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
You are saying it is possible to have an objective standard for morality without God. Yet you haven't demonstrated how that is possible. If there is no God, there is no universally correct moral system. Societies may impose their morals on the people within those societies but if two different societies had different morals how would you ascertain which society had the correct morals?

The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
The fact that "the Golden Rule has been recognized as one such concept through the ages, across many cultures and within both theistic and secular schools of thought" seems to indicate that it is a sound concept upon which to hang decisions of morality and that it is not arbitrary.

Argumentum ad populum.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Argumentum ad populum.

lol. Nice try.