Originally posted by @karoly-aczel I strongly disagree.
In the main it does work .... at keeping people subdued and stupid.
I'll let those type have their authority if they can first prove they deserve it, and we should all know that about half the cops just dont deserve it.
Dont even get me started on pollies.
Systems have faults, some more than others, but we (society collectively) give
those mentioned "authority". It's the best we have got and far, far better than
giving that authority to a theocracy with absolute "divine" power.
Originally posted by @bigdoggproblem Humans are not objective. Even if there is an objective moral code, our ability to interpret is subject to our limitations [experiences, bias, etc.] and necessarily subjective.
So you are saying even if rape was always wrong we wouldn't be able to know that?
Originally posted by @apathist What? How did you get that?
There is right and wrong. Which? depends on whether you are feeding or being eaten. This is what your god built.
If what you believe is wrong contradicts what someone else believes is wrong and there is no way for you to establish which of you is correct then the terms right and wrong are really worthless.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59 Systems have faults, some more than others, but we (society collectively) give
those mentioned "authority". It's the best we have got and far, far better than
giving that authority to a theocracy with absolute "divine" power.
Dont give authority to anyone unless you know they wont abuse their power ..
"Systems have faults" ... Are you referring to capitalism? I would say that that whole system is wrong.
It may have been right in the past however the inequality is rife at all levels. Why? Precisely because people give away their own authority. Instead of trusting the obvious parties, (family, friends, elders) , we just give all our money every week to the only 2 players in the game :Woolworths and Coles.
Originally posted by @dj2becker So you are saying even if rape was always wrong we wouldn't be able to know that?
Some of us wouldn't - the ones never taught to respect the wishes of others, or those that shirk the teaching and favor more of a 'might-makes-right' philosophy.
Originally posted by @karoly-aczel Dont give authority to anyone unless you know they wont abuse their power ..
"Systems have faults" ... Are you referring to capitalism? I would say that that whole system is wrong.
It may have been right in the past however the inequality is rife at all levels. Why? Precisely because people give away their own authority. Instead of trusting the obvi ...[text shortened]... , we just give all our money every week to the only 2 players in the game :Woolworths and Coles.
This wasn't a political debate so I won't continue along that line.
Who do you think has "authority" and how is it bestowed/taken?
And is it better or worse than what djbecker suggests?
Originally posted by @karoly-aczel Listen to all points of view.
The more generally inclusive, human(e) ,wholistic ideas are always more relevant than the divided and narrow views that theists have . They aren't 'better' but definitely more practical
Better is a person preference unless you want to suggest that it is more. I'm willing to look
at whatever standard you want to apply to everyone's standards to come up with what it is
that everyone's views makes one's better than an another's.
Originally posted by @karoly-aczel I strongly disagree.
In the main it does work .... at keeping people subdued and stupid.
I'll let those type have their authority if they can first prove they deserve it, and we should all know that about half the cops just dont deserve it.
Dont even get me started on pollies.
So you think it is something more than just human authority alone?
Originally posted by @dj2becker If what you believe is wrong contradicts what someone else believes is wrong and there is no way for you to establish which of you is correct then the terms right and wrong are really worthless.
You say that either morality is objective or else it is worthless.
Objective morality is for people who must be TOLD right from wrong. This isn't worthless; it is how we train children and constrain the mentally infirm.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59 This wasn't a political debate so I won't continue along that line.
Who do you think has "authority" and how is it bestowed/taken?
And is it better or worse than what djbecker suggests?
Yeah I was just jumping around with that last post.
When it comes to giving authority to 'the public' when it comes to social norms that make successful interactions then I'm all for it.
If you dont take up the slack of responsibility after leaving the nest / if you dont develop your own sense of authority based on a sound evaluation of reality then you risk falling under the spell of countless shysters and snake oil salesmen.
I'll comment on beckers' suggestions soon hopefully
Originally posted by @kellyjay Better is a person preference unless you want to suggest that it is more. I'm willing to look
at whatever standard you want to apply to everyone's standards to come up with what it is
that everyone's views makes one's better than an another's.
In fairness I believe other points of view to be equal to mine.
I am not trying to reach any overall consensus, but I do try to find consensus on certain points of debate.
Originally posted by @kellyjay So you think it is something more than just human authority alone?
I think humans should take up the slack of responsibility and gain authority over the things they can control.
Violence, environment, animal rights, gender equality ,etc.
Originally posted by @karoly-aczel I think humans should take up the slack of responsibility and gain authority over the things they can control.
Violence, environment, animal rights, gender equality ,etc.
Have you noticed that when humans do take up the slack of responsibility and game
authority over the things they can control, they actually bring about violence, and many
other nasty things.