Questions on morality

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
You appear to be unsure of what an ad-hominem argument actually is, perhaps you should ask somebody.

Someone who would actually answer my question. So that excludes you. 😛

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Someone who would actually answer my question. So that excludes you. 😛

I think you'll find that everybody stops answering your questions after a while if you continue to ignore their responses.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
I think you'll find that everybody stops answering your questions after a while if you continue to ignore their responses.

Which reponse of yours have I ignored? You are just using that as an excuse because you have no leg to stand on. If you had any form of confidence in your position you wouldn't hesitate to answer my question or point me to a supposed answer that I ignored.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Which reponse of yours have I ignored? You are just using that as an excuse because you have no leg to stand on. If you had any form of confidence in your position you wouldn't hesitate to answer my question or point me to a supposed answer that I ignored.

If he pointed out the answer you ignored today, you would only forget it tomorrow.

Your brain appears to be reset each morning when your alarm clock goes off.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Which reponse of yours have I ignored? You are just using that as an excuse because you have no leg to stand on. If you had any form of confidence in your position you wouldn't hesitate to answer my question or point me to a supposed answer that I ignored.

I have less interest in answering your questions than you than you have in having them answered. Also, I don't actually think you truly believe the tripe you're declaring. I think the person you're trying hardest to convice is yourself.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
If he pointed out the answer you ignored today, you would only forget it tomorrow.

Your brain appears to be reset each morning when your alarm clock goes off.

And all of this is just a smokescreen because you don't want to face up to the questions you can't answer on the implications of morality without God.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And all of this is just a smokescreen because you don't want to face up to the questions you can't answer on the implications of morality without God.

I have answered all your questions on this topic, 'repeatedly.'

You like to speak of society 'imposing' morality on people yet seem to struggle with the notion that people themselves 'are' society and develop their own moral standards to aid cooperative living that benefits everyone. Morality exists with or without God and this is blindingly obvious if you take the time to look around you.

And you're the one who insists on one moral standard. I have stated more than once that morality may vary between societies. And what implications?! I have again already told you that personally I think morality is even stronger without your imaginary deity who has adherers abide by ancient morality that is often brutal and unjust.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I have answered all your questions on this topic, 'repeatedly.'

You like to speak of society 'imposing' morality on people yet seem to struggle with the notion that people themselves 'are' society and develop their own moral standards to aid cooperative living that benefits everyone. Morality exists with or without God and this is blindingly obvio ...[text shortened]... your imaginary deity who has adherers abide by ancient morality that is often brutal and unjust.

If you say morals are self-determined by individuals in each society, it follows logically that each individual's morals are only true for themselves and not for others. Which means one individual has no right to judge the morals of another individual or impose his own morals on someone else.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Which means one individual has no right to judge the morals of another individual or impose his own morals on someone else.

Do you believe you have the "...right to judge the morals of another individual [and] impose [your] morals on someone else"?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
If you say morals are self-determined by individuals in each society, it follows logically that each individual's morals are only true for themselves and not for others. Which means one individual has no right to judge the morals of another individual or impose his own morals on someone else.

I think the only thing that follows logically from your 'arguments' is that you either can't read or you're deliberately attempting to troll the forum.

Originally posted by FMF
Do you believe [b]you have the "...right to judge the morals of another individual [and] impose [your] morals on someone else"?[/b]

It would only make sense for one person to make a moral judgement on another person's actions if that person believed they had an objective standard by which to differentiate between right and wrong. Obviously that person cannot impose their morals on another person who does not share the same beliefs.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
It would only make sense for one person to make a moral judgement on another person's actions if that person believed they had an objective standard by which to differentiate between right and wrong.

Any human being can make a moral judgement on another person's actions. Your constant bleating about how it "makes no sense" to you does not alter this fact of life one jot.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Obviously that person cannot impose their morals on another person who does not share the same beliefs.

So what? Do you seek to "impose" your morals on other people who do share the same beliefs as you? And do you feel some of the people here in this community - those who do not share the same beliefs as you - are trying to "impose" their morals on you?

Originally posted by FMF
Any human being can make a moral judgement on another person's actions. Your constant bleating about how it "makes no sense" to you does not alter this fact of life one jot.

Of course we can but what's the point of doing that without an objective standard? It's like grading an exam without an answer key. Or each person grading the same exam with a different answer key which consists of their own opinions. So no one can claim they have the right answer because there is no correct answer. But we all know there has to be a correct answer.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Of course we can but what's the point of doing that without an objective standard? It's like grading an exam without an answer key.

I don't see morality as being "an exam" with "an answer key". And I don't see as morality as being like "maths".