|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:30:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
How would the reaction of the forum been if I had started the topic with:
Atheist accept 12 year old child rape as part of there moral code as they have no moral code.
If you find this an appropriate argument, lets have the discussion.
If you find this an inappropriate argument, why? |
The premise "atheists have no moral code" is simply incorrect. Whatever argument you build upon incorrect premises is bound to be faulty. The observation that atheists don't rape 12-year-olds any more often than theists do supports the hypothesis that your argument is faulty.
Is there more discussion to be had on that subject? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:35:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by @tomic
Jerome, you seem to feel that all justice comes from the 10 commandments but have you given thought to all of the other societies with their own unique histories and moral development. We're talking about the great majority of people that have ever lived. Asian, African and societies from points in between have ideals of morality that have nothing to do with the 10 commandments. So why not Atheists, agnostics or even the Mormons? The way you began this topic highlights your biases. You may not want to accept that but it's something to think about. If you do think about it, try to do it outside the box you've been in.
@
|
I began the topic with an honest question. I have only stated how I determined my moral code when asked early on. I have insulted no ones moral code. I have not attempted to "teach" others about the "right" moral code(neither you nor I have that authority); as my code may be wrong.
As a group it seems that many assumption are made about my intentions. I asked the question simply because I wanted to know the answer. The defensiveness and attacks are uncalled for.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:38:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by moakley
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Amusing because religions disagree about many things. That is why I am not religious.
|
So you are either a liar or are playing a pointless game of devils advocate. A liar because you have made many arguments typical of the religious.
|
I have not been advocating anything. Silly, I asked a question because I wanted to know the answer.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:42:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Fripp
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The exponding of the law after the first tablets were broken are not the rules I follow.
|
So you pick and choose what you will and will not base your morals on, correct?
From the bible and http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/banswers.php:
The first time Moses came down from Mount Sinai with commandments, he merely recited a list (Exodus 20:2-17). They were NOT engraved on stone tablets and were NOT referred to in any way as "the ten commandments."
This is the version most churches today wrongly call the "Ten Commandments."
The first set of stone tablets was given to Moses at a subsequent trip up the mountain (Exodus 31:18).
Moses destroyed those tablets when he saw the people worshipping the golden calf (Exodus 32:19).
When he went back up for a replacement, God told Moses: "Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest." (Exodus 34:1)
What was on the replacement tablets (from Exodus 34:14-26) is the list that I posted earlier...the only list that is specifically called the "Ten Commandments": "And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments." (Exodus 34:28).
Since you're lazy and disingenuous, I will re-list them:
1) Thou shalt worship no other God.
2) Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.
4) Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.
5) Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks.
6) Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the Lord God.
7) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven.
8) Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left until the morning.
9) The first of the firstfruits of thy land shalt thou bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10) Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.
I fail to see how this is "expounding" on the law since: A) these do not include the original list of ten, B) These have almost zero correlation with the first ten, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, C) God made absolutely no mention that this list "expounds", "elaborates", "clarifies", or "explains more clearly" the original list of ten.
Thus, your contention that this is an "expounding of the law" is utterly, and without evidence, your completely uninformed opinion.
I'm underwhelmed with surprise.
|
You quoted my answer. How many times would you like me to answer. I choose to follow the 10 rules commonly called the ten commandments.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:43:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
That is why I am not religious.
|
I don't believe you.
|
Why should that matter to me?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:45:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
How would the reaction of the forum been if I had started the topic with:
Atheist accept 12 year old child rape as part of there moral code as they have no moral code.
If you find this an appropriate argument, lets have the discussion.
If you find this an inappropriate argument, why? |
The premise "atheists have no moral code" is simply incorrect. Whatever argument you build upon incorrect premises is bound to be faulty. The observation that atheists don't rape 12-year-olds any more often than theists do supports the hypothesis that your argument is faulty.
Is there more discussion to be had on that subject?
|
I agree, it a stupid statement and a stupid way to have a talk. Thats the point.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:49:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by @tomic
No, you stated the question in such a way that it was obvious you had not considered that morality can be derived from more than a piece of paper(or chiseled rock).
@
|
This question :"How does an atheist determine a moral code?"
In fact, it implies that atheist do have a moral code.
I asked how "it" is determined.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:51:26 [Permalink]
|
908 posts (and counting) from someone that loves to talk but not listen. You begin topics in a way that must be meant to be confrontational then you deny it. Over and over again.
This particular topic demonstrated that you have little understanding of what morality is. You'll deny it because that seems to be your greatest asset.
@
|
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 18:54:37 [Permalink]
|
You started this topic by saying
| How does an atheist determine a moral code? |
You demonstrate how little you understand on the subject because for some reason you think atheists are different from other people. As if we live on some island somewhere, cut off from everyone else. Think about it for a while, Maybe grab a book and read up on the subject. Or just think long and hard on the subject.
@
|
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 19:13:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I agree, it a stupid statement and a stupid way to have a talk. Thats the point. |
Actually, you volunteered your method for deriving a moral code, so your analogy is faulty. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 19:14:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by @tomic
You started this topic by saying
| How does an atheist determine a moral code? |
You demonstrate how little you understand on the subject because for some reason you think atheists are different from other people. As if we live on some island somewhere, cut off from everyone else. Think about it for a while, Maybe grab a book and read up on the subject. Or just think long and hard on the subject.
@
|
And to think, I intentionally framed the question so as to not allow for assumptions on its purpose. I discovered that many here are atheist. I thought this would be a good source for the answer to the question. I could care less about what anyone believes in the context of changing their minds. I am very interested in what people think.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 19:17:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I agree, it a stupid statement and a stupid way to have a talk. Thats the point. |
Actually, you volunteered your method for deriving a moral code, so your analogy is faulty.
|
Wrong Dave.
Trish asked in the second post "Can I ask you Jerome, how do you determine a moral code, are you willing to accept one that has been determined for you. Or would you rather consider the consequences of your action or inaction each time you make an ethically based decision?"
I you read not only selected posts but the entire conversation you will get a better understanding of what is being said.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 19:23:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Wrong Dave.
Trish asked in the second post "Can I ask you Jerome, how do you determine a moral code, are you willing to accept one that has been determined for you. Or would you rather consider the consequences of your action or inaction each time you make an ethically based decision?"
I you read not only selected posts but the entire conversation you will get a better understanding of what is being said. |
Wow, somehow Trish asking you a question means that you didn't volunteer your answer?
No, nobody forced you to answer, and most of the rest of the thread has been posts from people trying to make sense of your bewildering reply. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 19:34:35 [Permalink]
|
Dave, are you an atheist, and if so how do you derive your moral code?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Atheism and Morals
