Meaning in life

[blueyedpoet]

and a pefect form of Goodness sounds a lot like God

 

[Irvine511]

Universally recognized? It still had tohave a beginning, or it wouldn't be around to be recognized. Did man create the axioms of right and wrong? If so, upon what did he base it?

Where did the basic principles come from? How do we know, really that it's wrong to murder someone who stole from you?

why can't the beginning of such an axiom come from human logic? a human spoke it, and probably long before Christianity took note of it (and rightly so, i've always love that about what i understand to the the Christ message), so why couldn't it have been derived from rationality? i find it much more powerful that a human came up with it than if it were imprinted onto a stone tablet and delivered from heaven.

i know that it's wrong to murder someone who stole from me not because the 10 commandments tell me so, but because i know that one murder will lead to more murders, and with more murders i will be less safe. God doesn't tell me that being a vigilante is a bad thing, my own brain did.

 

[80sU2isBest]

why can't the beginning of such an axiom come from human logic? a human spoke it, and probably long before Christianity took note of it (and rightly so, i've always love that about what i understand to the the Christ message), so why couldn't it have been derived from rationality? i find it much more powerful that a human came up with it than if it were imprinted onto a stone tablet and delivered from heaven.

People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?

 

[80sU2isBest]

42

Douglas Adams! WOO HOO

 

[Se7en]

what further meaning does life require beyond that we should seek to provide for each other?

 

[Irvine511]

People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?

this is why we have laws, and laws are created by humans based upon a combination of logic, rationality, and evidence. humans also enforce these laws, and humans can also changese these laws as they evolve over time.

God doesn't strike down a murderer or someone else who violates "his" laws. mechanisms of government -- law enforcement, courts -- which are of, by, and for human beings are the ones who enforce these laws.

 

[80sU2isBest]

this is why we have laws, and laws are created by humans based upon a combination of logic, rationality, and evidence. humans also enforce these laws, and humans can also changese these laws as they evolve over time.

So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?

 

[deep]

So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?

exactly,

that is why we had slavery, and child labor, etc

the lawmakers are supposed to be held accountable by the voters

 

[Irvine511]

So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?

i don't totally endorse this viewpoint, but it strikes me as plausible that God is every bit as invented as law and every bit an arbitrary idea weilded by those in power to control others.

lawmakers have more credibility than others for a few reasons.

1) they are supposed to be educated in the history and process of making laws, and as such they are more qualified than your average layman. i'm not a mechanic, so i hire one when my car is broken; same thing applies to the process of making laws.

2) lawmakers are either elected by constitutents via a democratic process (i.e., congress) or they are judges who have been appointed by those who have been elected (i.e., judges) via a democratic process and undergone an elaborate confirmation process conducted by those who have been elected.

following the law is a voluntary process. we all agree on certain rules, and these rules and expectations are drilled into our heads from the very beginning of our lives so that the become more working assumptions than agreed-upon, consented-to rules.

however, like all institutions, the State is concerned with it's continued existence. as such, it has methods of punishment for those who break the laws created by the State's lawmaking apparatus, and these methods are also consented to by a majority of the citizens who would be affected by these methods of punishment. and it's also about power -- if you resist arrest, you will be subdued; if you fire upon an officer, you will be shot. there's also a system in place to change laws and punishments not because it's the right thing to do, necessarily, but because the State knows that such mechanisms ensure it's continued existence.

we all consent to be governed, we all consent to be ordered and controlled. there is free will to break the rules, but there are also consequences to breaking the rules.

and it's all done by people, not God.

the threat to the State, and then the people, is the claim by lawmakers to know the will of God and to then seek to impose "God's will" via the corruption of a legitimate process.

like in Saudi Arabia.

 

[Tinybubbles]

People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?

oh my goodness! You might possibly be turning into an anarchist! Carefull there with your revolutionary thinking...

 

[80sU2isBest]

oh my goodness! You might possibly be turning into an anarchist! Carefull there with your revolutionary thinking...

I'm no anarchist. I do believe is a higher power that set a standard moral code. I'm just stressing my belief that if there is no God, then all morality is relative.

 

[Anthony]

then all morality is relative.

All morality is relative.If history has taught us anything, it is exactly that.

Ant.

 

[Tinybubbles]

I'm no anarchist. I do believe is a higher power that set a standard moral code. I'm just stressing my belief that if there is no God, then all morality is relative.

Oh, I have read enough of your posts to know you are not an anarchist. I was just making a joke... because both of your "what ifs" describe perfectly what many people believe and live their life by - be they anarchist, agnostic, witches whatever.
I believe all morality is relative to the individual... and when we talk about more than one person we have to talk ethics. I also think that the only true law is natural law and that anarchy is a preferable state for us humans to live in... however, given the current level of awareness of "us humans" we most likely have alot of work to do before this happens.

Merry May Day to you all!!

 

[80sU2isBest]

Oh, I have read enough of your posts to know you are not an anarchist. I was just making a joke... because both of your "what ifs" describe perfectly what many people believe and live their life by - be they anarchist, agnostic, witches whatever.
I believe all morality is relative to the individual... and when we talk about more than one person we have to talk ethics. I also think that the only true law is natural law and that anarchy is a preferable state for us humans to live in... however, given the current level of awareness of "us humans" we most likely have alot of work to do before this happens.

Merry May Day to you all!!

Since I believe in God, I don't I don't agree with you at all.

But if no God existed, I would say you were right on the money.

 

[Tinybubbles]

Well, 80's, then that settles it!
You truly gave me a laugh today with that reply. It's not often christians get me to giggle! Thanks....

 

[LyricalDrug]

Love is a temple / Love the higher law