blueyedpoet
Refugee
and a pefect form of Goodness sounds a lot like God
80sU2isBest said:
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?
Irvine511 said:
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.
MadelynIris said:
80sU2isBest said:
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?
Irvine511 said:
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.
80sU2isBest said:
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?
80sU2isBest said:
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?
80sU2isBest said:
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?
Tinybubbles said:
oh my goodness! You might possibly be turning into an anarchist! Carefull there with your revolutionary thinking...
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.80sU2isBest said:
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.
Tinybubbles said:
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!!