Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
God can Ground Objective Morality

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-08-2024, 08:14 AM)SYZ Wrote: The so-called practice of "philosophy" has no place
in any debate about objectivity.  It's nothing more
than the ramblings of academics spewing bullshit
from their pretentious ivory towers.

As one ages, one finds—by worldly-wise osmosis—that
philosophy as such has no place in the real lived world.
It survives only because far too many people are afraid
to admit publicly that they have no time for it.

And it's a certainty that philosophy—for what it is—is an
exercise of pointless mental effort in the 21st century.

      Thumbsdown

Loved that! Philosophers have never made much sense to me. They are either stating the obvious or going on about "nothing".
Two paths diverged in the woods, and I managed to take both...
The following 2 users Like Cavebear's post:
  • SYZ, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
I’ve always been reluctant to engage in “philosophical” discussions. I don’t know the rules. I don’t understand much of the terminology. I never studied it. I don’t appreciate philosophers thumbing their nose at my lack of education in this area.

It’s always sounded like word salad to me. All I see are circular arguments that eventually boil down to how each person defines some word and thus “proves” the other is somehow wrong. Finally, those into philosophy tend towards TL.DR to me.
The following 5 users Like pattylt's post:
  • brewerb, mordant, Cavebear, Alan V, Minimalist
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
There's plenty of bad philosophy. A discipline should not be judged by its least illustrious specimens.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
The following 5 users Like Dānu's post:
  • Alan V, pattylt, brewerb, Cavebear, Deesse23
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 04:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve always been reluctant to engage in “philosophical” discussions.  I don’t know the rules.  I don’t understand much of the terminology.  I never studied it. I don’t appreciate philosophers thumbing their nose at my lack of education in this area.

It’s always sounded like word salad to me.  All I see are circular arguments that eventually boil down to how each person defines some word and thus “proves” the other is somehow wrong. Finally, those into philosophy tend towards TL.DR to me.
The TL;DR aspect is the worst part.

As a software developer I'm a big believer in minimizing cognitive load. Much of the problem in maintaining and expanding software is that it tends to be built on poorly conceived abstractions that are very leaky, with lots of black boxes in the form of outside dependencies with poorly documented behaviors and various fads du jour. To my mind, philosophy tends to have the same class of problems. You can critique most bad arguments with a half dozen of the major logical fallacies, but then someone has to develop on exhaustive list of a hundred of them, and alternative reasoning methods as thought experiments, and dog knows what else, until no one with less than 3 PhDs could even parse the resulting "word salad" as you put it.
The following 1 user Likes mordant's post:
  • SYZ
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 07:49 PM)Dānu Wrote: There's plenty of bad philosophy.   A discipline should not be judged by its least illustrious specimens.

I agree but, when someone isn’t educated in some or many schools of philosophy, it’s hard to even determine which one I agree with.  I don’t know enough to recognize “bad” philosophy.  I certainly don’t want to frustrate Steve with my obvious ignorance.  I wasn’t even aware which topics were in the philosophy section (my error) as I just click on Todays Posts.  So I will read but try my best to not disturb Steve’s harmony by posting my thoughts.
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 07:49 PM)Dānu Wrote: There's plenty of bad philosophy.   A discipline should not be judged by its least illustrious specimens.

I would counter-argue that the best philosophers are little different from the worst. And to call philosophy a "discipline" elevates it to a higher level than I think it deserves. But it probably matters what one considers "philosophy" to be. An educated thought is not is not the same as a philosophy.
Two paths diverged in the woods, and I managed to take both...
The following 2 users Like Cavebear's post:
  • SYZ, Minimalist
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 10:52 PM)pattylt Wrote:
(06-10-2024, 07:49 PM)Dānu Wrote: There's plenty of bad philosophy.   A discipline should not be judged by its least illustrious specimens.

I agree but, when someone isn’t educated in some or many schools of philosophy, it’s hard to even determine which one I agree with.  I don’t know enough to recognize “bad” philosophy.  I certainly don’t want to frustrate Steve with my obvious ignorance.  I wasn’t even aware which topics were in the philosophy section (my error) as I just click on Todays Posts.  So I will read but try my best to not disturb Steve’s harmony by posting my thoughts.

Socrates - wisest of men - and Marx both would weep seeing Steve bullshit being called philosophy. As for bad philosophy, apart from Steve posts which don't even rise to level of bad philosophy instead being simple word vomit, you could read Lenin but there is no good reason for wasting one time so instead you might try Raymond Aron The Opium of the Intellectuals or Daniel Dennett Breaking the Spell to see how good philosophy looks like.

I'm aware of all the ivory tower bullshit about philosophy but it does answer real questions and deals with real world. Just look at Marx From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Sure it is political but with deep philosophical underpinnings (like Marxism itself) and sure it is old but it's not hard to find philosophers dealing with important things today - Dennett, Walicki, Leder...
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
The following 2 users Like Szuchow's post:
  • Deesse23, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 04:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve always been reluctant to engage in “philosophical” discussions.  I don’t know the rules.  I don’t understand much of the terminology.  I never studied it. I don’t appreciate philosophers thumbing their nose at my lack of education in this area.

It’s always sounded like word salad to me.  All I see are circular arguments that eventually boil down to how each person defines some word and thus “proves” the other is somehow wrong. Finally, those into philosophy tend towards TL.DR to me.

The philosophical mistake which Steve seems to make again and again across multiple discussions is that he tries to define himself as correct.

He does this in the abortion debate, the "atheism as belief" debate,  and in this debate as well.

To me, this is an indication that he doesn't want to face difficult or ambiguous facts, but would rather take shortcuts to make his points.

However, I could be mistaken since I am not a philosopher either.  It's just that Steve thinks he is a philosopher, since that's the way he tries to structure his arguments. That could also be an attempt to win by defining himself as correct.

And yes, that is all circular.
The following 1 user Likes Alan V's post:
  • pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
You are probably correct.
Afaik Steve explicitly admitted once that he is not here for open discussion or search for truth, to possibly change his mind, but to improve his arguments/ argumentation. That's probably why he is (perceived to be) so dishonest. Is also possible he projects this onto the atheist forum members.
R.I.P. Hannes
The following 2 users Like Deesse23's post:
  • Alan V, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-10-2024, 07:49 PM)Dānu Wrote: There's plenty of bad philosophy.   A discipline should not be judged by its least illustrious specimens.

I agree. However, in my everyday life, I don't find much of it applicable. It certainly creates interesting conversations that may be impactful in the moment, but once the moment passes it fades into an interesting mental diversion.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 11:24 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: You are probably correct.
Afaik Steve explicitly admitted once that he is not here for open discussion or search for truth, to possibly change his mind, but to improve his arguments/ argumentation. That's probably why he is (perceived to be) so dishonest. Is also possible he projects this onto the atheist forum members.

He's also stated that he fears atheists(ism) as a tangible threat to his way of life. He has more than one agenda.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
The following 2 users Like brewerb's post:
  • Deesse23, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 11:55 AM)brewerb Wrote:
(06-11-2024, 11:24 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: You are probably correct.
Afaik Steve explicitly admitted once that he is not here for open discussion or search for truth, to possibly change his mind, but to improve his arguments/ argumentation. That's probably why he is (perceived to be) so dishonest. Is also possible he projects this onto the atheist forum members.

He's also stated that he fears atheists(ism) as a tangible threat to his way of life. He has more than one agenda.

Yes.

If... a very big if... we were ever able to unequivocally
convince Steve—against his every wish of course—that
God or gods did not exist, I'm guessing his life and state
of mind could be severely compromised.  It's obvious
that one of the reasons—the main one?—that he despises
atheists and atheism so much is to reinforce his own strong
internalised beliefs that these supernatural entities do in
fact exist.  They're in some ways a large part of his entire
raison d'etre in this world.  To glorify something.

And his desperation is obvious as evidenced by the hundreds
of comments he's posted on these forums both defending
his position and damning ours.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 10:02 AM)Alan V Wrote:
(06-10-2024, 04:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve always been reluctant to engage in “philosophical” discussions.  I don’t know the rules.  I don’t understand much of the terminology.  I never studied it. I don’t appreciate philosophers thumbing their nose at my lack of education in this area.

It’s always sounded like word salad to me.  All I see are circular arguments that eventually boil down to how each person defines some word and thus “proves” the other is somehow wrong. Finally, those into philosophy tend towards TL.DR to me.

The philosophical mistake which Steve seems to make again and again across multiple discussions is that he tries to define himself as correct.

He does this in the abortion debate, the "atheism as belief" debate,  and in this debate as well.

To me, this is an indication that he doesn't want to face difficult or ambiguous facts, but would rather take shortcuts to make his points.

However, I could be mistaken since I am not a philosopher either.  It's just that Steve thinks he is a philosopher, since that's the way he tries to structure his arguments.  That could also be an attempt to win by defining himself as correct.

And yes, that is all circular.

I view this more as a skill problem. He is a better rhetorician than he is a reasoner, and so his arguments are weak, but well stated. We all tend to capitalize on our strengths and shy away from our weaknesses.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
The following 2 users Like Dānu's post:
  • Alan V, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 11:55 AM)brewerb Wrote:
(06-11-2024, 11:24 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: You are probably correct.
Afaik Steve explicitly admitted once that he is not here for open discussion or search for truth, to possibly change his mind, but to improve his arguments/ argumentation. That's probably why he is (perceived to be) so dishonest. Is also possible he projects this onto the atheist forum members.

He's also stated that he fears atheists(ism) as a tangible threat to his way of life. He has more than one agenda.

What a surprise, Supreme Court justice Alito said the same thing.

Amen brutha
The following 2 users Like 1Sam15's post:
  • pattylt, brewerb
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 10:02 AM)Alan V Wrote:
(06-10-2024, 04:26 PM)pattylt Wrote: I’ve always been reluctant to engage in “philosophical” discussions.  I don’t know the rules.  I don’t understand much of the terminology.  I never studied it. I don’t appreciate philosophers thumbing their nose at my lack of education in this area.

It’s always sounded like word salad to me.  All I see are circular arguments that eventually boil down to how each person defines some word and thus “proves” the other is somehow wrong. Finally, those into philosophy tend towards TL.DR to me.

The philosophical mistake which Steve seems to make again and again across multiple discussions is that he tries to define himself as correct.

He does this in the abortion debate, the "atheism as belief" debate,  and in this debate as well.

To me, this is an indication that he doesn't want to face difficult or ambiguous facts, but would rather take shortcuts to make his points.

However, I could be mistaken since I am not a philosopher either.  It's just that Steve thinks he is a philosopher, since that's the way he tries to structure his arguments.  That could also be an attempt to win by defining himself as correct.

And yes, that is all circular.

Circular? What are you going on about? I don't present an argument because I don't believe my conclusion or need your feedback on it to think it through. I defend, reposition, defend. Knock down all challenges as I can. That is the nature of formal arguments. Have you ever watched a debate? I define the argument, state my assumptions or rationale or premises, and it is your job to show me where I go wrong. There is nothing circular about that.

I am not a philosopher although I have a decent vocabulary of philosophical concepts (largely developed while here). Most of my recent 'debates' have been very heavy on philosophy because that level of analysis is the most interesting to me. Debating the NT has gotten old because is too fact-driven and arguing about facts hardly ever has a resolution. Debating doctrine is okay but since the other person knows hardly anything, and while correcting people is sometimes satisfying, it is not an argument per se and does not take more than a couple of posts to button up. Arguing philosophy (concepts) on the other hand, you can win decisively (at least discreet pieces of it) and the overall debate can morph in interesting ways.
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
Imagine believing that you even might decisively win some argument where you posit that moral subjectivity grounds moral objectivity........

If our moral reality is grounded in the nature, opinions, or any other attribute of a god...then the moral reality is fundamentally and categorically subjective.
The following 2 users Like Rhythmcs's post:
  • SaxonX, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
Quote:I would counter-argue that the best philosophers are little different from the worst.

And how would one tell the difference, Cavebear?  I'm sure our little Stevie thinks he is a fucking genius.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • SaxonX
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
And all of us (except Stevie) are waiting for valid evidence of god(s).

It's all in your head Steve. To quote John Lennon, 'Whatever gets you through your life, it's alright'. If god is what it takes for you, fine. You're getting nowhere here in your attempts at convincing us.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
I still doesn't matter whether a god is in our heads or out there floating around doing magic and finding lost car keys - either case is the same metaethical theory.
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 07:22 PM)SteveII Wrote: Have you ever watched a debate? I define the argument, state my assumptions or rationale or premises, and it is your job to show me where I go wrong. 

Is that what you are doing?  

Then never mind.
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
Quote:Have you ever watched a debate? I define the argument, state my assumptions or rationale or premises, and it is your job to show me where I go wrong. 

Was that what your were doing ? Could have fooled me  Tongue
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 09:45 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: I still doesn't matter whether a god is in our heads or out there floating around doing magic and finding lost car keys - either case is the same metaethical theory.

Don't really care.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental. 
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 07:22 PM)SteveII Wrote: ...Circular? What are you going on about? I don't present an argument because I don't believe my conclusion or need your feedback on it to think it through. I defend, reposition, defend. Knock down all challenges as I can. That is the nature of formal arguments. Have you ever watched a debate? I define the argument, state my assumptions or rationale or premises, and it is your job to show me where I go wrong. There is nothing circular about that.

The singular, unique presupposition of the entirety of all
your arguments is based solely on your unsubstantiated
belief
that a supernatural entity exists in the real world.

And until you substantiate that belief with empirical evidence
rather than simply your faith, then any/all of your following
arguments and/or claims are worthless.    Totally.

And as we all know:  "faith" is defined as belief without evidence.

The concept of evidence is the basis of philosophical evidentialism,
an epistemological thesis according to which a person is justified
in believing a given proposition p if and only if  the person’s evidence
for p is proper or sufficient.
      [Empirical evidence, Britannica, May 2024]

Your evidence [sic] for the existence of a supernatural entity is not
in any way proper or sufficient.  QED.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 2 users Like SYZ's post:
  • Alan V, pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
(06-11-2024, 11:32 PM)SaxonX Wrote:
Quote:Have you ever watched a debate? I define the argument, state my assumptions or rationale or premises, and it is your job to show me where I go wrong. 

Was that what your were doing ? Could have fooled me  Tongue

This presumptuous directive from Steve is of course absurd.      Facepalm

As an ignostic (which is why Steve refuses to debate me LOL),
I can say that I have no desire whatsoever to "show" anybody
where he's "gone wrong".

As I've already said, any/all of his arguments fall over at the starting
line because he will not, and cannot provide, any evidence supporting
his absurd beliefs in God or gods.   End of story.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • pattylt
Reply

God can Ground Objective Morality
Deleted.   hobo
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)