Formal and Informal Logic

Very possibly, but why go that far when the social standards and cumulative experience explanation is already there.I don't think I'm following your reasoning. You suggest that social convention and experience are not a source of morality as they are frequently contravened. Then you ask if some 'inbuilt' moral restraint, which also apparently frequently fails, is evidence for the existence of a creator God.If the contravention of moral standards are enough to dismiss highly relative and flexible sources such as social standards, etc.., how on earth can they not be even worse for something as fundamental as something created within us by God?TTFN,WK

You seem to be ignoring the point about how many unsolved murders there are and how therefore many DO get away with it, people who have convinced themselves they can -- and often do.

No, I do not.You seem to be ignoring the fact that if there was 'absolute morality' then no one would murder to begin with.

Most definitely. There's just no logical moral grounds for it. There's no such thing as a "logical moral ground."A moral ground, for example, would not be, "I might get caught." That's not a moral ground. This keeps some people from murdering other people, but it's no more moral that my thinking I should not go out in the storm because I might get electrocuted.

Yes, as I said, you could be psychopathic. That is certainly one possibility. You could well be someone with no sense of morality.If that is the case then the question becomes, "What do the rest of us do about you?"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

To call such an attitude psychopathic is to beg the question. According to your scheme, "psychopathic" is just another word for "evil" since what constitutes evil is to do that which is disruptive for society in the long run. So what you're saying is that the reason I should not murder for profit is that it's evil to do so.Your argument has not been advanced any.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

And I suppose you can show where I said that?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Here:

Substitute the word "Anti-social" for the word "evil" and you have it about right.
If you just have the urge to kill people then you are anti-social and pretty soon you will be ejected from society either by imprisonment or a needle in the arm.
Maybe you will get away with it but only by pretending to fit into society. Just let everybody else get a look at the real you for one minute and your goose is cooked.
Morals don't come into it. Society will take you down and move on.

Please point out where I used the term evil in that?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

What do you mean? We are talking about Jar's moral scheme. If you are going to have a moral scheme, some actions have to be good and others bad.

I would like to jump in here with a comment that I think is relevant to the OP. It seems to me that the morality discussion is getting a bit off track.To me there really is no such thing as informal logic. Logic is logic. There are rules that are formally spelled out but even if one could not say what those rules are they can still make a logical argument and use correct logic. If I say, "that is not logical" it means that I think one of the "rules" has not been followed. I may not know what rule has been broken, I just know it doesn't seem logical.For example, I might say:
"If we plan to have a picnic, it will rain tomorrow."Everyone knows that is a silly statement - it may or may not rain, but it will have nothing to do with whether we plan a picnic. There is a logic term for what is wrong with it. (I think it is false correlation). But one does not need formal logic training to know there is something wrong. By the way, I don't call this "common sense" - to me common sense is the same as "conventional wisdom," which is quite often wrong. I don't think it has anything to do with logic at all. But I know some may disagree. Edited by deerbreh, : Add subtitle.

Exactly. Anti-social is an apt term.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I agree completely.

So being anti-social is not evil? What's evil according to your scheme?