Absolute Morality...again.

The question I'm considering is whether enough fine print would do the trick.

So if it was shown that Allah made us would you shift your perception of morality to one that befits Islam?Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

Or perhaps another question that seems to have arose. Is that everyone seems to talk of the context of a situation.Could we then propose that an absolute morality would be mutually exclusive and not be affected by the context of the situation? Or perhaps that the situation must be reduced into such absrtraction (or stereotyping) that te situation loses all meaning?

Or maybe we could perhaps instead make a situation so abstract that then an absolute morality can be applied. By that i man:Consider a murder of a husband (wife beater/murder via the wife. So violation of the proposed 10 commandments murder list) but then we abstract it to. Woman killed man. So now it fits into the conception of absolute morality.Does that indicate we must abstract to such a level that a situation and life then becomes meaningless?

quote:

---

How do you come to this conclusion?

---

p1: Morality is subjectivep2: Each human being has a set of moralsp3: There is no universal morality(I used p1, p2, and p3 because the use of p, q and pq may sidetrack my point)Based on the above truth preserving statement I will further explain what I wrote to you earlier. This is under the assumption that you believe there is not a universal morality.A society can not exist if each individuals morals were equally respected.For example:There is a man that does not believe killing human beings is wrong and this man takes pleasure in this action and does it frequently.
This man believes killing is a righteous action...If a society deemed this man's morality equally because of morality's subjective nature then the society would be unable to stop the man from killing men.If morality is subjective who is to say this man's action of killing and belief that killing is good is wrong?

• Kant established a way to live

The categorical imperative would fix this plight because surely not everyone would want to kill or be killed. And the second categorical imperative establishes that all individuals are valuable so it dismisses fanatics (militant groups, nazis etc).

quote:

---

How does utilarianism become an unrealistic way to judge or rule a society?

---

Utilitarianism, in my personal view is not sound because I believe like Eugene Debbs: "The rights of one are as sacred as the rights of a million".In history the doctrine of untilitarianism has helped to provide for heinous crimes such as the Holocaust and the genocide in Rwanda, this is because the point is to maximize happiness for the majority.

quote:

---

What causes you to say that Moral Relativism must acknowledge every moral value set to be respected with equal justice and mercy?

---

As I made clear in the earlier portion of this post, what is the standard a society of government would govern upon?Who would decide what is wrong and what is right?For example:Majority? What if they choose genocide? A Monarch(Hobbes)? What if he also was an advocate for genocide?Who or what in your mind would decide the morality of a society?Would there need to be basic protection of a human's natural rights(Rousseau)?Think these questions over.

So, God set up a set of absolute moral boundaries for humans but decided to define those boundaries so poorly that we don't know if we exceed them or not?Could you explain the rationality of God doing this or of your believing that He has?

I wouldn't say he defined them poorly(they'd have to be well defined to be absolute), its just that we don't have the capacity to understand them because we'll always have a situation that is ambiguous. But it doesn't matter because, ultimately, the morality of a situation comes down to the personal level, conscience. Whether or not we deem something immoral and whether or not we do it anyways.Take murder. We can come up with all kinds of What if this and what if that situations where the morality of murder becomes blurred. God could have all the answers and keep the definition absolute but how could he have it laid out for us, especially when we keep comming up with more what if's. I guess the definition could be precise and well defined and simplified enough to cover all the bases, and perhaps it is(in god's eyes), but we just lack the absolute definition.The absolute moral could still be there as "Thou shall not murder", we just don't have a working definition of murder, because in some cases, killing some is not wrong even though it is still killing someone, and in that case it would not be included in 'murder'. Thus the absolute moral still stands and we'd just have to argue over the definition of murder and the what if's would be is this murder, is that murder? Still, the absolute moral of not murdering would stand, it would just become reletive in what should be included in murder. So that we have a choice. So we aren't robots that must be good and must believe in him. For some reason, he wants us to hafta have faith.

I'm not quite sure what you mean.But there's no reason to assume that an absolute rule has to be SIMPLE--something that you state in 25 words or less. It might be complicated and yet still not relative. So if we take our rule, "Thou shalt not murder," and define murder as "unjustified killing," then we have to set up criteria for judging a killing as justified or unjustified. If we were elaborate enough with our criteria, perhaps we could cover every base. If we covered every base, our law would be absolute in one sense of that word.

If the terms are not defined then you don't have an absolute anything (law, moral...etc). What you have is a statement which is interpreted differently depending upon the subjective definition of the terms by the reader. Admittedly, murder is not completely without definition. In fact, God himself provided some further clarity in regards to that term by exclusion, as I pointed out in my previous post. I am sure we could find more.Killing that is not murder according to the Bible.
1. Killing an unborn child
2. Killing residents, including children, of conquered territories.
3. Killing of a slave as long as he/she suffers for longer than 2 days before expiring.Seems rather odd that Bible believers would likely categorize all of these as murder when the Bible clearly states that they are not. Defining the choices distinctly does not eliminate choice...it provides for a more informed choice. Satan knew God existed and had even spoken to him directly, yet he chose to disobey. Seems to me that direct evidence of God's existence did not remove Satan's ability to choose. Edited by LinearAq, : to address a comment that I missed in the first draft

I've been pondering this and I finally know what I think about it but I may not yet have the right terms for it. Yes, and whatever is decided for the circumstance is just as absolute as the law itself. That is, there is a correct interpretation or application of the law for each circumstance, in spite of the fact that it may be hard to arrive at and mistakes may be made.Subjectivity or relativity would be something else, the idea that there could conceivably be conflicting interpretations that are both valid. No. I finally figured this out. Relativity or subjectivity is the idea that you can have two or more entirely different interpretations of the law and both be valid. Yes you can make that equation. Applying the law to different circumstances doesn't involve relativity or subjectivity.

I was saying that the terms are defined (by god), just that we cannot comprehend them, or simply aren't given them. The absoluteness would still be there, just not practicle to our everyday situations..... enter your conscience. Let's not derail the thread, ok? Yeah, I guess not.

quote:

---

For the sake of the argument, can we for once drop the semantics and get down to the actual argument.

---

But this thread is about the definition (semantics) but not about twisting the meaning of a word to mislead or confuse (semantics). It is a matter of understanding what is actually meant by the term, absolute morality.

quote:

---

Absolute----> Definite------> Certain-------> Nothing can circumvent or supplant its authority.

---

Unfortunately I don't see that your conclusion that nothing can circumvent or supplant its authority is supported by the definition you provide.The definition you are bringing forward for Absolute is the same as certain, positive or sure. (I'm certain he's here.) (allowing no doubt)But that doesn't seem to carry the idea of authority.With what you've given me all absolute morality means is that something is definitely (without a doubt) right or wrong.If my questions annoy you so that you are unable to answer with a civil tone, then don't answer. This is a sincere attempt to understand what absolute morality is envisioned to be whether through definition or example.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

"Sin" is that which separates us from each other.God is against sin because of its effect on us, not on Him. His so-called "absolute morality" is only relevant (and relative) to our relationships with each other. If no example is possible, there is no absolute morality.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Us seperating ourselves from him affects us. I agree its not about him. My opinions differs on this but we're getting off topic. Why not?I agree we don't have it in real life, on earth, in actuality or whatever becuase like you say, if we don't have it (can provide an example) then we don't have it (it doesn't exist).But....God could have morality absolutely defined and we just aren't able to exemplify it. That doesn't mean the definitions aren't there, to god. They just aren't there to us.

God could be surrounded by pink unicorns, too, but if we can't know anything about them, it seems like a waste of time to discuss them.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC