MrMontella:

its nonsensical because even with objective morality....we've seen such instances

No we haven't, objective morality by definition doesn't fall into the issues implied by subjective morality.

Richirich713:


how typical, when atheists get cornered, they immediately try to change the topic to the bible while ignoring the part of ur post where u challenged their views.

And u still confused, u hold on to subjective morality, basically u can't criticize anything without being inconsistent, racism isn't evil on atheism, u just disapprove of it becuz u live in a society that disproves of it. If lived in a society where it was accept, u be condemning anyone who wasn't a racist. Because on ur worldview there's nothing objectively wrong with racism. Remember what dawkins said?

"Justin Brierley: Ultimately, your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we've evolved five fingers rather than six.

Richard Dawkins: You could say that, yeah."

......says the dumbo that knows nothing about humanist philosophy.


What fruitful discussion is there to be had with you that knows nothing about morality from another religion? Like a myopic fool, you only see morality from one religion when there are thousands of religions? How can one discuss morality with you? You are ignorant and proud of that ignorance

JackBizzle:



......says the dumbo that knows nothing about humanist philosophy.


What fruitful discussion is there to be had with you that knows nothing about morality from another religion? Like a myopic fool, you only see morality from one religion when there are thousands of religions? How can one discuss morality with you? You are ignorant and proud of that ignorance

Dawkins told me more than enough.

Richirich713:


No we haven't, objective morality by definition doesn't fall into the issues implied by subjective morality.

is this bar of objective morality recorded in the bible?

Nice Thread!

MrMontella:
even with objective morality... If you claim morality is set by the divine... Why condemn another religion's moral bar?

Nice one
Kingebukasblog is just talking crhap as usual

hopefulLandlord:


Nice one

Kingebukasblog is just talking crhap as usual

Wetin ?

You don't understand the post ?

I have objective morality that's why I can say that something is bad or good .

But the atheists have subjective morality , good or bad is from a personal perspective - this means , it makes no sense condemning another person because that which he has done is good from his own personal perspective .

Comprende ?

KingEbukasBlog:


Wetin ?

You don't understand the post ?

I have objective morality that's why I can (though I have not ) say that something is bad or good .

But the atheists have subjective morality , good or bad is from a personal perspective - this means , it makes no sense condemning another person because that which he has done is good from his own personal perspective .

Comprende ?

All atheists are the same abi?

The humanists
The buddhists
The rationalists
The confucianists


They all have the same morality abi?


FYI, humanists follow an objective morality based on logic.

JackBizzle:



All atheists are the same abi?

The humanists
The buddhists
The rationalists
The confucianists


They all have the same morality abi?

FYI, humanists follow an objective morality based on logic.

Based on logic : communists wiped out 200 million people (ripple effect inclusive) because they thought these people will preclude their objectives and goals from being actualized .

These communists felt that their goals were the best for the advancement of humanity and that man not God determines what's right or wrong - with this perception you can commit whatever evil and claim its good . Just like the communists .

You can't have objective morality without God . Its impossible .

KingEbukasBlog:


Based on logic : communists wiped out 200 million people (ripple effect inclusive) because they thought these people will preclude their objectives and goals from being actualized .

These communists felt that their goals were the best for the advancement of humanity and that man not God determines what's right or wrong - with this perception you can commit whatever evil and claim its good . Just like the communists .

You can't have objective morality without God . Its impossible .

JackBizzle:





A God that you have never seen or heard from
A God that has a chosen race (isrealites) like a racist
A God that commands the slaughter of women and children
A God that tests his servant (Abraham) by telling him to sacrifice his son
A God that sends his only begotten son to die
A God that claims that he is a "jealous God"
A God that once flooded the earth and left an incestuous family (Noah's family) as an example.



God is not great. God is not good. God is not moral

JackBizzle:





A God that you have never seen or heard from
A God that has a chosen race (isrealites) like a racist
A God that commands the slaughter of women and children
A God that tests his servant (Abraham) by telling him to sacrifice his son
A God that sends his only begotten son to die
A God that claims that he is a "jealous God"
A God that once flooded the earth and left an incestuous family (Noah's family) as an example.


God is not great. God is not good. God is not moral

By what standard is God being judged ? And who made that standard right ?

MrMontella:

is this bar of objective morality recorded in the bible?

Objective morality just means certain things are really right and wrong, u don't need the bible to know that. Saying morality is subjective leads to absurd conclusions, such as the one dawkins admitted.

KingEbukasBlog:


By what standard is God being judged ? And who made that standard right ?

Even by God's own standard in the bible, he is a hypocrite.


1) Incest is bad. Bad guy Yahweh goes on to start the world twice with incest (Adam/Eve + Noah's family)
Some of his prophets/main men were even incestuous perverts- Abraham and his half sister

2) Thou shalt not kill. Bad guy Yahweh sends the isrealites to canaan to commit genocide. Bad guy Yahweh even floods the whole world and drowns almost everyone.


And many more

Richirich713:


Objective morality just means certain things are really right and wrong, u don't need the bible to know that. Saying morality is subjective leads to absurd conclusions, such as the one dawkins admitted.

you cannot say thats ''objective morality''...
Eveb in subjective morality... ''Certain'' things are really right or wrong..eg murder..

2)i am following an objective morality...
The quran...

child Marriage is right...

Prove that child marriage is wrong.

hopefulLandlord:

Nice one
Kingebukasblog is just talking crhap as usual

he always fails to answer the important questions..

MrMontella:

you cannot say thats ''objective morality''...
Eveb in subjective morality... ''Certain'' things are really right or wrong..eg murder..

Moral subjectivism is the view that what is morally right and good for an individual, A, is whatever A believes is morally right and good. Thus, if Andy believes that murder is always wrong, and Jennifer believes that it is not always wrong, according to moral subjectivism murder is always wrong for Andy and is not always wrong for Jennifer. And this is why I say there's no real right and wrong on subjective morality.

Objective morality says that nonsense, murder is really wrong for all of us regardless if we think otherwise. Andy can believe all he wants that murder is right, that wouldn't make it right. Just like he can believe all he wants that 2+2=9 that wouldn't make it right.

MrMontella:


2)i am following an objective morality...
The quran...

child Marriage is right...

Prove that child marriage is wrong.

U missing the point, saying morality is objective just means that there is objective truth in morality, not that I would suddenly know all those moral truths.

And I don't evens think muslims believe in objective morality since they usually appeal to culture differences to respond to that.

Richirich713:


Moral subjectivism is the view that what is morally right and good for an individual, A, is whatever A believes is morally right and good. Thus, if Andy believes that murder is always wrong, and Jennifer believes that it is not always wrong, according to moral subjectivism murder is always wrong for Andy and is not always wrong for Jennifer. And this is why I say there's no real right and wrong on subjective morality

Objective morality says that nonsense, murder is really wrong for all of us regardless if we think otherwise. Andy can believe all he wants that murder is right, that wouldn't make it right. Just like he can believe all he wants that 2+2=9 that wouldn't make it right.

@the first bolded...thats definitively nihilistic morality...

Not all subjective forms of morality are nihilistic...

Subjective morality is ''broader'' than this little stuff you wrote up there

Morality is highly relative...

Your idea of subjective morality and mine differ...

Your definition of objective morality is obscure
@the second bolded..please answer this question..
is murder for self defense wrong?
p.s your answer matters to your ''objective morality''

U missing the point, saying morality is objective just means that there is objective truth in morality, not that I would suddenly know all those moral truths.

Noted...but i was only being Practical..saying morality is objective without being able to put it to the test is like throwing punches in the air..
Also..objective morality is usually seen as gotten from the divine...(i havent seen any other view)
So i ask again..
Why is the islamic child marriage wrong...if morals are objective

And I don't evens think muslims believe in objective morality since they usually appeal to culture differences to respond to that.

i dont think they do..
And if you mean ''differences in interpretations''..its even applicable to christians too...some christians believe polygamy is highly moral..

MrMontella:

@the first bolded...thats definitively nihilistic morality...

Not all subjective forms of morality are nihilistic...

Subjective morality is ''broader'' than this little stuff you wrote up there

Morality is highly relative...

Your idea of subjective morality and mine differ...

Any form of subjective morality is subjective? Thats my whole point and problem with subjective morality.

MrMontella:

Your definition of objective morality is obscure

Is this obscure - "Moral objectivism is the position that moral truths exist independantly from opinion."

MrMontella:

@the second bolded..please answer this question..
is murder for self defense wrong?

p.s your answer matters to your ''objective morality''

Killing in self defense is not murder.

MrMontella:

Noted...but i was only being Practical..saying morality is objective without being able to put it to the test is like throwing punches in the air..
Also..objective morality is usually seen as gotten from the divine...(i havent seen any other view)
So i ask again..
Why is the islamic child marriage wrong...if morals are objective

I don't considered ur test to be adequate, it assumes that if morality is objective there would be no disagreement over it, that everyone would agree but this doesn't follow, we disagree over whether God exist but that doesn't mean neither of us are objectively right about reality. Here's two reasons why I considered muhammad marriage to aisha as immoral, he was in his 50s and she had not reached puberty.

MrMontella:

i dont think they do..
And if you mean ''differences in interpretations''..its even applicable to christians too...some christians believe polygamy is highly moral..

Yes we disagree over whether polygamy is immoral, but that doesn't mean morality is not objective. Lots of muslims disagree with isis interpretation of the quran, yet no one would say therefore no interpretation of the quran is correct.

Richirich713:


Any form of subjective morality is subjective? Thats my whole point and problem with subjective morality

not the way you explained it.

Is this obscure - "Moral objectivism is the position that moral truths exist independantly from opinion."

okay..lets see

Killing in self defense is not murder.

sorry let me rephrase...your answer is really critical...

Is killing for self defense wrong?

I don't considered ur test to be adequate, it assumes that if morality is objective there would be no disagreement over it, that everyone would agree but this doesn't follow, we disagree over whether God exist but that doesn't mean neither of us are objectively right about reality. Here's two reasons why I considered muhammad marriage to aisha as immoral, he was in his 50s and she had not reached puberty.

didnt rebut it at all..

Is ''God'' no longer the source of objective morality?

Yes we disagree over whether polygamy is immoral, but that doesn't mean morality is not objective. Lots of muslims disagree with isis interpretation of the quran, yet no one would say therefore no interpretation of the quran is correct.

i only brought polygamy up because you brought up the idea that muslims are divided on the morality stuff

MrMontella:

not the way you explained it.

okay..lets see

sorry let me rephrase...your answer is really critical...

Is killing for self defense wrong?

Its not critical guy, if objective morality is true - all that would mean is that what is right or wrong is independent of custom or opinion. My opinion included.

As to ur question, if we defining self-defence as defending the health and well-being of oneself from harm, then yeah I think there are cases where it would be morally wrong.

MrMontella:

didnt rebut it at all..

Is ''God'' no longer the source of objective morality?

U the one who's appealing to specific gods, all I said was objective morality cannot exist without God(a moral law giver).

At this point I'm not sure what u evens trying to refute, are u saying that Morality is not objective or are u saying that u don't need God for morality to be objective?

MrMontella:

i only brought polygamy up because you brought up the idea that muslims are divided on the morality stuff

I don't know why u evens brought it up, I think disagreements between humans are irrelevant to whether objective morality exists. I don't see any reason to think we will be infallible in our moral judgments if morality was objective.

Richirich713:


Its not critical guy, if objective morality is true - all that would mean is that what is right or wrong is independent of custom or opinion. My opinion included.

As to ur question, if we defining self-defence as defending the health and well-being of oneself from harm, then yeah I think there are cases where it would be morally wrong.

okay..so your ideals ofmorality
is absolute morality right?

Divine command theory...is it applicable in your concept of morality?

U the one who's appealing to specific gods, all I said was objective morality cannot exist without God(a moral law giver).

At this point I'm not sure what u evens trying to refute, are u saying that Morality is not objective or are u saying that u don't need God for morality to be objective?

i'm saying Morality is not objective...but relative.

I don't know why u evens brought it up, I think disagreements between humans are irrelevant to whether objective morality exists. I don't see any reason to think we will be infallible in our moral judgments if morality was objective.

''punches in the air'' it is then(objective morality)

@jackbizzle,

There are so many christian liars here on Nairaland!!! Satan na learner for their side!!!

1.Idiots keep insisting that Hitler was an atheist, when even the foolish Palmarian catholic Church has Hitler as one of their saints!!! Even the Fuhrer oath that Hitler made his troops to proclaim, went like this:............................................"I swear to God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German Empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath."

2.Pol Pot was not an atheist, only unrepentant blockheads on nairaland keep repeating that stupid lie!!! Pol Pot believed in "heaven" and "destiny"!!! Pol Pot believed in forces outside of him that were guiding him!!! That is best described as religion!!!

3.There is a "shit-lipped liar" on Nairaland who claimed that Ne Win of Burma was an atheist!!! But sadly and unfortunately for this pathetic christian fool, Ne Win's wikipedia page says he was into "Theravada Buddhism"

4.This same "shit-lipped liar" said that Hideki tojo was an Atheist!!! But his wikipedia page says that he was into "Shin Buddhism", a f.ucking theist!!!

Niflheim:
@jackbizzle,

There are so many christian liars here on Nairaland!!! Satan na learner for their side!!!

1.Idiots keep insisting that Hitler was an atheist, when even the foolish Palmarian catholic Church has Hitler as one of their saints!!! Even the Fuhrer oath that Hitler made his troops to proclaim, went like this:............................................"I swear to God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German Empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath."

2.Pol Pot was not an atheist, only unrepentant blockheads on nairaland keep repeating that stupid lie!!! Pol Pot believed in "heaven" and "destiny"!!! Pol Pot believed in forces outside of him that were guiding him!!! That is best described as religion!!!

3.There is a "shit-lipped liar" on Nairaland who claimed that Ne Win of Burma was an atheist!!! But sadly and unfortunately for this pathetic christian fool, Ne Win's wikipedia page says he was into "Theravada Buddhism"

4.This same "shit-lipped liar" said that Hideki tojo was an Atheist!!! But his wikipedia page says that he was into "Shin Buddhism", a f.ucking theist!!!

don't mention me when cursing...

I agree. So are Atheists, Shinto, Buddhists, Hinduists e.t.c. Anyone that terrorizes humanity is simply a terrorist. Apparently your example failed to mention the atheist attack on a Canadian mosque earlier in the year or Thomas Bervick, an odinist who killed 93 people in Norway. While it may be more frequent among some religions, don't think we who subscribe to rationality don't have Psychos amongst us.

Sabergol99:
I agree. So are Atheists, Shinto, Buddhists, Hinduists e.t.c. Anyone that terrorizes humanity is simply a terrorist. Apparently your example failed to mention the atheist attack on a Canadian mosque earlier in the year or Thomas Bervick, an odinist who killed 93 people in Norway. While it may be more frequent among some religions, don't think we who subscribe to rationality don't have Psychos amongst us.

There are psychos in every belief or non-belief.

The issue here is that psychopathic nonsense is preached in abrahamic religions which makes some of the followers psychopaths.