The AntiChris

Yup, I think you're right. A little like those interminable free will debates in which opposing factions are often denying/defending quite different concepts of FW.
Well, using your criteria I suspect you'd view my morality as objective though I'm still not so sure it's objective in the sense that most theists use the word.

Chris

Wiploc

I usually can't get them to say what they mean by objective. If they do try to say, and I point out a problem with their definition, they're done; they don't clarify or elaborate.

crc

moonwatcher

That's simple enough. To be moral is to be loving (at least by my definition).

So the question "should I be moral?" comes down to the question "why love?"

The answer: because love is the best thing this world holds. There are certain things that are intrinsically valuable and love is one of them. We don't need a Platonic supernaturalism because the source of its value is intrinsic, is in the nature of the thing itself, not some external sanction---divine or otherwise.

To say that without God there would be no reason to be loving is to say that love is not valuable in and of itself--- that what is intrinsically valuable is pleasing God and that love is just a means to that end.

I don't think that is a position any of us really want to hold, including theists.

Lógos Sokratikós

No, it isn't "nitpicking". While there are atheists who make moral statements (we all do, don't we?), they cannot do it stating it in the name of atheism or naturalism. It's like a Franciscan monk giving support to quantum mechanics in the name of the brothers minor! He can do so as an individual, but to do so on behalf of all Franciscans, from Francesco d'Assisi down to the most recent novice would be risible. Atheism just doen't have a standard or official ethic.

llanitedave

That's true. The ethic is humanism, and it's open to both atheists and theists.

Lógos Sokratikós

:thumbs: Exactly!

Minnesota Joe

Metaphysical naturalism is concerned about what there is and what there isn't. As such it is a philosophy that includes, or ought to include, a statement about morality, whether it is moral nihilism or secular humanism. So, I can speak of the types of moral/ethical systems defended by naturalists--they are going to have certain things in common. If naturalists are correct, then of course the system will be open to theists and atheists alike, becaue it won't depend on the existence or nonexistence of gods.

But I'm not interested in arguing technicalities. Do you know anything about secular humanism that might apply to one of the three questions I asked?

Lógos Sokratikós

Risking to become obnoxious (me??)... the OP is about technicalities!

Right, it ought to. I myself am very concerned about ethics. But a system that says: "Apples are red, gravitation is universal, the speeds of events are relative..." has nothing to say about the right or wrong of red apples falling with relative speed powered by universal gravitation upon the heads of our enemies. So is a system that states that "All events in nature (the neighborhood called "Universe") are and can only be caused by events in 'Universe', and these are of patterned (described in "laws")".

Moral subjectivism is a subset of moral relativism. This creates space for morally relativistic statements not being morally subjectivistic, although I haven't seen any yet.

Please clarify.

No idea. But I'll be darned if this isn't a "technicality" question!

Minnesota Joe

No, a world view such as metaphysical naturalism is a complete philosophy that would define what properties (such as red) are, what constitutes 'meaning', etc. It would also be concerned with whether morals exist or not and if so, how so. I really don't think that this is controversial as I have books in my office from three naturalists who discuss exactly these things.

That is interesting, can you give me some examples? (Or do you agree with the examples wiploc and I discussed?)

I mean the weird sort of supernaturalism that Plato was into--you know, things exist independent of the people thinking them. People sometimes speak about morality in that sense, as if 'good' and 'evil' had supernatural existence all on their own.