SUTG

[ September 05, 2002: Message edited by: SUTG ]</p>

Kent Symanzik

Hi Jack,

There have been many proposed answers. If you think you have one that is sound present it.

But anyway, I must not be making myself very clear. God provides me with a rational foundation for ethics both in scripture and in the way he made me. With God as my foundation for ethics, ethics are universal, invariant, and prescriptive for all.

So, my point in the previous post was simply that God has provided us a means to attain what right and wrong is besides scripture. I called it conscience.

The question is not about conscience and where it came from. But, if it didn't come from the Christian God then it has no foundation for its ethical claims. You can attempt to explain it by social condition etc. But, the result is still an arbitrary foundation for ethical values. You cannot get from non-moral foundations to morality. Just as you cannot get rationality from irrationality.

I'm trying to be as clear as I can. Please tell me where I am still confusing so I can improve my explanations.

Kent

Keith Russell

Kent:

There is the difference between us, then.

If I could prove to you that there was no God, your ethical system would break down, and I assume your behaviour would change, now that you could no longer believe in a 'higher power' which dictates what you ought to do. Scary.

However,

if you could prove to me that there was a God, my life would not change much. I wouldn't start going to church, would not 'worship', would pretty much continue to do what I do. I wouldn't become a 'better' person: I am already trying to be the best person I can be, no God needed.

Keith.

Kent Symanzik

Hi Typhon,
You are begging the question. We are debating the existence of God. You assume the non-existence of God in your premise.

Kent

Keith Russell

Kent:

Just as you assume the existence of God, in your own.

Keith.

Goliath

Kent Symanzik,

Sorry to butt in, but I've noticed that you've stated that atheists supposedly assume that no gods exist. This is, in fact, incorrect. Weak atheists (such as myself) do not believe that no gods exist (of course, we don't believe that any gods do exist, either).

So, I'm afraid your argument seems to crumble when applied to weak atheists such as myself.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Keith Russell

Goliath:

This is way off the subject, and has probably been answered here before, but I haven't run across it:

What is the difference between a 'weak atheist' and an 'agnostic'?

Keith.

Goliath

Keith,

These definitions are, of course, hotly debated in many circles. However, I've encountered many people that have used them (including George Smith in his book _Atheism: The Case Against God_).

A weak atheist does not believe that any gods exist.

An agnostic is one who makes the assertion that it is impossible to know whether or not any gods exist. Consequently, there are theistic agnostics (those who believe that a god exists, but who assert that it is impossible to know whether or not said god exists), and atheistic agnostics (those who do not believe that any gods exist and who make the assertion that it is impossible to know whether or not any gods exist).

Hope that cleared things up.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Keith Russell

Goliath:

It did.

Thanks,

Keith.

sir drinks-a-lot

Hello Kent,

Sorry for the sporadic responses, I am travelling.

I guess I am still not seeing what you are getting at.

Consider a pet dog. A pet dog is able to generalize across particulars. Each time the dog hears the sound "Spot" he will run to the same place he found his owner filling up the food dish last time. Are you saying that the dog must believe in the christian god to justify this action!?

Also, I am still suspicious of presupposition. I think it is not accurate to say world views are constructed by presupposing a single, ultimate proposition and deriving a worldview from there. A single proposition, in isolation, has no meaning. You say you presuppose the christian god as revealed in scripture. Does this presupposition include the entire text of the bible? How are you able to read the text? How many presuppositions are allowed if one wishes to construct a worldview?

Can you also show how someone presupposing the christian god as revealed in scripture has a truer picture of the world than a person presupposing that sir drinks-a-lot has all of he answers?