Eric H

Hello Spencer: brace yourself; you might need to get some waterproof pants on before you read this gibberish !!!!!

I suppose if all people had absolute morality there would be peace on Earth.

Because we seem to have a certain amount of choice in how we act it is unlikely that absolute morality could ever exist on Earth. The most that could be hoped for is that some people may have it some of the time, it would be a goal to strive towards.

Probably absolute morality would be looked on as a sign of weakness in most cultures, we need bombs and guns and big business, money and power rules. We live in a culture of survival of the fittest and the weak go under.

However this does not stop you trying to define what absolute morality is, but to really search for an absolute morality surely means to search for a greatest good. If we search for all the negative aspects then we will not be able to define absolute morality.

Apologies this is cut and paste, and I can’t remember where it came from.

In the context of love your neighbour, the use of the word love can seem confusing. In the Greek language there are four meanings for the word love.
There is ‘eros’ from which the word erotic comes from, it is a passionate feeling, a feeling you might have towards a work of beauty, a dream house, or to lust after another person.
‘Storge’ is the second word for love, which means family affections or ties. Even though all the family members may not feel this bond exists between them they are still a family and it is said that blood is thicker than water.
Thirdly there is ‘Philia’ which means a friendship between people, they can often have similar interests, an affinity or chemistry can exist between them. We choose our friends but we cannot always say why we like one person and not another.
‘Agape is the word used by philosophers and teachers for what they have in mind as an ideal behaviour between people. It is not necessary to like the person as in ‘Philia’. It is an attitude towards others based on words such as compassion, understanding, empathy, respect and sympathy. It means being willing to live with the differences between oneself and others and it operates by free choice. It is a way of making life bearable between people of opposing views, such as religious or political differences. Getting on with our next-door neighbour even if we do not like them. Only doing to others as you would have them do to you. It is said to be the noblest quality that human beings can express towards each other.

peace

Eric

Eric H

quote ContraTheos: But I do like to hear that there are still feely-good folks out there like you. Harmless and probably pleasant to talk to.
==================================


There are many aspects to love your neighbour including the harmless and pleasant.

I work with people who use challenging behaviour, violence and abusive language, I have been hit and have had death threats. This is where I use the philosophy of love your neighbour, often I find the most violent people are the most troubled, and it is a way of searching for peace one day at a time.

peace

Eric

Eric H

sorry I hit the submit before I deleted the first part of the last post

Eric
Fixed. J.

Spenser

Good point. Something one might expect from an omnipotent omnibenevolent God that had and absolute standard of morals.



This I agree with, only I see the 'greatest good' as being subjective to the individual who seeks it. Considering people cannot agree on what the greatest good might be, it further follows the trail of subjectivity.

Personally I think you have a great attitude towards you own standard of morality and I hope it benefits as many of your neighbors as possible. I just still think it doesn't apply much to this post, sorry, didn't mean for it to come off as rude...

James Hamlin

I think Eric does not understand what is meant by "Absolute Morality". It does not mean, "the best morality", or, "the best moral philosophy". The meaning is changed when one uses it as an adjective, as in, "He is absolutely moral." Absolute morality is a moral standard that is in effect for every human being, making certain actions always wrong and other actions always right, leaving no middle ground. Absolute Morality is often used by theists as evidence for a deity. Unfortunately for them, it is, in fact, a conclusion drawn from the presupposition of the existence of a deity, and not an observed piece of evidence initially independent of a deity.

The idea of "Absolute Morality" is preposterous. Morality is abstract. It exists within our minds; it is dependent upon consiousness. Therefore, morality is subjective. Unless one point of reference is deemed "absolute" (an obvious contradiction) and superior to all others, morality is purely subjective. Morality does not exist independently, nor absolutely.

Eric H

Hello Spencer

quote: Eric

I suppose if all people had absolute morality there would be peace on Earth.


quote Spenser.
Good point. Something one might expect from an omnipotent omnibenevolent God that had and absolute standard of morals.
=========================================





I saw a poster at the seaside which said something like: Teamwork is a bunch of mindless morons doing exactly what the boss says.

If God exists, then I believe that would also apply to him, he could create peace on Earth but humanity would have to be subdued first. Surely the price of peace would be our loss of freedom from a God and humanity would have to conform to God’s will.

I don’t have any problems with a creator God having absolute morality.

But I feel it would not be logically possible for a God to create all life on Earth with absolute morality, unless it is brainwashed in some way.

If and only if there is an absolute morality then presumably it could be found by searching for what is absolute for God in a greatest good sense.

Obviously this would not offer any total proof of God’s existence.


Thank you all for your patience and explanations while I have been drifting of thread.

Jobar, thanks for your edit.

This will probably be my last post on this thread, you can put it back on track now. Smilie Face,

Peace

Eric

Spenser

But to possibly further this discussion any one up for answering the question of whether their Absolute Morality comes from God or is separate from him and in being omnibenevolent he must conform to it? Or does it go some other way?

James Hamlin

That is why Absolute Morality must be myth. How can it be absolute if it is dependent upon a perspective, God's? This situation seems to rule the "Absolute" out immediately.

But, in the other situation, morality exists on its own, and should be subject to an empirical investigation concerning its existence. Because morality is abstract, the spawn of our minds, if it were absolute, all humans would hold the exact same moral standard, as if we we were tapping into this "source" of morality. But, because we all hold our own subjective moralities, apart from the theoretical Absolute Morality, a world with such an Absolute Morality would be no different than a world with one. Apply Occam's Razor, and away it goes.

Cross Examiner

S'up Spenser? I'm eagerly awaiting the appearance of my first born son so I've been distracted, but I've been meaning to respond to you, like I said I would, and to others here at iidb.org. Any other excited/nervous expectant fathers here? I notice the issue of Absolute Morality is very important to you. Why is that do you think? Have you been following the big debate at TheologyOnLine? I ask because it seems you reference Euthyphro’s Dilemma, a hot topic there, when you asked:
I'll respond on behalf of the theists since Eric H, your former dance partner, likely said his final peace on the matter when he wished you "peace" in his last post. Gotta hand it to him though, he sure maintains his composure. What a peaceful guy! I'd say the overwhelming majority of Christians concur with Bob Enyart that our notion of Absolute Morality flows naturally from the very character of God Himself, codified in the Bible and, to a certain degree, upon the minds/consciences of men--invoked daily by man without true awareness of such. Simply, God's character sets the standard, independant of some other or higher standard. I think the latter answers your quesiton directly. This issue can go tangential quickly, so if you want to speak on it seriously, we should define some boundries.

Regards,
BGiC

Spenser

Congrats on the kid! To go off topic, I wonder whether or not you believe your baby to be born atheist? This seems to be going over in a somewhat heated manner in another thread coming down to the defining of the word atheist.

Yes I have been following the debate on the TO site and so I am left to ask how you defend yourself from Euthyphro’s Dilemma?

You state:

Gods character sets the standard? So anything God does it good? So examples in the bible of things the majority of people in the world would consider immoral are, by definition of his character, moral?



...hence the dilemma. I do not feel Pastor E did an adequate job of refuting this. Personally I don't feel the good pastor has succeeded in anything in the debate other than attempted intellectual intimidation, to the point that the peanut gallery over there isn't so lopsided as it usually seems.

Back on topic, so as long as God does things that we would normally consider immoral we must actually realize them to be moral, though we cannot do them ourselves. Or is it that if God's character at the moment is feeling the need to punish children for the wrong doing of their parents that I can go whip a convicts kid at that moment and since I am invoking this absolute morality (unaware of this of course) at said time I am actually committing a moral act?

James Hamlin asks a nice question; How can it be absolute if it is dependent upon a perspective, God's?

Furthermore if we all tap into this absolute morality unknowingly, why do all of our versions of morality differ so much? There is a whole lot to talk about here...