WLC and the moral argument

Discussions on a ranges of philosophical issues including the nature of truth and reality, personal identity, mind-body theories, epistemology, justification of beliefs, argumentation and logic, philosophy of religion, free will and determinism, etc.
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
User avatar
RickD
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 22063
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Kitchen

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by RickD »

Kenny,

I'm pretty sure that you said something along the lines of morality being a construct of the human mind, and without humans, there'd be no morality.
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.


“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow




St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

RickD wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:22 am Kenny,

I'm pretty sure that you said something along the lines of morality being a construct of the human mind, and without humans, there'd be no morality.
I may have said it, I just don't recall; but that does sound like something I could agree with.
Do you agree with the examples I gave?
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:36 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
So, you are saying that, the statement : Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right.
Is NOT an objective statement?
Even though it has a FACTUAL, provable, base to it and is NOT based on opinion?
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:55 am
Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:36 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
So, you are saying that, the statement : Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right.
Is NOT an objective statement?
Even though it has a FACTUAL, provable, base to it and is NOT based on opinion?
When the Nazi's came to power in Europe, German citizens were legally allowed to take from Jewish people, because they were considered inferior. There are countless examples especially during war when what you might call stealing was believed to be okay (by those in power) considering the circumstances. Your statement is wrong.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
User avatar
RickD
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 22063
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Kitchen

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by RickD »

PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:55 am
Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:36 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
So, you are saying that, the statement : Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right.
Is NOT an objective statement?
Even though it has a FACTUAL, provable, base to it and is NOT based on opinion?
Paul, I don't think Kenny is seeing what you're saying. While the statement, "stealing is wrong...", is an objective truth statement, Kenny thinks you're asking if stealing is objectively wrong.

But then again, I don't think Kenny would agree that it's an objective truth statement, because he believes stealing being right or wrong, is subjective.
John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.


“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow




St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:23 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:55 am
Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:36 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
So, you are saying that, the statement : Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right.
Is NOT an objective statement?
Even though it has a FACTUAL, provable, base to it and is NOT based on opinion?
When the Nazi's came to power in Europe, German citizens were legally allowed to take from Jewish people, because they were considered inferior. There are countless examples especially during war when what you might call stealing was believed to be okay (by those in power) considering the circumstances. Your statement is wrong.
Did those very same German people view stealing the same way when it happened to them?
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Paul, I don't think Kenny is seeing what you're saying. While the statement, "stealing is wrong...", is an objective truth statement, Kenny thinks you're asking if stealing is objectively wrong.

But then again, I don't think Kenny would agree that it's an objective truth statement, because he believes stealing being right or wrong, is subjective.
Probably.
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 11:33 am
Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:23 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:55 am
Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:36 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:08 am Ken,
If you didn't say that Morality exists only in the mind, then I am sorry.
I didn't mean to misrepresent your view.

Yo use your examples and to make sure we are discussing the same thing in the same way:

Morality:
Objective - Stealing is wrong. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right

Subjective - It may be justifiable to steal to feed your children.

Would you agree with this?
No. I don't agree with what you labeled objective, because it can't be proven/demonstrated as wrong.
So, you are saying that, the statement : Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and there is no evidence in recorded history if it ever being right.
Is NOT an objective statement?
Even though it has a FACTUAL, provable, base to it and is NOT based on opinion?
When the Nazi's came to power in Europe, German citizens were legally allowed to take from Jewish people, because they were considered inferior. There are countless examples especially during war when what you might call stealing was believed to be okay (by those in power) considering the circumstances. Your statement is wrong.
Did those very same German people view stealing the same way when it happened to them?
The examples were supposed to EXCLUDE Theism and morality. All of your examples were about morality. Would you like to try again? This time anything except theism and morality
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Sure, answer my question first.
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

PaulSacramento wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:35 am Sure, answer my question first.
The Germans at that time felt they were the superior race, so of course they would consider it wrong to steal from the superior race, it's only okay when you take from those who are inferior
Same thing with Slavery; slaves were considered to be 3/5 human so it was okay to enslave/own them; sorta the same way today we consider it okay to own a dog, cat, or any other animal that isn't human. People will come up with all sorts of logic in order to justify evil behavior.
Now care to answer my question?
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Kenny wrote: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:38 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:35 am Sure, answer my question first.
The Germans at that time felt they were the superior race, so of course they would consider it wrong to steal from the superior race, it's only okay when you take from those who are inferior
Same thing with Slavery; slaves were considered to be 3/5 human so it was okay to enslave/own them; sorta the same way today we consider it okay to own a dog, cat, or any other animal that isn't human. People will come up with all sorts of logic in order to justify evil behavior.
Now care to answer my question?
So the Germans would view it to be WRONG if anyone took from them.
Making my point that NEVER at any point in recorded history has there been a case of stealing to be right.
Stealing from another, sure, but not from me !

LOL
Kenny
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3742
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: I don't believe in creation

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by Kenny »

PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:14 am
Kenny wrote: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:38 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:35 am Sure, answer my question first.
The Germans at that time felt they were the superior race, so of course they would consider it wrong to steal from the superior race, it's only okay when you take from those who are inferior
Same thing with Slavery; slaves were considered to be 3/5 human so it was okay to enslave/own them; sorta the same way today we consider it okay to own a dog, cat, or any other animal that isn't human. People will come up with all sorts of logic in order to justify evil behavior.
Now care to answer my question?
So the Germans would view it to be WRONG if anyone took from them.
Making my point that NEVER at any point in recorded history has there been a case of stealing to be right.
Stealing from another, sure, but not from me !

LOL
Not quite. If I recall correctly, you claimed there has never been a time when taking something that doesn't belong to you was considered okay. (which is the same as stealing) In this case the NAZI's just redefined stealing as taking from me, not you. So they were okay with taking something that doesn't belong to them (the point you made) as long as they were taking from specific people.

Ken
PS let me guess; you aren't going to answer my question are you. Why am I not surprised....
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 9224
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: WLC and the moral argument

Post by PaulSacramento »

Kenny wrote: Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:38 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Fri Jun 28, 2019 5:14 am
Kenny wrote: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:38 am
PaulSacramento wrote: Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:35 am Sure, answer my question first.
The Germans at that time felt they were the superior race, so of course they would consider it wrong to steal from the superior race, it's only okay when you take from those who are inferior
Same thing with Slavery; slaves were considered to be 3/5 human so it was okay to enslave/own them; sorta the same way today we consider it okay to own a dog, cat, or any other animal that isn't human. People will come up with all sorts of logic in order to justify evil behavior.
Now care to answer my question?
So the Germans would view it to be WRONG if anyone took from them.
Making my point that NEVER at any point in recorded history has there been a case of stealing to be right.
Stealing from another, sure, but not from me !

LOL
Not quite. If I recall correctly, you claimed there has never been a time when taking something that doesn't belong to you was considered okay. (which is the same as stealing) In this case the NAZI's just redefined stealing as taking from me, not you. So they were okay with taking something that doesn't belong to them (the point you made) as long as they were taking from specific people.

Ken
PS let me guess; you aren't going to answer my question are you. Why am I not surprised....
My point to you, Ken, was that your example was wrong because the Nazi's didn't view stealing as right, they viewed stealing what belong to Jews as right.
Stealing was still wrong to them since if someone stole from them they would say, "that's wrong".
Post Reply