Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,316
|
Evil
Jan 10, 2020 15:47:18 GMT -8
Post by Luca on Jan 10, 2020 15:47:18 GMT -8
Absolutely true on both accounts. You can argue theism just as convincingly as you can atheism, and I am frequently amazed how many don't even understand the implications of the latter..........................Luca
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Evil
Jan 10, 2020 16:42:42 GMT -8
Post by davidsf on Jan 10, 2020 16:42:42 GMT -8
An aside to this discussion, I would suggest that a large percentage, if not an outright majority, of people who say they are atheist actually fall under the agnostic category. They don't go to church, they don't formally pray, but they also don't outright say definitively that there is no God. They have no faith in formal religions and don't want to be bothered with the minutia involved in the arguments between theists & atheists, but they logically know that the existence of a Supreme Being can't be disproved. So they live their lives in a way that often follows Judaeo-Christian history as far as morality and are people who are a plus to their communities. This has been my position for a long time. |
|
|
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 4:28:40 GMT -8
Post by vilepagan on Jan 11, 2020 4:28:40 GMT -8
I'd be interested to hear those implications.
|
|
|
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 8:21:35 GMT -8
Post by coach on Jan 11, 2020 8:21:35 GMT -8
Evil = Liberalism.
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 9:25:31 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Bick on Jan 11, 2020 9:25:31 GMT -8
To answer your question, Bick, I don’t believe there are demons, if by that you mean a non-material conscious presence that influences human behavior. (There is a difference between denying that something exists versus not being convinced that it does. I'm simply not convinced). But I do think there is an objective evil behavior that virtually all human beings would label as such, eg, random murder, genocide, etc. It is true that there are some who do not believe those acts are intrinsically evil, but I believe that this simply indicates there is something significantly wrong with those people rather than being evidence that objective evil does not exist. A blind man can insist that there is no mountain on the horizon, but that doesntt mean it’s not there. The problem lies with he who is blind………………………………..Luca I can appreciate this is a tough pill to swallow, and used to feel the same way. Probably true for many things that require faith that can generally be explained with some reasonable rationalization. |
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 9:46:14 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Bick on Jan 11, 2020 9:46:14 GMT -8
This is the argument for the existence of God based on the existence of good and evil. Only God can be the source of objective moral value--any other source of morality is merely personal opinion or social consensus. I agree, and I've stated much the same at least twice in the past. This is also a position that Dennis Prager has repeated several times on his radio show. The concepts of good and evil stem from a belief in a Supreme Being from whom those values come. The belief in good and evil goes hand in hand with the belief in an afterlife and the prospects of eternal rewards or punishments. As Credo and Prager both say, without a God, good and evil are personal or societal values with no real basis other than consensus. They are social constructs, similar to the current 112 genders we have constructed for men and women Wouldn't this mindset be along the lines of evaluating nearly all extremes, much like a color spectrum or temperatures? I don't think God is involved much with how we perceive temperatures, for example. And to Vile's point, how we perceive the ambient temperature in terms of very cold to very warm, would depend primarily on our geographic location. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jan 11, 2020 10:02:03 GMT -8
First, I don't think comparing good and evil to how we perceive colors and temperatures is necessarily valid. We can see colors and feel temperatures, although we may label them with different words. Good and evil are intrinsic values and models of behavior that we don't experience through our senses.
Second, I don't think whether or not a God actually exists is what's important. It's the the belief that He does that derives our notions of what is good behavior and what is evil. Much of our legal system has it's origins in the ten commandments, and most of our most cherished rights are "inalienable" only because they were "endowed by their Creator". If not for the belief in a Supreme Being, why would most of us not behave just like other mammals -- take what we want, mate with whomever we want, kill if we want, etc.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 10:26:40 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Bick on Jan 11, 2020 10:26:40 GMT -8
Don't we perceive an action as very bad / "evil", bad, neutral, good, and very good / "Devine"?
Seems that would depend on the societal perceptions over time. Hell.. it even depends on the color of your vote now.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 11:43:14 GMT -8
Post by davidsf on Jan 11, 2020 11:43:14 GMT -8
Without a moral compass, which I understand to be God (but “you” don’t have to), all reference to “good” or “evil” becomes personal preference, relative to each individual.
On these discussions over on TOB, both Paul and Mike regularly asked, “by who’s definition” anytime anyone laid down some specific act was “bad” or “evil.” I don’t know either of them well enough to state they actually believed it, but they always argued for moral relativism whereas my position has a,ways been towards moral absolutes because I adhere to a standard.
That said, I am self-aware enough to understand my behavior doesn’t always fall in line with that standard. My disdain for people like vile-boy for example. Predators and recalcitrant reprobates like that are beyond my capacity for decency or respect. But that’s not to say I don’t still recognize moral absolutes.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 12:32:18 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Bick on Jan 11, 2020 12:32:18 GMT -8
One of the reasons I went with the temperature spectrum analogy was there really shouldn't be much of an argument that water boils at 212, and freezes at 32.
I think you can make similar claims about something miraculous / Devine or clearly evil.
I would say anything in between boiling and freezing would be put in the bucket of "freedom of choice". But given how there really isn't much we can agree upon in 2020, the reality is there's not much hope we'll find common ground on this.
Or is there?
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 12:58:24 GMT -8
Credo likes this
Post by MDDad on Jan 11, 2020 12:58:24 GMT -8
Yes, water boils at 212 degrees and freezes at 32, at least at sea level. But those are realities of physics, not personal or societal concepts of good and evil. And if you put two people in a wheat field at a sunny 65 degrees and a slight breeze, one might say it's warm and the other cool.
In the same way, a devout Christian might see a specific act as either good or evil, while a Maori warrior or a radical jihadist might see it differently. We cam all agree that it's wrong (or evil) to eat the flesh of another human being, although cannibal tribes might certainly disagree. But what if a stranded mother has to eat the flesh of a dead human being in order to produce milk for her newborn infant? Then calling it right or wrong becomes much more hazy. But those are specifics of detail. My point is that the concepts of good and evil as human behaviors, not the classifications of specific acts, originate from a belief in a Supreme Being.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 17:38:16 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Bick on Jan 11, 2020 17:38:16 GMT -8
I was looking for things that would be undeniably evil... Hitler, Pot, Dahmer, etc.
Maybe there's a good part of the population that think they're OK? Can't really tell anymore.
|
|
|
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 18:42:55 GMT -8
Post by captaintrips on Jan 11, 2020 18:42:55 GMT -8
I was looking for things that would be undeniably evil... Hitler, Pot, Dahmer, etc. Maybe there's a good part of the population that think they're OK? Can't really tell anymore. If evil is only a human concept, open to the ' changes & definitions' of the times and the people involved, those you named aren't evil by definition. They're only " evil" according to who you might ask. The " true for you, but not for me" effect that liberals so love. It's as nonsensical as everything else liberals do and say. Remember, these are people (liberals) who love & support Muslims & Islam AND love & ALSO support " gay marriage," " Transgenderism" and all the rest of the hateful, anti-scientific "LGBTQRTS" agenda. Muslims regularly kill "gays" and those who want to pose as a gender they really are not.... senseless destructive idiocy from liberals again ,,, their very ideas are self-destructive LOL Evil Dangerous & evil insanity all of it. None of it works in reality, it only causes death, pain and misery... evil does ... & destruction. |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Evil
Jan 11, 2020 22:34:42 GMT -8
Post by RSM789 on Jan 11, 2020 22:34:42 GMT -8
I was looking for things that would be undeniably evil... Hitler, Pot, Dahmer, etc. Playing Devils advocate, Hitler and his henchmen did not believe Hitler was evil. To them, it was deniable. |
|
|
|
Evil
Jan 12, 2020 3:19:05 GMT -8
Post by vilepagan on Jan 12, 2020 3:19:05 GMT -8
We may not experience good or evil through our senses, but there is no intrinsic value to either good or evil. What we consider to be good or evil changes over time and depends on where we are. We model our behavior based on what we're taught and how we're raised based on the society we live in at the time.
I don't think that's important either.
That may be true for some people but it's certainly not necessary to have that belief to have morality or to preach moral behavior.
This is actually a good example of how morals change over time. When our legal system began it certainly had more in common with the Ten Commandments than it does today. Today very few of the commandments are upheld by our criminal justice system. Doesn't this mean that we no longer see some behaviors proscribed by the commandments as "evil"?
Similarly I would dispute your claim about "inalienable" rights as being endowed by a "creator". Since the only ones named in the document are "life" liberty" and "the pursuit of happiness", and none of these are "inalienable" as the document claims they are, I think we can dismiss the claims of their origins as well.
Because while we are members of the animal kingdom we have evolved farther than most and have invented things like philosophy, ethics, and a sense of morality. Confucius is one of the most influential philosophers in the areas of morality and ethics, and he didn't believe in a supreme being nor believe that a God had to tell us what was right and wrong. Darwin believed in a "natural morality" that we acquired through evolution.
|
|
