are we all sinners ??

[treize]

We? you take away the subjectivity of morality if you use the word "we". "we" pertains to the general populace therefore, you are not referring to an individual capable of seeing what is RIGHT or WRONG to him, but rather, you're setting a definition of what is right or wrong based on what is acceptable or not. that is objective morality, not subjective. of course, murdering another individual is wrong---but that doesn't mean it's wrong for each individual, whether we like it or not.

ever heard of Jim Jones?

in your previous post you asked "who are we to say killing another person is wrong" and in this post you said "of course, murdering another individual is wrong" now you're confusing me... hehehe...

Chad criminals who commit murder are very much aware that doing such a criminal act is wrong however they're making it right for them for their selfish reasons..

so then I say morality can never be subjective when people are aware that something seems so right but you know it's wrong..

Have you ever killed someone for your own selfishness? If not, try it and you'll understand what I'm saying...

BTW never knew that you're such a great fan of a lunatic like Jim Jones..

[josephdc]

on the first paragraph, yes.. because it served their interests better... and to continue that,, there are people who stopped them because it served thier best interest to stop those guys from killing others... its in the best interest of the robber to steal, and it is also in the best interest of the police to prevent crime.. its just a matter of conflicts of interests..

I see, so that's what it really was then; they were all a matter of conflict of interests and nothing really wrong happened?

on the second paragraph.. hmm.. i dont think thats how those guys think... if i were hitler.. i wouldnt see any point in killing the jews.. i prefer making them slaves and working the to death.. thats more productive..

So if you were in Hitler's shoes, you wouldn't really think that killing the Jews is wrong? It's just that you wouldn't see any point in doing it...

regarding maguindanao.. if i wer ampatuan.. i should have given the victims police escort.. so that there will be no blame placed on me... those guys are just merely acting on impulse... without much thinking and deliberations.. a wise person would know when, how, and where to inflict necessary "evil"..

I'm shocked that that's what you think. So the Ampatuans should've been more careful in doing what they and their accomplices did... If they'd been more wise and careful, they would've eluded the police, etc... So the massacre wasn't really wrong?

i quite dont understand your third paragraph.. if i was not mistaken.. it was a preacher who claimed that their was too much evil in haiti so god sent an earthquake...

What I meant bro was that some atheists often bring up the problem of evil to somehow argue that God does not exist.

regarding god commanding genocide, its in your bible.. kindly look for it... i personally have nothing against genocide or saving them.. if they dont serve my interests. in has nothing to do with me..

So you think genocide is good or at least a morally-neutral act?

the crusades,jihad, inquisition, witch hunts, are nothing more than political events but covered up by religion.. there is no such thing as absolute righteousness.. only self-righteousness... biased perspectives..

Some atheists sometimes bring up those issues as reasons to somehow discredit Christian theism. When they do that, they presuppose that there are objective moral wrongs. In your view, you don't believe that there are objective and absolute moral truths, right?

I'm really surprised you've been very candid and honest about your views. At the same time, I'm shocked that any person in his right mind can actually believe that the Holocaust, for example, or genocide, or rape, is not objectively wrong. I guess that's just fairly consistent with a naturalistic and atheistic worldview. The novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky once said that without God or immortality, everything is permitted. I think your views have been pretty revealing so far. With that kind of worldview or philosophy, one can justify anything, even the most horrendous and despicable of acts.

[chad_tukes]

in your previous post you asked "who are we to say killing another person is wrong" and in this post you said "of course, murdering another individual is wrong" now you're confusing me... hehehe...

what is so confusing about it? i wasn't implying that murdering an individual is right. if it was, then i could have murdered my enemies and i'd be in a maximum security prison right now. i was making a point about subjective morality. again, who are we to judge what is right or wrong? is it right or wrong to murder a pig?

Chad criminals who commit murder are very much aware that doing such a criminal act is wrong however they're making it right for them for their selfish reasons..

wrong. some of them committed murderous acts thinking what they did was right.

so then I say morality can never be subjective when people are aware that something seems so right but you know it's wrong..

then how can you explain what seems to be right during Hitler's time but totally wrong during our time?

BTW never knew that you're such a great fan of a lunatic like Jim Jones..

you're a funny guy. don't put me in a bad light. oh by the way, if you haven't known, Jim Jones was a "follower of GOD".

[Tirong-say]

We? you take away the subjectivity of morality if you use the word "we". "we" pertains to the general populace therefore, you are not referring to an individual capable of seeing what is RIGHT or WRONG to him, but rather, you're setting a definition of what is right or wrong based on what is acceptable or not. that is objective morality, not subjective. of course, murdering another individual is wrong---but that doesn't mean it's wrong for each individual, whether we like it or not.

ever heard of Jim Jones?

Yeah not wrong, but better ask the victims. Such a notion is tantamount to lawlessness.

[chad_tukes]

Yeah not wrong, but better ask the victims. Such a notion is tantamount to lawlessness.

but nevertheless, we still have laws to follow right? whether or not these laws are "GOD" or man-made, we are bound to follow the rules. if we break the rules, it is considered "wrong". but to what extent should we call an act wrong?

[AmorsoloX]

I'm really surprised you've been very candid and honest about your views. At the same time, I'm shocked that any person in his right mind can actually believe that the Holocaust, for example, or genocide, or rape, is not objectively wrong. I guess that's just fairly consistent with a naturalistic and atheistic worldview. The novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky once said that without God or immortality, everything is permitted. I think your views have been pretty revealing so far. With that kind of worldview or philosophy, one can justify anything, even the most horrendous and despicable of acts.

yup... everything is actually neutral.. it just depends on your perspective.. regarding the holocaust, if you like the jews, you would say it was evil.. if you hated the jews, youd say it was good...

all actions are just means to an ends.. and the ends justifies the means.. if the ends is not what you expected, then you were wrong.. big time..

everything is really permitted..but of course, there are times when it is in the best interest of your fellow men to stop you... ex. you just cant rape your neighbors daughter without expecting retribution... conflicts of interest..

Men created the concept of morality to suit their interests.. nothing more nothing less... thats why we see here on the forum.. conflicts in view of morality... but actually, they are just conflicts of interests..

P.S. im not anti-god here.. im anti-religion.. i still believe on the infinite intelligence... with no concept of good and evil.. only actions and reactions...

[Tirong-say]

but nevertheless, we still have laws to follow right? whether or not these laws are "GOD" or man-made, we are bound to follow the rules. if we break the rules, it is considered "wrong". but to what extent should we call an act wrong?

Each one of us are bounded and protected by these laws, an act to breach is already considered wrong.

[treize]

what is so confusing about it? i wasn't implying that murdering an individual is right. if it was, then i could have murdered my enemies and i'd be in a maximum security prison right now. i was making a point about subjective morality. again, who are we to judge what is right or wrong? is it right or wrong to murder a pig?'

pig is a part of human food chain so it aint wrong unless you're just simply killing it and living it there..

wrong. some of them committed murderous acts thinking what they did was right.

they think it's right for them but they're very much aware that it's wrong.. human acts of selfishness

then how can you explain what seems to be right during Hitler's time but totally wrong during our time?

you don't have to explain that you'll just have to understand that they're doing it for their own selfish reasons.. they may think that it is right for their sake but they're very much aware that killing an individual is wrong..

you're a funny guy. don't put me in a bad light. oh by the way, if you haven't known, Jim Jones was a "follower of GOD".

glad that you've notice that.. hehehe...
I was just wondering what kind of God did he followed that led him to persuade his followers to commit suicide... totally insane...hehehe...

[treize]

I honestly can’t see how morals could be comparable to a taste preference in the arts. We don’t say that it’s just the opinion of the Islamic suicide bombers to blow themselves up on buses filled with innocent civilians, as we might say that it is just your opinion that the Red Sox are the world’s greatest baseball team or that country music is god awful. I can’t see that any human being could compare the two. The fact is that humanity is not nihilistic. We lock up sociopaths because they are a threat to the reality of human society. We could never have become the dominant species of the planet if we thought that human behavior was just a matter of taste. We have a natural instinct to live and to live with other people. Only short sighted self destructive creatures are or can be nihilistic. Our very ability to see into the future in regards to human behavior, our capability for empathy, the inherent logic of zero sumness in almost all of human relations, the progress and spread of cosmopolitanism… all these point to objective moral facts...

[josephdc]

yup... everything is actually neutral.. it just depends on your perspective.. regarding the holocaust, if you like the jews, you would say it was evil.. if you hated the jews, youd say it was good...

all actions are just means to an ends.. and the ends justifies the means.. if the ends is not what you expected, then you were wrong.. big time..

everything is really permitted..but of course, there are times when it is in the best interest of your fellow men to stop you... ex. you just cant rape your neighbors daughter without expecting retribution... conflicts of interest..

Men created the concept of morality to suit their interests.. nothing more nothing less... thats why we see here on the forum.. conflicts in view of morality... but actually, they are just conflicts of interests..

I see. I think I understand your view bro. For you, evil does not exist. So the horrible things that humanity has experienced in history (the Holocaust, genocide, wars, etc.), they were not evil. So are the things that we see in our newspapers every day (rape, murder, child abuse, domestic violence, massacres, robberies, corruption in government, etc); they too are not evil.

I think it follows also that, since evil does not exist, objective goodness does not exist, too, right? So things like self-sacrifice, justice, love, etc., are objectively meaningless actions, too, right?

P.S. im not anti-god here.. im anti-religion.. i still believe on the infinite intelligence... with no concept of good and evil.. only actions and reactions...

What do you mean by the infinite intelligence?