[UnklGene]

Good post. Thanks.

[tioga]

interesting point......I will use this line of reasoning soon for the imbeciles I encounter, I am sure...

[ModelBreaker]

Nice post. Paul made as similar point eloquently in Romans. I also saw something similar in a Florence King essay some years ago. She argued that Southern men drove liberals crazy because, when pressed about why he thinks something is wrong, the southern man will often reply "I don't know. It's just wrong."

[Doctor Stochastic]

The essence of PostModern thinking. The author not only claims morality is what he feels it to be, but he also asserts that he cannot explain why. When two such people meet, it's fun to watch (from a distance.)

[FreedomFlynnie]

Elevate personal squeamishness to the level of a moral absolute? No thanks. If one can't adequately explain why a given act is wrong (which one can, for incest), either one is a poor debator or should consider whether that act is wrong in the first place.

[watchin]

Interesting post.

I've always thought it interesting that the same people who deny an absolute morality when talking about modern social/sexual issues have no problem with absolute morality when it comes to environmental issues.

IOW, my views on abortion and homosexuality are merely opinion, but their views on saving the whales and the ozone layer are universal, undeniable truths.

[NCPAC]

An individual who needs rely on so-called "self evident truths" to buttress his/her argument is an individual who either does not have, or does not care to employ, logic and/or reasoning. What one deems to be "self evident" IS, indeed, subjective.

"Self evidence" is the lazy man's way to self-righteousness.

[spodefly]

BTTT

[Countyline]

"That instinctual sense of revulsion is a moral perception as accurate and undeniable as your sense of sight, smell, taste, touch, or hearing."

It is a bit like going naked. We learn very early on that is is taboo to run around without clothes and there it is.It is a accepted part of our society and things that aren't, do not make the cut. Too bad. Just how it is.

We are told if we do not like the content of tv to turn it off. By that logic, if people where you are do not like your actions and you want them accepted go to where they are. Simple LOL!

[MEGoody]

Ah, so that's it. The vast majority of America has had their morality sensing 'nerves' numbed.

[Jerrybob]

Good points.

I love it when people say "There is no right or wrong, good or bad."

That's the time to say "Fine. Next time you come across some roadkill, stop, scoop it up, take it home and put it in the middle of your dining room table -- and just leave it there for a month or two. Then call me."

[freeangel]

I was just discussing this point with a friend the other day. Thanks.

[TalBlack]

God infuses Man with understanding. Some men get a thrill by replacing God with themselves. The more they outrage the more God-like they feel. These are usually called "Liberals" To me it comes down to whether or not you believe in God or, if you do, whether accept His authority.

One thing is sure, and it is to me as close to "proof" of God's existence as one can get: You are in the battle between right and wrong, no on opts out. It's not possible.

[Trinity_Tx]

The author starts off ok, saying that there are "certain" moral truths that we "just know" without having to analyze the "why".

OK... I think we can all agree that "certain things," like murder and stealing and lying, etc, are wrong. (tho one could describe them as "wrong" because they are malfunctional to humanity, rather than because they are "sinful".)

But then he talks in very general terms, i.e., "matters of morality," and he says that if someone doesn't "get" why it's immoral, they are in denial or rebellious:

"The bottom line is, when it comes to moral matters, there is just no way you that can convince someone of a truth that their conscience should have already apprehended."

My question is, what qualifies as a moral matter to him? There are many things that you or I might say are amoral, while others would consider it a moral matter with a Self-Evident Truth.

And if not all moral matters are self-evident, who decides which ones are self-evident and which are not?

And until this is hashed out, then what is the point?

[MHGinTN]

I'm afraid Askel5's conversion of my semi-choice stance is a refutation of this author's premise. But the writing wasn't that bad ...

[aliadn]

I hold it to be self-evident and undeniable that truth is relative, If you have to ask why you will never understand.

How can that be proven wrong? Is it possible that His laws written on our mind and heart are my belief that mankind should be treated on the individual level with kindness and respect?

[Scarchin]

C.S. Lewis does a much better job with this in Mere Christianity.

[Mmmike]

Bump.