Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: stuartcr
of course I would have a beef. As we well know, there are those that are prone to murder, just as there are those that find it abhorrent. There is societal justice, and we must obey the laws that are in place, or pay the consequence...
and
.it is the interpretation/acceptance that gives it it's value.

I am not trying to play games with your words. I've been a theist most of my life. I've been interested in what you might call Philosophical Theology most of my adult life. I'm VERY interested in what people who disagree with me (and the RC Church, of which I am a member) think.

Your assertion that the subject matter of the Natural Sciences is the only area where we may find absolutes is not brand new, but it has always intrigued me, precisely because Baconian empiricism seems to me to be very practical but based on a lot of assumptions -- many of which, I think, Bacon understood, but which the present devotees of empiricism think so obvious that they get all irritable when the assumptions are not questioned but merely brought to the surface. Then they start saying people are twisting their words. It reminds me of the way people got irritated with Socrates.

Anyway, to proceed:

The value of your complaint (or your heirs' complaint) if I have you murdered is that a lot of people accept the notion that murder is a bad thing? So back before people had opinions about murder it would have been okay? Or back when tribal warfare was considered noble, it WAS noble? But now it's not?

So the only thing wrong with my murdering you for your opinion is my timing?

... we must obey the laws that are in place, or pay the consequence. The police ARE better armed than we are, so we MUST (probably) pay the consequence, but it sounds like you think the question whether we SHOULD pay the consequence is meaningless -- or is insignificantly different from asking what the majority thinks.

A land mass' physical existence can be easily verified without any qualifiers.

But isn't the notion that Australia existed before any humans ran across it relative to some suppositions about matter and causality generally? Your absolutes are VERY relative, and they are relative to assumptions (which I happen to share) which have not always been held by even a minority of humans. (And in a few bazillion years when the sun goes Nova, or in somewhat fewer years when Christ comes again and heaven and earth pass away, Australia will be, at most, a memory. Your absolute then will be that once there was a planet with such and such a land mass.)

Have you ever read Kant's Critique of Pure Reason? Any Aristotle? The Timaeus of Plato? You seem to have an admirable commitment to articulating the Truth. I'd like to think that that commitment led you to interact with the great people who agree and disagree with you.

Have you read any C.S. Lewis? I'm thinking here especially of Mere Christianity. The reason I think of it is that Lewis's opening argument is about the relationship between the concept of moral law and the existence of God.

But if you think that God doesn't care about right and wrong, then, while we petty humans may be upset by it, it doesn't really matter in the final analysis. It's not verifiable, it's not of ultimate concern, (and, of course, I -- MOI! -- am above mundane concerns) so who cares? I shall do whatever I want, if I think I can get away with it. Yee Hah - Just as soon as I get me some Ben Gay and some Viagra, I'm headed for the Hootchie-Kootchie joint!

408 posted on 01/06/2005 12:06:09 PM PST by Mad Dawg (My P226 wants to teach you what SIGnify means ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies ]


To: Mad Dawg

The real problem with murdering me, is that I would not like it, and we all have built-in self-defense mechanisms. For me, my family, and our current society, first degree murder is abhorrent...has been in most societies. I think we need to talk of taking a life, as opposed to murder. First degree murder, within one's family, tribe, group, etc, has almost always been considered wrong..taking a life, in the form of wars, abortions, human-sacrifice...has not. This distinction, I think, has to be made. As members of a society, we must and should, obey the laws, but I think our concept of justice only applies to us here on earth. That is why I have said that I don't believe that what we do really is of any consequence to God. After all, I believe He made us knowing exactly what we will do in our lifetime, and since we are alive, by His grace, it must have been part of His plan. Consequently, I don't believe in eternal punishment for something that we may have done here on earth for the few years we are alive.

I'm not familiar with the suppositions about matter and causality that you mention. If, what you say is true, then it would appear that there are no absolutes of any kind.

No, I have not read any of those that you list. Yes, I do agree that, in the final analysis, it really doesn't matter.

It is not, that I will do whatever I want, I believe that I will do whatever I have been designed/destined to do by God. While some have broken out the Ben Gay and Viagra, more have not.


427 posted on 01/07/2005 6:21:46 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson