Posted on 02/27/2007 5:57:42 AM PST by A. Pole
How does a blind, impersonal physical process that has no purpose and consequently no preference for either survival or extinction provide any foundation for a value judgment that survival is good and extinction is bad? Why presuppose that there a moral obligation to survive? If there is such a moral obligation, where does it come from in a universe comprised solely of physical forces? How do brute forces generate moral incumbency?
And even assuming that such a universe could produce moral commands that ought to be obeyed, if the purported natural history of the earth provides any clue as to the origin of moral incumbency then why isn't extinction, which is by far the more common occurrence, be the 'preferred' outcome?
Cordially,
By what standard?
You have to assume some sort of overarching standard to make such a value judgment. But what are you measuring the universe with? If you say that the universe (or, in this case some aspect of it, such as extinction) is "bad" then you are assuming some sort of standard by which the universe may be judged. The problem is that a measuring stick must be independent of the thing measured, and if you are no more outside being a mere product product of those self-same brute physical forces than than an extinct fish then you cannot account for the super-natural standard you are invoking to judge the universe. So how do you account for that standard which you are assuming that is independent or outside of the universe? In the atheist view, what exists outside the universe? What are you comparing the universe to when you say that it or some part of it is "bad"?
And furthermore, how can you on one hand trust the universe that miraculously provides a standard by which to judge itself, and then on the other hand condemn the very same universe (or some aspect of it) which provided the standard that you trust?
Cordially,
"By what standard?"
Mine. The only one I abide by (unless in the presence of superior firepower).
"You have to assume some sort of overarching standard to make such a value judgment."
Why? I do not think so.
"If you say that the universe (or, in this case some aspect of it, such as extinction) is "bad" then you are assuming some sort of standard by which the universe may be judged."
I do not think so. I do not need any exterior, objective or acceptable to anyone but myself standard to say that dropping a bowling ball on my foot hurts. Neither do I need to appeal to God/Gods nor the opinion of anyone else to consider something 'bad'.
Now, if I want to convince someone else that something is bad or good I should be required to provide a common frame of reference, of course, but I, myself alone am quite capable of determining what is 'bad' without reference to any external definition. Now, if I wish to convince you that, say, Islam is bad then, yes we need to agree on commonplaces, definitions and some extrinsic 'right' and 'wrong'.
Cordially,
Yes, it is the extrinsic 'right' and 'wrong' to which I'm referring. Leaving aside the problem of how deterministic neural/chemical reactions can be 'convinced' of anything, if good and bad is as subjective as billions of brain chemical states at any given moment it doesn't make any sense to invoke an objective standard, In the universe that Dawkin has constructed in his imagination his railings against religion make about as much sense as complaints that one ought to prefer chocolate over vanilla. Why does he expect that other subjective chemical brain states should (or is even possible to) conform to his own? If there is no objective moral standard there is nothing to argue about. Dawkins' materialistic presuppositions reduce his own protests to mere emotive utterances, devoid of ethical and rational content. His ethical complaints about aspects of the physical universe are self-refuting.
Cordially,
LOL. Well said:^)
Any belief system peculiar to one person is insanity, shared by only a few is a cult and adhered to by enough people is a religion.
I would just say that from a purely materialistic philosophical premise there is no ground for a diagnosis of insanity because it inconsistently implies that there is some objective, right standard by which a belief system (presumed to be nothing but a product of that very same deterministic, purposeless universe) can be measured. It doesn't make any sense to say that little machines, accidental byproducts of the big machine, controlled by the same forces of mechanical necessity that govern atoms and stars are either sane or insane.
I don't know if I have bad hair or not.... Wait a minute. Yes I do know. I do have bad hair, but at least I'm not on TV on a cheap, tacky looking background set. It's not really a problem that on Dawkins' assumptions theism is untrue because on his presuppositions his own philosophy is also untrue. If Dawkins' presuppositions reduce his own philosophy to nonrational chemical forces, those same nonrrational presuppositions cannot be used to deny other belief systems, including theistic ones.
Cordially,
It's a delusion the same way that children who believe in Santa Claus are delusional. Santa does as much actual "work" as Jesus/God/Muhammad/Allah/whatever.
People believe in a higher power and an afterlife because they'd get terribly depressed and be unable to function without that idea-- the idea that things aren't random, that there is order, that it all makes sense to some higher power even if it doesn't make sense to people, that there is a magical fairy land we can go to when we die where all sorts of things will happen that make us happy forever. They choose to ignore things that tell them that none of that is true and they latch on to the flimsiest of evidence to support their belief. It is a crutch, a security blanket to get through life without wanting to kill yourself because of the extreme despair that would result from true awareness of the situation.
Instead, people should just enjoy the parts of life that are enjoyable and learn to deal with the fact that life sucks sometimes-- sometimes it sucks very hard (like the poor baby who just got his nose eaten off by a rat). Bad things will happen to good and bad people alike, same with good things. It's just how it is.
We encourage kids to believe in fantasy things because it brings them joy-- like a buzz from a narcotic or drinking alcohol. We view it as harmless. Kids want to believe that everything is under control in their world and that when things are crazy around them, there is a chance that something magical will happen to make everything better. Believing in a higher power is no different at all.
That's the other odd thing. That people who believe in a higher power don't realize that you can deduce "good neighbor" behavior as a part of a social contract, a part of joining civilization. You don't have to either be a believer in a higher power or act like a monkey. That's a false choice.
You can define evil as senseless, malicious harmful activity-- especially against "innocents."
Guilt? Because he knows that persecution isn't appropriate behavior? Like the reformed racist who does charity work in inner cities? It's a perfectly natural response to discovering you've acted poorly. Plus, Paul believed that converting and becoming that which he despised would undo his bad behavior-- give him a blank slate.
Yes you can, but you would be in error, especially trying to use such an esoteric term as "senseless". Senseless to whom? I would imagine that an action makes perfect sense to the person commiting the evil. Now, you've set up a scenario where someone other than the actor has to judge whether or not the act was senseless.
Don't you see the inherent contradiction in this?
Senselessness is sort of defined by the victim, not the actor. There are victims of acts (by humans or nature) where there is no possible validation-- particularly against the defenseless and those who had no quarrel with the actor. You can use reason to judge things like that. You don't have to consult a holy book.
Paul was chosen by God. He was a scholar of Jewish Law and loved God with all his heart.
At first he felt he was doing God's will by eliminating a sect that followed this Jesus, that said He was God. Christians, to him, were an abomination of the Law.
Then, he met the Holy Spirit of Christ on the road to Damascus. Of course, he felt guilty.
But, Christ forgave him,
and showed him his true purpose in life, to spread Christianity to the non-Jewish people.
He did not spend the rest of his life trying to erase the slate. He spread God's Word because the Spirit was within him. The love of God, and his love of his fellow man, drove him to spread the Word.
Christians live by faith, not fear. We all have trials, every day. We all make choices, every day. Some seem so miniscule, but we are affected, and those around us are affected by our daily decisions.
If we believe that Christ died for us, and allow God to control our hearts and thoughts, we will have a wonderful, although often difficult, adventure. We are striving for a goal, to live life as if there is no tomorrow.
F.A.I.T.H. = Fantastic Advenutre In Thy Hands.
God created each and every soul.
"It's just how it is."
Each human has a body and soul (soul comprised of mind and heart, these are the elementary significant components), and was originally created with a spirit.
"It's just how it is."
After the fall, humans have separated from God in spirit.
"It's just how it is."
Now, after physical birth, each human has a human soul and a physical body. The physical body perceives from the five senses. The soul perceives with the soul, by rationalism.
"It's just how it is."
Prior to the first death, each and every human is afforded an opportunity to comprehend the meaning of how to have a relationship with God through faith in Christ.
"It's just how it is."
Every human has volition, and in that volition may choose to either accept God's grace or to reject it in the human's thinking.
"It's just how it is."
For those who reject Him continually prior to their bodily death, they are part of the group known as unbelievers.
"It's just how it is."
For those who exhibit just a little more faith than absolutely no faith whatsoever, God makes that faith efficacious for salvation.
"It's just how it is."
Upon faith in Him, God then immediately regenerates the human spirit in the believer.
"It's just how it is."
Those who have a regenerated spirit have eternal life, while those who reject Him, are condemned already.
"It's just how it is."
Every human has the opportunity for God to give him eternal life.
"It's just how it is."
Volition, marriage, family, and national governance are all divinely established institutions for believer and unbeliever alike.
"It's just how it is."
People attempt to make order out of chaos. This is the definition of the Greek word KOSMOS, also translated as 'world'.
"It's just how it is."
People can create a world without faith, or they can walk by faith and organize the chaos by His will. God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever might believe in Him, shall have eternal life. THose who reject Him might live within His established institutions for a lifetime, but are perishing. The consequences of rejecting Him throughout one's life in body and soul is to be cast out with those things found to be good for nothingness by the same person who created us to perform good. The place that is created for things that are good for nothingness was created for fallen angels and is known as the Lake of Fire.
"It's just how it is."
Salvation doesn't imply happiness. Salvation is accompanied by joy.
"It's just how it is."
Those who never accept the saving work of Christ, do not have a regenerated spirit and thereby lack perception of spiritual truth. Faith is a system of perception in the spirit, just as the five bodily senses provide a system of perception in our bodies and rationalism provides a system of perception in our souls. Those lacking that system of perception will attempt to either rationalize or sense God's existence, but without a human spirit regenerated in man, the unbelieving human has no perception of God spiritually. Man was nonetheless created in body, soul, and spirit and none of it intrinsically is evil. We have however, inherited an old sin nature which scars our body and thinking to promote further alienation from Him. If left unattended, its natural course is not only to reject God, but later to attack the very things He provides for us to follow Him in His Plan.
"It's just how it is."
AMEN
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.