[Hank Kerchief]

I don't see anything in your this post, HK that isn't relativism; "law of the jungle" as Alamo-Girl has said. Nothing about not harming others, for instance. It looks more hole than doughnut to me.

Everyone tends to see things as they are. The thief believes everyone is a thief, the liar thinks everyone is a liar. Seeing "law of the jungle" in rational values is a comment only on the one doing the seeing.

Those who embrace a rational moral view not only do not initiate the use of force against any other individual, but neither desire or pursue anything they have not earned by their own effort. This is entirely from selfish motives.

Why do those whose moral values are based on arbitrary dictates, totally disconnected from reality, the nature of the beings to whom they are supposed to apply, or the world they live in, exhibit an almost hysterical hatred for those who pose no threat to anyone, and could not be induced to be a threat to them by any means.

Why do you hate reason, truth, decency, honesty, and virtue so much? You must hate them, or you would not always be excoriating those who espouse them.

Hank

[unspun]

Oh Hank, I love you, even if you do need a shave.

I'm glad that Saddam hasn't been allowed to keep acting according to the values that were rational for the attainment of his objectives, by his personal sense of what he found enjoyable.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for pinging me to the “law of the jungle” discussion between you (unspun and Hank!) Hank, you said:

Everyone tends to see things as they are. The thief believes everyone is a thief, the liar thinks everyone is a liar.

And then you almost immediately also said:

Those who embrace a rational moral view not only do not initiate the use of force against any other individual, but neither desire or pursue anything they have not earned by their own effort.

If I apply your first statement ”everyone tends to see things they way they are” to your second statement, I get an interesting result. The conclusion that “a person who embraces a certain rational moral view would not initiate the use of force against any other individual and would neither desire nor pursue anything they haven’t earned by their own effort” is the tendency of one ”to see things the way they are”.

And that brings me right back to agreeing with general_re --- you can no more be objective about any “rational moral view” than I can be objective about “the absolute moral law of God.”

Why do you hate reason, truth, decency, honesty, and virtue so much?

That is a strange allegation, Hank; unless you mean something other than the common dictionary definition, I do not hate any of these things. I also do not hate any person or being.

I am at odds with metaphysical naturalism – along with any philosophy which elevates self to parity, or above, God. That is an abomination to me; it is utterly pointless to try to convince me otherwise. Conversely, I have it on highest authority of my faith that anyone who willfully excludes God in their pursuit of knowledge will be given over to a reprobate mind (Romans 1:28) – therefore, it is futile for me to discuss knowledge much less wisdom, with a metaphysical naturalist.

And the futility is only more clear with your own statement: Everyone tends to see things as they are. A metaphysical naturalist can only see the world through a metaphysical naturalist’s eyes. A born again believer can only see the world through a born again believer’s eyes.