Moral objective values...

[whisperit]

[font=Verdana]In one of his papers, Dr. William Lane Craig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lane_Craig) argues moral objective values is to say something is right or wrong independently of whether anybody believes it to be so. If God does not exist, what is the foundation for moral objective values?[/font][/url]

[keithprosser3]

We've moved the debate on since you were away.

[JohnA]

Nice way to avoid that your dogma pontification is way off.

General Relativity (GR) is a classic theory in the sense that it has open questions. It can not explain singularities (the space-time curvature), even-though it is a feature of the theory - E.g. the beginning of the universe. It also can not explain the effects on the small quantum scale; quantum gravity is needed or something that can unite QM with GR.

When someone uses a GPS and it does not get him to his destination, we do not say "GR is a bit off". We do not say that because of these open questions in GR, or because GR is wrong/incomplete. GR just does not apply under those conditions (GPS receiver wrong/faulty, GPS satellite wrong/uncalibrated, Navigation software buggy, Map data is wrong/incomplete, etc.).

What is your opinion now on this Golden rule?
Do you still hold that this is a scientific "law" or "fact" or "Theory" whatever you were trying to claim?

[Bust Nak]

I can just write down some vague rules and let my followers argue over what I meant.

That's a good idea. That way we only have to bother you when we can't agree.

So, what are the rules, master?

Start with ones I gave here. Re: death penalty, foxhunting, foetal stem-cell research, euthanasia, inequality, homosexuality and sex outside marriage.

They give insight into the ethics of crime and punishment, science, medicine, social issues and sexual issues.

[Bust Nak]

I don't think it's curios at all, morality has baffled academics for a long time. Nobody is amazed that we have tendency for reciprocity. It's not surprising that I have an urge to help those in need, i.e I find pleasure in helping others. An inclination for altruism is easily explained by evolution. What is baffling is that when there is no such inclination, and I'd find helping some particular person very unpleasant and unrewarding, even then I work against my biological inclinations and offer my help. The reason I do it is not because it feels good, not because that kind of behavior would help the society in a long run, but simply because it seems the right thing to do.

You simply aren't acknowledging how good it feel even when you help particular person very unpleasant and unrewarding. It DOES feel good - because you find pleasure in helping others. If the good you feel doesn't outweight the unpleasantness, you wouldn't be doing it. It's simply another manifestation of altruism as explained by evolution.

...the fact remains that even in cases where none of these explanations apply, one might still choose to do the right thing merely for the sake of doing the right thing.

One condition always apply, it feels good to do the right thing.

[Artie]

Need I say more?

Yes, you need to explain why we shouldn't live by the motto "if you want help, help others" and why it would be bad for us?

But that is not the golden rule (One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.)

One should help others as one would like others to help oneself. Simply substitute the word treat with other appropriate words and use some common sense. I would be very interested in knowing why exactly you spend day after day post after post trying to discredit the most universally accepted moral law? What's your agenda? What do you hope to gain by doing so? That we don't help each other?

[keithprosser3]

One condition always apply, it feels good to do the right thing.

Or does it feel bad to do the wrong thing? Guilt is like pain - it is something that you learn ways to avoid.

Nature is a bit of a bitch that way. Apart from orgasms (which only lasts a few seconds) no pleasure is as intense as some of the pain she often inflicts. She prefers to use a stick rather offering a carrot to get us to behave. Same with guilt - it makes you feel lousy for much longer than something that makes you happy has any effect.

Or am I just a miserable git?

[JohnA]

Need I say more?

Yes, you need to explain why we shouldn't live by the motto "if you want help, help others" and why it would be bad for us?

But that is not the golden rule (One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.)

One should help others as one would like others to help oneself. Simply substitute the word treat with other appropriate words and use some common sense. I would be very interested in knowing why exactly you spend day after day post after post trying to discredit the most universally accepted moral law? What's your agenda? What do you hope to gain by doing so? That we don't help each other?

This golden rule is not a law and it's not moral either.
If it was, then you would help me showing it is myth, surely.
My agenda is to debate, that is what this site/forum is about, remember? I hope to help you see that your anti-scientific pontification of myth, grounded in biased and faulty reasoning, is irrational and incoherent.
I would be very interested in knowing why exactly you spend day after day post after post trying to credit a mystical ununiversally rule? What's your agenda? What do you hope to gain by doing so? That we don't help each other? (You are already not helping me, are you must confining this rule is false? )

[NoisForm]

One condition always apply, it feels good to do the right thing.

Or does it feel bad to do the wrong thing? Guilt is like pain - it is something that you learn ways to avoid.

Nature is a bit of a bitch that way. Apart from orgasms (which only lasts a few seconds) no pleasure is as intense as some of the pain she often inflicts. She prefers to use a stick rather offering a carrot to get us to behave. Same with guilt - it makes you feel lousy for much longer than something that makes you happy has any effect.

Or am I just a miserable git?

Yes. Yes you are. But, I believe you are also correct. Guilt is an amazing tool for molding behavior. Why do you think so many religions have monopolized on it, along with fear? That stuff works.

I recall one of the 'four horsemen' (perhaps Harris?) speaking of how evolution uses pain to deter us from harmful situations. Protect the package at all cost! He didn't take issue with the fact that it did so, but he did question the apparent overkill. Something like a simple paper cut can be immensely painful, seemingly far outweighing the actually potential for harm.

Of course, I suppose something like a tiny cut now, versus the same a few hundred thousand years ago when there'd be no knowledge of remedies, defense against infection, etc. might be quite different. Anyway, nature indeed carries a very large stick, and protects its own with ferocity.

Side note; "it feels good to do the right thing." Gotta say, I'm off now to do my daily grind. I'm quite convinced it is the 'right thing' to do. Continued existence, food, responsibility - all that rot. But I can tell you, at the moment it certainly doesn't 'feel good'. It's cold out there. It is entirely a reasoned position connected to my future survival that pushes me out the door, not a good feeling. Heh. *sigh* I'm off...

[Artie]

I hope to help you see that your anti-scientific pontification of myth, grounded in biased and faulty reasoning, is irrational and incoherent.

So "One should help others as one would like others to help oneself" is myth grounded in biased and faulty reasoning. Good luck with convincing people of that. Then you should never help people and people should never help you. You wouldn't want to help perpetuate the myth you know.

By the way, you said and I quote: "I hope to help you". That would be you acting according to the Golden Rule, the same rule that according to you is a "myth grounded in biased and faulty reasoning". You have heard the expression shooting oneself in the foot, right? You shouldn't be acting according to the same rule you are trying to discredit you see.

By posting you are trying to help us. Either

1. Stop posting or
2. Admit that you are acting according to the Golden Rule.

[Bust Nak]

One condition always apply, it feels good to do the right thing.

Or does it feel bad to do the wrong thing? Guilt is like pain - it is something that you learn ways to avoid.

Yes, it always feel bad to do the wrong thing, it's just sometimes the pleasure of an action outweight the bad one feels for doing the wrong thing, just as sometimes the pain of doing something outweight the good one feels for doing the right thing. That's all it boils down to, it is a matter of conflicting feelings and desires.

Nature is a bit of a bitch that way. Apart from orgasms (which only lasts a few seconds) no pleasure is as intense as some of the pain she often inflicts. She prefers to use a stick rather offering a carrot to get us to behave. Same with guilt - it makes you feel lousy for much longer than something that makes you happy has any effect.

Or am I just a miserable git?

Every non-sociopath feels the same way you do.