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]

[10CC]

[Replying to post 724 by JohnA]

So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

1. Evolution (empathy and ethics - max survival, min extinction / suffering for our species)
2. Society (laws - even if I do not agree with them)
3. Thinking (not wishful thinking, but reasoning based on a public square)

In the above order.

What are yours?

Woops

#1 can be aka "the golden rule"

Well done sir.

You have thus solved your own dilemma.

#1 can be aka "the golden rule"

Well done sir.

Really?
Are you claiming that this Golden Rule is a product of evolution? Is this for humans only, or all life? Is this for all humans, or just non-faulty humans? Do you have any evidence for your claim? Any peer reviewed scientific journal that were accepted by science?

So when I read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule "This concept [golden rule] can be explained from the perspective of psychology, philosophy, sociology and religion" - I would need to surrender my critical faculties to accept that these "ideologies" are science. I would need to accept the 2 base assumptions that i) all life is the same, and ii) all life's wants and needs are the same. I would need to accept that a rule = sceintific theory without any evidence for this other than wishful thinking.

Also, would you love my enemies for me? I would need to reject the fact that you will reject this golden rule, as evidence that the golden rule exists and is real.

How absurd.

BTW, you have not answered my question:
So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

You make claims that bear no relevance to the discussion.

You ask me a question that bears no relevance to the discussion.

The #1 imperative in how you live your life is the "golden rule".

You failing to admit that to yourself is down to you.

[JohnA]

[Replying to post 724 by JohnA]

So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

1. Evolution (empathy and ethics - max survival, min extinction / suffering for our species)
2. Society (laws - even if I do not agree with them)
3. Thinking (not wishful thinking, but reasoning based on a public square)

In the above order.

What are yours?

Woops

#1 can be aka "the golden rule"

Well done sir.

You have thus solved your own dilemma.

#1 can be aka "the golden rule"

Well done sir.

Really?
Are you claiming that this Golden Rule is a product of evolution? Is this for humans only, or all life? Is this for all humans, or just non-faulty humans? Do you have any evidence for your claim? Any peer reviewed scientific journal that were accepted by science?

So when I read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule "This concept [golden rule] can be explained from the perspective of psychology, philosophy, sociology and religion" - I would need to surrender my critical faculties to accept that these "ideologies" are science. I would need to accept the 2 base assumptions that i) all life is the same, and ii) all life's wants and needs are the same. I would need to accept that a rule = sceintific theory without any evidence for this other than wishful thinking.

Also, would you love my enemies for me? I would need to reject the fact that you will reject this golden rule, as evidence that the golden rule exists and is real.

How absurd.

BTW, you have not answered my question:
So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

You make claims that bear no relevance to the discussion.

You ask me a question that bears no relevance to the discussion.

The #1 imperative in how you live your life is the "golden rule".

You failing to admit that to yourself is down to you.

Assertion fallacy.
Confirmation biased.
Straw man.
Red herring.


What else can you add? Refusing to answer my question?

You make claims that bear no relevance to the discussion.

Example please? Or is this assertion fallacy?

You ask me a question that bears no relevance to the discussion.

Example please? You can ask me, but I can not ask you? Is that based on your Confirmation biased?

The #1 imperative in how you live your life is the "golden rule".

Straw man. I do not love my enemies, nor will I help others to break the law. But you are AGAIN claiming to believe to know my beliefs. How rude and absurd.

You failing to admit that to yourself is down to you.

Red herring. That is not what we are discussing, it has nothing to do with YOUR CLAIM that the golden rule exists and is true. WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE for you CLAIM?


Maybe you should read a bit more about this so called golden rule and the criticisms of it before you (like theists) just assert something exists and is true without ANY evidence for it.
You may as well have written one sentence as the full argument you are offering: "FAITH is reasonable" and be done with it.

Come on, give me ANY evidence that this golden rule exists and is true. ANY. Or will you fail as well.

Maybe answer this question and see for yourself how this rule fails:
Will you love my enemies for me?

Also, do reject that this golden rule makes 2 assumptions?:
1) all humans are the same
2) you know what every human want and need.


Come one, answer this and be honest with yourself.

[10CC]

[center]EVIDENCE THE GOLDEN RULE EXISTS.[/center]
Thoughtfully supplied by JA

[Replying to post 724 by JohnA]

So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

1. Evolution (empathy and ethics - max survival, min extinction / suffering for our species)

[center]ERGO: THE GOLDEN RULE[/center]

[JohnA]

[center]EVIDENCE THE GOLDEN RULE EXISTS.[/center]
Thoughtfully supplied by JA

[Replying to post 724 by JohnA]

So exactly what imperatives are controlling influences upon the way you live your life?

1. Evolution (empathy and ethics - max survival, min extinction / suffering for our species)

[center]ERGO: THE GOLDEN RULE[/center]

Really?
Where did I assume (like you), that the Golden rule = Evolution? You are merely still pretending to claim to know my beliefs. That is annoying and absurd.

So, according to you; I should help a rapist and murderer? Tell me; will you love my enemies for me?

Where is the evidence for your claim that this golden rule = evolution. In fact, science has not confirmed this at all. The golden rule fails the basic test of logic.

So, tell me: God exists because the bible says so. Correct?
What about Iron Man? He exists because the Marvel comics says so.
Golden rule exists? Is that because Wikipedia says so, or you say so, or you straw manning me to claim I said so?

Why are you so scared to answer a basic question:
Will you love my enemies for me?

At least tell me why you are refusing to answer my question (you do not have to answer it, it's safe not to answer).

You are being shown guilty here of the very thing you try to claim theists being guilty of: wishful thinking.

[Artie]

LOL. You are arguing that this Golden rule is false, by presenting your own version of it.

LOL. It's the same rule because to help others is one way of treating others. The word treat covers help. To treat is to "behave towards or deal with in a certain way" and to help is to "behave towards or deal with in a certain way" too, namely helping. https://www.google.no/search?client=ope ... 8&oe=UTF-8

[JohnA]

LOL. You are arguing that this Golden rule is false, by presenting your own version of it.

LOL. It's the same rule because to help others is one way of treating others. The word treat covers help. To treat is to "behave towards or deal with in a certain way" and to help is to "behave towards or deal with in a certain way" too, namely helping. https://www.google.no/search?client=ope ... 8&oe=UTF-8

In your world:
help = treat.
rule = scientific law or was it scientific fact or scientific theory.

This from you :

It's the Golden Rule with a few extra words added.

is probably the same as the golden rule.
GR = GR + something extra.

You have to deal with this post:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 041#612041

Projection and presenting false analogies are not your answer.


Will you love my enemies?

[Nickman]

Jesus Christ! The Golden Rule is about doing to others as you would want them to do unto you.

It is based on sympathy and empathy. Which is subjective. The whole rule itself tells you it is subjective. "do unto others as you would want them to do unto you."
You and You are telling!


The only way it becomes objective is if someone thinks that some invisible, imaginary being proclaims it.

[Artie]

In your world:
help = treat.

Yes! You got it! Congratulations! Helping people is one way of treating people.

rule = scientific law or was it scientific fact or scientific theory.

A rule is "one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct or procedure". The Golden Rule is the ethic of reciprocity, and reciprocity evolved.

"Evolution of indirect reciprocity"

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 ... 04131.html

Welcome to reality.

[help3434]

[Replying to post 733 by JohnA]

If you don't believe that we evolved with the golden rule then why did you say in your number 1 guide to behavior that evolution involves empathy and ethics?

[help3434]

[Replying to post 720 by JohnA]

Pointing out sloppy and incomprehensible writing is not character assassination. Clear communication is an essential part of debate.