The God Delusion - Chapter 7

Debate specific books

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18593
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

The God Delusion - Chapter 7

Post #1

Post by otseng »

McCulloch's questions:
Is there is a moral Zeitgeist that continually evolves in society, often in opposition to religious morality?
Do believers really use the Bible as a source of their moral values?

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18593
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 215 times
Contact:

Post #51

Post by otseng »

Yes, let's move on to the next chapter.

User avatar
QED
Prodigy
Posts: 3798
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:34 am
Location: UK

Re: The God Delusion - Chapter 7

Post #52

Post by QED »

Just as a reminder; anyone wishing to pursue the question of universal moral law might like to join the debating topic: CS Lewis: Proof of God through universal morality?

jjg
Apprentice
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:42 am
Location: Victoria, B.C.

Post #53

Post by jjg »

Physical science is concerned with reality in as far as it is measurable in quantity. It does not deal with morality whatsoever.

User avatar
QED
Prodigy
Posts: 3798
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:34 am
Location: UK

Post #54

Post by QED »

jjg wrote:Physical science is concerned with reality in as far as it is measurable in quantity. It does not deal with morality whatsoever.
A statement like that is worthless without supporting evidence. If you wish to support it then please accept my invitation to join the CS Lewis topic or any other thread debating Morality.

jjg
Apprentice
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:42 am
Location: Victoria, B.C.

Post #55

Post by jjg »

Supporting evidence?

What do you think these supposed arguments against God are about? The atheists say God cannot be measured quantitatively, so he mustn't exist.

Science has nothing to say about the qualitative side of life, only the quantitative.

Dawkins admits this with questions like why is there something instead of nothing. He says science does not deal with it. He then contradicts himself with the "but science is best at answering it."

User avatar
Cathar1950
Site Supporter
Posts: 10501
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: Michigan(616)
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #56

Post by Cathar1950 »

QED wrote:
jjg wrote:Physical science is concerned with reality in as far as it is measurable in quantity. It does not deal with morality whatsoever.
A statement like that is worthless without supporting evidence. If you wish to support it then please accept my invitation to join the CS Lewis topic or any other thread debating Morality.
If "Science" deal with reality and not morality then does that mean morality isn't real?
Even in the behavioral sciences we learn about behavior and it's consequences.
If morality does not deal with behavior I would like to know it's purpose?
Not all science is built on measurements sometimes it is built on many measurments.
I would say it is based on experience of the universe that are falsifiable and the conclusions it draws as well as measurements that have no purpose except to verify experience of the world or reality.
If you think science is measurement then you have mistaken technology for science.

jjg
Apprentice
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:42 am
Location: Victoria, B.C.

Post #57

Post by jjg »

I said physical science, hence physics. The different sciences are separated by the degree of abstraction and the formal and material object that it studies. I never said physical science is concerned with reality as a whole, I said it's concerned with reality in asmuch as it is measurable in quantity.

Physical science is always concerned with observable phenomenon, but our thinking goes beyond what is simply empirical to concepts like justice etc. which doesn't have a measureble pheomena but belongs intellectual order of the mind.

Physics cannot be studied in the same way as justice, fortitude except possibly by some ultimately meaningless poetic statement or analogy such as a "selfish" gene.

User avatar
QED
Prodigy
Posts: 3798
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:34 am
Location: UK

Post #58

Post by QED »

jjg wrote:Physical science ... does not deal with morality whatsoever.
jjg wrote:Supporting evidence?
Yes please.

In the debating topic titled CS Lewis: Proof of God through universal morality? I have explained how morality can arise from a blend of cultural and genetic inheritance. If you believe that science cannot account for it in these terms alone then that topic would be a good place to set out your reasoning. I look forward to seeing it there.

Locked