Total posts: 2,481
-->
@zedvictor4
Objectivity is always subjective.
Prove it.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
That makes no sense, objectivity and subjectivity cancels out, it’s fundamentally impossible to be both.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
The specific qualifying distinction I add to what I am defining that completely changes the specific thing I am describing
Then your pretty much admitting that morality isn’t subjective.
I am not defining what “light” means, or what “on means”, simply making sure we agree on what the light being turned on means in contrast to it being off.
Difference here is a light bulb can turn on or off, morality can’t turn objective or subjective.
Your reply here borders on idiotic ; as you’re essentially saying that if I am drawing a distinction between a “light”, and a “light that is turned on”, the the light we are talking about cannot be turned on.
But that’s not a distinction, your simply just making a broad topic more specific.
It’s a ridiculous argument that does not appear to recognize that I am talking about a quality of something, not the something of self.
Well if the quality of it is subjective then you shouldn’t use the word subjective in your explanation.
At this point, your argument has become what I refer to as “picking peanuts out of poop”.
And your arguments have been illogical and dishonest, back in your court.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
You explicitly omitted a critical part of my post which rendered the two parts different.
No, because like I said before it was a meaningless variable, unless you’re arguing a distinction between morality and subjective morality which weakens your original argument because if theirs a distinction then morality isn’t in fact subjective.
I’m sorry you didn’t fully understand what I said originally
Me calling you out for your contradicting error isn’t me misunderstanding, in fact it’s the total opposite.
not to deliberately shoe horn whatever dishonest argument you can make in order to save face for your original error.
If anything’s a dishonest argument it’s this one, everything I said you said you actually did say, I didn’t say you said that ONLY.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
You see nothing, page 53 was my first post on this forum, don’t worry about me.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
Don’t intentionally misquote people; it’s intellectually dishonest.
It’s only misquoting if I quoted something that you didn’t say, but you did say that and I made sure of that by copying and pasting the quote, in regards to my intentions I admit I am guilty of not adding the extra meaningless variables but that was only to put emphasis on my point of you being contradictory.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
I’m not defining what morality is either.
I’m defining what I mean by morality
Contradiction at its finest 🥱.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
I was referring to the word moral.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
Subjective morality is where what we humans feel as moral is based on subjective emotional responses, rather than some Universal fact.
You can’t use the word in the definition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
both end with the exact same result
Which is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
In your dreams big boy.
I don’t need to dream reality, go look at back at all our other previous convos and how they ended for reference if your memory’s a little hazy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
What's was on your mind when you wrote that?
All the other times I schooled your behind on this exact subject, it’s not our first rodeo zed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I’m curious what causes people to think the way they do in the first place.
Anything specific you have in mind? Because politics is a pretty broad spectrum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I have but how can I determine if its theirs that is faulty, or mine?
Why bother taking up a position you’re uncertain of? The most objective route is to simply say I don’t know, don’t you think?
There’s a reason that cities are deep blue and rural areas are blood red, yes there are different incentives and policies that explain a lot of the difference but it’s also just differences in living preferences.
There’s a fundamental difference between being right and wrong and preferences, the former is objective and the latter is subjective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
But that’s just really difficult to accept when I realize that the opposition might literally be running on different hardware that causes a different world view
Not to be that guy but did you ever stop to think that different hardware they’re running on is just blatant ignorance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I’m pretty sure we’ve done this little dance a plethora of times, and how does it always end? With me schooling your behind (this time would be no exception) so come correct next time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
necessarily
Well I was strictly asking in regards to when you do, also in regards to facts theirs no “necessarily” grey areas there’s only objectively right and objectively wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
While you might be diametrically opposed your brains are probably different enough that it's not that they are simply stupid or evil, but that they truly see the world differently in a way so fundamental that you that you're unlikely to ever change them.
Well if the way they see it is so objectively wrong, then what makes it fundamental?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Because that's the only field that "well-being" doesn't have a consensus agreed-upon definition.
Well I was only going by the source you used, nice to know you abandoned that and moved the goal post to the dictionary so let’s take a look at that shall we
Well-being- The state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/well-being
When we last spoke about well-being you said you use it for your standard of morality, problem with that is different things make different people happy even things that conflict with your happiness so even that’s a pretty arbitrary standard.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
cause we're not using the definition medically
Even if there were a distinction, where in my arguments did I ever say anything in regards to medicine? Please quote me otherwise spare me your dishonesty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
How do you see intent contributing to overall "well-being" (whatever that means)?
Good question, I always tell Theweakeredge There is no consensus around a single definition of well-being, yet he still uses it as a foundation for his arguments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Can you elaborate on that rather than being so vague?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
The fact that no argument for god doesn't have serious flaws.
And you know this how?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Then that should have been your response to the OP and not ask him a question instead.
First of all I can ask anybody anything I want, second the question I asked was relevant to the topic at hand it’s not like I just asked a random question, and last it wouldn’t make sense if that was my response to the OP because the OP didn’t make any direct claims towards me like you did.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Is an action good because god commands it, or is does god command it because it's good
Vice versa
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
The claim was in the question FFS you said " TO PROVE HE IS ALL LOVING".
That’s not my claim it’s the OP’s.
You have furthered that by admitting that YOU BELIVE that your god is "all loving". are you now saying that he is NOT "all loving"? Because you'd be correct as attested to by the bible itself.
Unless you have a direct quote of me saying so don’t tell me what I said, because I never said in this thread that The Biblical God was my God.
Now address have some respect and address the OP .
Not that I owe you anything but I already did.
Can you prove god is a lie or can you prove god is real?
It’s not fair to ask me that, just because I’m a believer doesn’t mean I argued in favor of that belief in this thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
YES!!! because you made a claim on a thread concerning the christian god and the christian bible.
What claim was that?
It became nothing more because you have not shown me that those other followers of the other religions are claiming that their god is "all loving".
I didn’t have to, I said for arguments sake.
Only YOU have claimed that about your own god.
I answered this argument already.
Ok and does their religious text make the same claim the you claim about your own god that he is "all loving"?
You’re not paying attention, I was saying not all religions have a religious text so don’t bother looking for contradictions like you did with The Bible.
he didn't say that god was "all loving" .
I’m not saying he did, referencing WHAT IS SUGGESTED is still mentioning an all loving God regardless of whether or not you agree.
The question - YOUR QUESTION - contains your belief.
True but that doesn’t change the fact that a question and a claim are two different things period.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
A) Shifted the goalpost
Prove it because I’m sure I can dispute whatever it is you’re alluding to.
B) Claimed I was doing that after I called you out
You did so guilty as charged.
C) failed to substantiate your claim (even now)
What claim is that, please if you’re gonna accuse me of something please be specific otherwise you shouldn’t even bother.
D) Failed to actually prove that there is a morally consistent god
I can’t fail if I never attempted.
you've failed to actually prove logically why implication I drew was illogical.
Because it was false I already told you why and if all you have to offer to my proof is rejection with no explanation as to why then please feel free to not respond.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Why would I? This thread is about the Christian god of the christian bible.
Because that’s what you did in regards to the Christian Bible and it became something more once I mentioned the other religions.
Have "one" what?
A religious text.
It was you that first mentioned an "all loving god", not me.
Actually it was the creator of this forum, I just responded.
as you appear to be claiming.
Although that’s what I believe, I said no such thing in this forum so far.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Um.. cool - care to substantiate that?
I wish you started with that instead of leading with the false accusations, that quote was in response to you calling my point about parents once having the free will to not be parents an excuse when it’s not an excuse it’s a fact that has nothing to do with the moral consistency of God.
Furthermore, notice who you dropped the other question?
I didn’t drop anything, last time that I checked no is an answer.
Please just admit your dishonesty - actually - how about this - you concede that you were being dishonest, justify said dishonesty in some regard
I wasn’t being dishonest, falsely accusing one of such is dishonesty in itself and that applies to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
but their are logical conclusions you reach from a claim
Well the conclusion you’ve reached isn’t logical because it’s false period.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Because, and notice here, you said "He doesn't need anyone to make excuses", combined with your position regarding "all-loving" being a quality of that god, and you it is quite obvious that that's what it implies.
I think I would know what I imply better than you.
Regardless, you failed to respond to my earlier question - have you any proof of a morally consistent god? Can you even demonstrate that the character of god presented in the bible is morally consistent?
I already told you no, are you gonna answer mine
are you gonna present evidence that you’re morally consistent?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Because I do not know if or not the followers of the Muslim, or the Pagan or the Jew god claim that their particular god "all loving" as you have done.#2
So for sake of discussion what if they did? Are you gonna go searching for contradictions in their religious texts too? Well I got news for you not all of them have one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
That would presume that god has some level of moral consistency that precludes him from defending moral actions.
Actually it doesn’t presume that, so if anyone’s shifting the goalposts with irrelevant dishonest claims it’s you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
So... you gonna present evidence for a least a morally consistent being? At all?
No, are you gonna present evidence that you’re morally consistent?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
And do they, as you have done, ask " Why does God have to prevent every evil thing from ever happening to prove He is all loving?"#2
Whether or not they asked the same question I asked is irrelevant, fact of the matter is discovering contradictions in The Bible makes no difference in their regard.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I have yet to see evidence of any god, much less a morally consistent one
There’s nothing much less then nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
That was my answer to gods being morally inconsistent.
Then why not believe in a consistent God?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
absolute power will absolutely corrupt.
What is this in response to?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Wrong - because we can actually OBSERVE the traits that one possesses whenever they are loving towards another individual, and whenever that individual claims ot be all-loving, it is especially noticeable.
Or they’re just very good actors that fooled you.
Um... yes, god is your average joe of making moral decisions, would you like me to list the moral contradictions made by him alphabetically or sequentially? In fact, the god from the bible is below average when it comes to making morally consistent positions, he's terribly inconsistent.
So what do you say to those who believe in a God not depicted in The Bible?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I stand corrected, but clearly if one is forced into sex my argument doesn’t apply to them, but it does apply to the rapist because they had the free will to not rape.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
having that emotion is a specific claim
It’s only a claim if it’s professed in some way shape or form but if it’s kept to yourself it’s not a claim, honestly love in the grand scheme of things isn’t something that can be concretely proven, it all comes down to how genuine or sincere someone comes across and if you believe them.
Pretty easy, because its completely dependent on the situation
What dictionary you read that defines arbitrary as dependent on the situation (call me semantic all you want, I embrace the label)?
That's entirely arbitrary, and based on their perspective.
But you’re liking God’s perspective to your average Joe and that’s blasphemous, if there’s any rule in regards to the everyday person than God is clearly the exception.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Cause if you live in a place where people starve you can access birth control? Or you would be of a mind to never have sex? Or be forced into sex.
If you’re able to carry a child to term then there’s no way that would be possible under starvation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
because love is a specific claim that takes certain qualities to actually be there
On the contrary it’s an emotion, and there’s no way you can no how someone (or God) emotes better than them.
Furthermore, no, no it isn't because if that were the case, rights would be completely arbitrary
Explain
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I somewhat answered this question in our recent discussion, feel free to respond to it here if you wish.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Tarik's rule, that they are always correct.
When did I ever say this? If this is you trying to bait me because you have nothing else to stand on it’s pathetic, your a grown man (and even if you weren’t it’s still a petty tactic) it’s beneath you.
The nature of philosophy is such, that correctness is usually elusive.
That depends if not knowing is considered incorrect, and since nobody has infinite knowledge then I’ll do you one better, it’s beyond elusive, it’s fundamentally impossible (I guess you don’t have me figured out as you thought).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Um... its also a right that all people have?
Was that a rhetorical question? Nonetheless I’ll answer it anyway, (and this answer extends to the forum you recently made as well) God determines what our rights are so to criticize Him in that regard is blasphemous because no one would know better than Him.
You shouldn't have to worry about not being able to afford it
What we should and shouldn’t worry about is a separate issue, fact of the matter is people starving doesn’t prove God isn’t all-loving, in fact logic says nothing can prove that because you can’t prove a negative.
Created: