Religion From An Evolutionary Perspective

[Amppax]

[quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1307116612' post='2249478']
On the contrary, Catholics love. We love not because we are called to but because we want to. It is Christ Who shows us the way and corrects us when we err. What you see here is an internet forum. You do not see our souls or the prayers in our hearts when we kneel before the Blessed Sacrament. Since we believe - know - that the Holy Catholic Church is the fullness of Truth we want all peoples to embrace Her. For their salvation and for God's glory. We love Protestants, Masons, and Muslims. But that does not mean we have to like their religions. If just for a second they knew what Catholics know, truly knew, they would be falling over each other to get to the nearest Church. And we would already be there, ready to open the doors.
[/quote]

beat me to it, good post

Edited June 3, 2011 by Amppax

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
I'm sorry I've forgotten, "sad" is just another social construct that only actually exist in the imagination of people. Sorry bout that just forget all about it.[/quote]

So is "love"...

Unless of course you say that 'god is love' and therefore objectify a purely subjective emotion/experience.

(Though I think that being motivated by love for others is a good thing, I won't argue against that premise, I just disagree with the methods and opinions being labeled objective truth.


[quote]Wikipedia FTW! But Oooh too bad so sad this source is nothing more than just another opinion and that's all. If you don't believe in objective truth stop arguing as though it exist. [/quote]

You're confusing facts with opinion. All opinions are subjective, whereas facts are independent from opinion.

You can't say that 1+1=2 is an opinion.

[quote]Oh I'm sure anti-theists can believe in gods, still though the atheists of the USSR and other communist states were in actuality atheists and enforced what they believe were atheist policies. [/quote]

I still think it's more in line with anti-anti-communism.

What causes an entire country to socially engineer itself to eradicate religion speaks of beliefs that many atheists don't hold, though there are those who think that the world would be a better pace without any religions.

I mean, wasn't Russia a feudal society before the revolution?

Edited June 3, 2011 by xSilverPhinx

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307086582' post='2249416']
I would say that is not my stance. I would say that moral and immoral seem to be religious terms, they imply a static set of objective wrong and rights, merely being an action that moves one closer to or away from god.[/quote]

Okay...I think that way about the words "good" and "evil", which is why I always write them that way.

[xSilverPhinx]

So, what do you guys think? Is something moral/good/just because God commands it or is it because there's a standard of morality outside of God?

[MIKolbe]

expalin how there is morality outside of God.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1307124154' post='2249511']
expalin how there is morality outside of God.
[/quote]

As in is something moral because it is intrinsically good or because god says that it's good?

If god says that killing for instance is bad (and even put it in the 10 commandments), then why does he allow it in some cases? If killing were factually intrinsically bad then god shouldn't be able to command others to kill without violating that.

[Amppax]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307128342' post='2249545']
As in is something moral because it is intrinsically good or because god says that it's good?

If god says that killing for instance is bad (and even put it in the 10 commandments), then why does he allow it in some cases? If killing were factually intrinsically bad then god shouldn't be able to command others to kill without violating that.
[/quote]

First of all, the commandment is thou shalt not [b]murder[/b]. that is an important distinction to make. Secondly, have you ever heard of the concept of free will? [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will[/url]

[sixpence]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307123049' post='2249503']
So, what do you guys think? Is something moral/good/just because God commands it or is it because there's a standard of morality outside of God?
[/quote]

*arbitrarily enters the conversation*

i think that all goodness exists within God, and are "good" due to the inherent nature of God (not arbitrary commands)... but those are just my initial thoughts...

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
If there is no objective truth then I don't know why his grasp is any thing else less than yours. Because it isn't, it was his opinion and you have another. Without objective truth you can't argue as though objective truth exist so at the end of the day his truth is just as true as your truth. Welcome to the crazy world of relativism.
[/quote]
I feel there is much confusion with regards to language and definition of words and the concept of objective morals.
It certainly was objective morality that we were talking about which you have twisted into objective truth and you are now twisting it to mean the truth of the meaning of words.
If you want to argue that words have no objective meaning then it is indeed worthless me continuing to debate with you. If you want to debate objective morality then I am open to continue.
If you are really honest in your search to understand the term Athiest or Atheism you would spend some time investigating dictionary definitions. But all roads here will lead to Rome, "An Atheist lacks a belief in god". This is very clear, very succinct and simple to understand.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
I'm sorry I've forgotten, "sad" is just another social construct that only actually exist in the imagination of people. Sorry bout that just forget all about it.
[/quote]
Again, if you care to play a game of grown-ups with me, I think it could be possible for us to have a productive conversation.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
That's a might pretty opinion, but others in world history and others in the world today have had different opinions and without objective truth theirs is just as important and true as yours even if each conflict like crazy. You may think a black man is a person under the law, another person in another society may believe the opposite. Without objective truth, and 'truth' being left up to society or the individual, both opinions are of equal value.
[/quote]
All countries (societies) have a different set of rules, all religions preach a different set of rules. As a collective the democracies come up with rules that align with the majority, the dictatorships come up with rules that align with the leaders, the religions come up with rules that align with their interpretations of their scripture.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
Oh I'm sure anti-theists can believe in gods, still though the atheists of the USSR and other communist states were in actuality atheists and enforced what they believe were atheist policies.
[/quote]
Not sure what your point is with regards to that one quote of Lennin's, he is no authority on Atheism and is not looked upon as an example of what Atheism is about. There is no such thing as Atheism really. Your argument is weak and contrived and has a somewhat misleading and villifying personal agenda.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307110417' post='2249452']
From my POV what I've stated is objective truth, atheists have murdered millions of people in the modern age in the name of atheism...
[/quote]
In the name of atheism, I've never heard that one before, do you have a source reference that you can provide?
In all groups of people there are a contingent that are willing to murder people. Catholic history contains this, as do many other religions, again your personal agenda is showing at its best.

[quote name='HisChildForever' timestamp='1307116612' post='2249478']
On the contrary, Catholics love.[/quote]
Anti theist doesn't mean hate of the people, it means hate or opposition of the beliefs or religion. Catholocism is very much against any religion that isn't Catholocism.

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307122000' post='2249499']
Okay...I think that way about the words "good" and "evil", which is why I always write them that way.
[/quote]
I am the same with regards to Good and Evil. I never use the word Evil, it makes no sense to me. The word "good" is doubled up, I never use the word "Good" with a capital as that is how religious people tend to use the word and define it as something towards god. But to me it is basically the same thing as moral and immoral. I have a personal set of values which in someway could be likened to morality but I don't choose to use the moral and immoral words as they imply other connotations


[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1307124154' post='2249511']
expalin how there is morality outside of God.
[/quote]
I really feel it would be more productive to draw a line in the sand and define objective morality before we go down this path, otherwise we are likely to be debating different things which ends up being pointless
[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044656' post='2249274']
Can anyone define what objective morality is?

1. What is it?
2. Who is the authority?
3. How do people know what the objective morals are?

As an atheist I do not have a definition of this concept. If you want an open and honest debate about this, we need to be clear with regards to what it is that we are debating.
[/quote]

[Amppax]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2]Can anyone define what objective morality is?

1. What is it?[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2]
[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2][/quote][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2]
[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2]that's easy, objective morality is where there is an absolute right and wrong. Here's wikipedia [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_morality"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_morality[/url]

[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2][quote]
2. Who is the authority?[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#595959"][/quote][/color][/size][/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#595959"]
[/color][/size][/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#595959"]God[/color][/size][/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#595959"]
[/color][/size][/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#595959"][quote][/color][/size][/font]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2]3. How do people know what the objective morals are?[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#595959][font=arial, verdana, sans-serif][size=2][/quote]
[/size][/font][/color]Many feel that morality based on Natural Law ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Law"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Law[/url]) is the way to go

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307121692' post='2249498']
So is "love"...

Unless of course you say that 'god is love' and therefore objectify a purely subjective emotion/experience.

(Though I think that being motivated by love for others is a good thing, I won't argue against that premise, I just disagree with the methods and opinions being labeled objective truth. [/quote]

Love does not exist without God. Love would be yet another made up social construct. So for an atheist to say he 'loves' anyone is for the atheist to believe or state something that is only imaginary. What a depressing pointless existance to think that the love I would have for my wife does not in fact exist but is only imaginary and is just a product of societal social constructs, and cheicmcial and biological functions in my body.


[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307121692' post='2249498']You're confusing facts with opinion. All opinions are subjective, whereas facts are independent from opinion.

You can't say that 1+1=2 is an opinion.

I still think it's more in line with anti-anti-communism.

What causes an entire country to socially engineer itself to eradicate religion speaks of beliefs that many atheists don't hold, though there are those who think that the world would be a better pace without any religions.

I mean, wasn't Russia a feudal society before the revolution?
[/quote]

I'm not confused at all. You've not stated any facts other than 1+1=2, and even that is sometimes argued as relative. And thanks but I dismiss the rest of this as just your personal opinion which is in no way binding in reality.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']
I feel there is much confusion with regards to language and definition of words and the concept of objective morals.
It certainly was objective morality that we were talking about which you have twisted into objective truth and you are now twisting it to mean the truth of the meaning of words.
If you want to argue that words have no objective meaning then it is indeed worthless me continuing to debate with you. If you want to debate objective morality then I am open to continue.[/quote]

Without objective truth words can mean anything one wishes them to mean. Again welcome to the world of relativism. And I feel what your stating is just more baseless subjective relative personal opinion. There is no objective morality or truth without God. All you have is your opinion. I have mine by your own ideology are opinions are equal in value.

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']If you are really honest in your search to understand the term Athiest or Atheism you would spend some time investigating dictionary definitions. But all roads here will lead to Rome, "An Atheist lacks a belief in god". This is very clear, very succinct and simple to understand.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']Again, if you care to play a game of grown-ups with me, I think it could be possible for us to have a productive conversation.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']All countries (societies) have a different set of rules, all religions preach a different set of rules. As a collective the democracies come up with rules that align with the majority, the dictatorships come up with rules that align with the leaders, the religions come up with rules that align with their interpretations of their scripture.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']Not sure what your point is with regards to that one quote of Lennin's, he is no authority on Atheism and is not looked upon as an example of what Atheism is about. There is no such thing as Atheism really. Your argument is weak and contrived and has a somewhat misleading and villifying personal agenda.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']In the name of atheism, I've never heard that one before, do you have a source reference that you can provide?
In all groups of people there are a contingent that are willing to murder people. Catholic history contains this, as do many other religions, again your personal agenda is showing at its best.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']Anti theist doesn't mean hate of the people, it means hate or opposition of the beliefs or religion. Catholocism is very much against any religion that isn't Catholocism.[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']I am the same with regards to Good and Evil. I never use the word Evil, it makes no sense to me. The word "good" is doubled up, I never use the word "Good" with a capital as that is how religious people tend to use the word and define it as something towards god. But to me it is basically the same thing as moral and immoral. I have a personal set of values which in someway could be likened to morality but I don't choose to use the moral and immoral words as they imply other connotations[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']I really feel it would be more productive to draw a line in the sand and define objective morality before we go down this path, otherwise we are likely to be debating different things which ends up being pointless

[/quote]

Again just more of your baseless subjective relative personal opinion.

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307131007' post='2249570']
Without objective truth words can mean anything one wishes them to mean. Again welcome to the world of relativism. And I feel what your stating is just more baseless subjective relative personal opinion. There is no objective morality or truth without God. All you have is your opinion. I have mine by your own ideology are opinions are equal in value.
[/quote]
The difference is that I am willing to discuss my opinions and contemplate and consider the opinions of others. I am even willing to change my opinion if presented with new and relevant information.

[CephaDrigan]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307128846' post='2249557']
I feel there is much confusion with regards to language and definition of words and the concept of objective morals.
It certainly was objective morality that we were talking about which you have twisted into objective truth and you are now twisting it to mean the truth of the meaning of words.
If you want to argue that words have no objective meaning then it is indeed worthless me continuing to debate with you. If you want to debate objective morality then I am open to continue.
If you are really honest in your search to understand the term Athiest or Atheism you would spend some time investigating dictionary definitions. But all roads here will lead to Rome, "An Atheist lacks a belief in god". This is very clear, very succinct and simple to understand.
[/quote]

What he's saying is that, by your belief system (or lack thereof), anything that is spoken is subjective, and nothing can have more truth than anything else. Were we to say that grass is red, that would be inaccurate, but due to the lack of definition of objectivity, you would not be able to refute it by replying that the grass is green. We all know that it is green, but because colors are merely perception of light, you could not argue your sight to be correct. Consider "objectivity," even though it is not true objectivity, to be something that is accepted and consistent among society. Thus, you can use definitions and such. But we can't discuss objective morality until you say where objective is. (Though, of course, [i]where[/i] you say is subjective in itself)

[quote]
Not sure what your point is with regards to that one quote of Lenin's, he is no authority on Atheism and is not looked upon as an example of what Atheism is about. There is no such thing as Atheism really. Your argument is weak and contrived and has a somewhat misleading and villifying personal agenda.
[/quote]
He may not be an authority on atheism, but he [i]does[/i] emulate atheism, whether you like it or not. He satisfies all the requirements of being atheist, which is to say, not believing in God. If atheism doesn't really exist though, then you could say that no words [i]really[/i] exist, and that all words are subjective.



[quote]
In the name of atheism, I've never heard that one before, do you have a source reference that you can provide?
In all groups of people there are a contingent that are willing to murder people. Catholic history contains this, as do many other religions, again your personal agenda is showing at its best.
[/quote]
I think that the main difference here is that those people willing to murder people that happen to be atheists fulfill [i]all[/i] requirements for atheism, although those Catholics that do so are misguided, and do not follow all of the teachings that they are supposed to follow.

[quote]
I really feel it would be more productive to draw a line in the sand and define objective morality before we go down this path, otherwise we are likely to be debating different things which ends up being pointless
[/quote]
Then do so. Nearly everybody else has very similar moral lines, so we can probably argue from wherever you happen to draw yours.

[stevil]

[quote name='CephaDrigan' timestamp='1307134069' post='2249589']
What he's saying is that, by your belief system (or lack thereof), anything that is spoken is subjective, and nothing can have more truth than anything else.
[/quote]
The problem is that he is telling me what my belief system is rather than listening to what I am saying. My standpoint is that there are no objective moralities, however I do feel that words have a defined meaning, there are many languages and they are created by humans, they do evolve over time, but thanks to published dictionaries we have the ability to communicated using a common understanding of words. If a word is ambiguous it is worth taking the time to clarify before debating an issue using that word, so in the context of that debate the definition is clear.

[quote name='CephaDrigan' timestamp='1307134069' post='2249589']
He may not be an authority on atheism, but he [i]does[/i] emulate atheism, whether you like it or not. He satisfies all the requirements of being atheist, which is to say, not believing in God. If atheism doesn't really exist though, then you could say that no words [i]really[/i] exist, and that all words are subjective.
[/quote]
The only requirement of atheism is having a lack of belief in gods. That's it, no more than that. Atheism does not lead towards or require a communist state. If a person likes communism and feels that theistic beliefs are a threat then they may want to promote atheist stance to the people. They may even come up with some propoganda towards this goal. But that propoganda is not Atheist propoganda, is is the propoganda presented by that person towards their personal agenda of getting people into communism.

[quote name='CephaDrigan' timestamp='1307134069' post='2249589']
I think that the main difference here is that those people willing to murder people that happen to be atheists fulfill [i]all[/i] requirements for atheism, although those Catholics that do so are misguided, and do not follow all of the teachings that they are supposed to follow.
[/quote]
I still don't see the point of the argument. Atheism does not lead to being a murderer. They may fullful all the rerequirements of atheism, but also fulfil all the requirements of being human and all the requirements of being alive, you could even say all the requirements of being god's creation.
I just don't get the point, how does this imply anything about atheism?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307132297' post='2249579']
The difference is that I am willing to discuss my opinions and contemplate and consider the opinions of others. I am even willing to change my opinion if presented with new and relevant information.
[/quote]

It's simply a waste of time to debate relative opinions. Without the objective truth of objective morality all there is is relative opinion and debating such things is quite pointless. It's like having a debate on what cookies are the best, or if green apples are better than red apples. If you state green are better that's true for you if I state red are better then that's true for me. Both opinions being opinions are equal in value.

Also there is a great flaw in an Atheist using society as a source or base for morality and truth. Most societies believe God or gods exists, this however does not stop the Atheist from rejecting God or gods. So if the Atheist can reject God or gods, racist groups can reject that certain groups are persons, murders can reject that murder is immoral and wrong, men can reject the belief that women are equals, or others can reject any other societal norms and constructs. It's called relativism, it makes all opinions of 'truth' equal and destroys any idea that there is any form of right and wrong.

Edited June 3, 2011 by KnightofChrist

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307137284' post='2249619']
It's simply a waste of time to debate relative opinions. Without the objective truth of objective morality all there is is relative opinion and debating such things is quite pointless. It's like having a debate on what cookies are the best, or if green apples are better than red apples. If you state green are better that's true for you if I state red are better then that's true for me. Both opinions being opinions are equal in value.
[/quote]
I feel that all we have to go on is opinion in many circumstances, I don't find it a waste of time to get to know and understand the opinions of others and even explore my opinions with others. If you go into debate with a mindset of exploration and learning then you will get value and you might even learn something in the process. If you go in with a mindset that you are right, everyone else is wrong and you want to show this by winning the argument then you will find the debate a waste of time.
All that being said i feel we are always coming back to this concept of objective morality, so i will create a thread and lets explore this concept.


[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307137284' post='2249619']
Also there is a great flaw in an Atheist using society as a source or base for morality and truth. Most societies believe God or gods exists, this however does not stop the Atheist from rejecting God or gods. So if the Atheist can reject God or gods, racist groups can reject that certain groups are persons, murders can reject that murder is immoral and wrong, men can reject the belief that women are equals, or others can reject any other societal norms and constructs. It's called relativism, it makes all opinions of 'truth' equal and destroys any idea that there is any form of right and wrong.
[/quote]
Atheism is not about alignment of personal beliefs or morals or stances. There is not an Atheist mantra to suggest that all people should align with the majority.
In my opinion Atheism could be seen as a passive stance, by that I mean it only applies to me. "I have a lack of belief in god", this does not mean that I think other people should have a lack of belief in god or that I should align my understanding with everyone else. It does not mean that I should impose my idea of right and wrong on others. However a functioning society requires rules that apply to everyone, and members of that society need to comply for that society to function appropriately.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307140436' post='2249632']
I feel that all we have to go on is opinion in many circumstances, I don't find it a waste of time to get to know and understand the opinions of others and even explore my opinions with others. If you go into debate with a mindset of exploration and learning then you will get value and you might even learn something in the process. If you go in with a mindset that you are right, everyone else is wrong and you want to show this by winning the argument then you will find the debate a waste of time.
All that being said i feel we are always coming back to this concept of objective morality, so i will create a thread and lets explore this concept.



Atheism is not about alignment of personal beliefs or morals or stances. There is not an Atheist mantra to suggest that all people should align with the majority.
In my opinion Atheism could be seen as a passive stance, by that I mean it only applies to me. "I have a lack of belief in god", this does not mean that I think other people should have a lack of belief in god or that I should align my understanding with everyone else. It does not mean that I should impose my idea of right and wrong on others. However a functioning society requires rules that apply to everyone, and members of that society need to comply for that society to function appropriately.
[/quote]

Thank you for your opinion. Communist Atheists had another. Both opinions are equal in value.

[Amppax]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307140792' post='2249635']
Thank you for your opinion. Communist Atheists had another. Both opinions are equal in value.
[/quote]

You know, you're really not doing anyone any favors here, jussayin

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1307140914' post='2249636']
You know, you're really not doing anyone any favors here, jussayin
[/quote]

Too bad. It should be viewed as a devils advocate arguement. Rejection of objective truth and objective morality is the result of relativism and that results in all [i]truths[/i] becoming opinions, and all opinions are equal. There is no right or wrong without God, and there is no point for existence that is objective. Life is meaningless and of no real value without God. But as you can see the atheists are trying in different ways to hold on to some form of objective truth and even some form of objective right and wrong. This is a conflict of what they profess to believe.

Edited June 3, 2011 by KnightofChrist