Kay 17:

Since there are about two ppl in the area, all the footprint§ there wouldn't mean they are mine.

True but how does this relate to what we are talking about? Are you somehow suggesting that it is possible it wasn't only one God in the beginning?

Exactly, you are beginning to understand me. But the difference between our experience and God's circumstances, is that God had no platform but a void. There was nothing to design with. No gravity, no spacetime, no light, no atmosphere, no pressure or density.

Perhaps you should consider my analogy of thought a bit more seriously. I think it demonstrates how one can create a world from himself, by himself and through himself.

On the subject of the spiritual being creating a physical world, it is more of magic cos you can't give what you don't have. The spiritual being lacks the physical substance to create the Universe.

But then everything physical did begin to exist or did they not? wouldn't that equally be 'magic' if it all began to exist from nothing?

Mr_Anony:
Yawn..........your subjective opinions again? Go back and pray to pikkiwoki some more....you are boring me.

Erm, talking about subjective
Dohohohohohohohoho

Very thoughtful post here

wiegraf:

Erm, talking about subjective
Dohohohohohohohoho

Very thoughtful post here

....yawn........

Mr_Anony:
....yawn........

Yes, I know, feign disinterest

You're supposedly objective, yet you toss "god exists" as an objective fact into this discussion? Actually you toss in yahweh, not just any god, one of the most ridiculous and illogical concepts, omnixxx grand daddy tyrant himself,into a discussion as objective fact. Then you expect to be taken seriously? You call me subjective?

Did we decide we were going to assume the sadist existed in this discussion? It was evolutionary biology and morality, then objective/subjective morality, suddenly YAHWEH. Wtf? Why? Because YAHWEH!? This yahweh $hit must be some real strong potent stuff brah....

Btw, don't let me get in the way of your discussion with kay. Can't say I understand all of it, but I want to see where it's headed.

And why aren't you in church?

wiegraf:

Yes, I know, feign disinterest

You're supposedly objective, yet you toss "god exists" as an objective fact into this discussion? Actually you toss in yahweh, not just any god, one of the most ridiculous and illogical concepts, omnixxx grand daddy tyrant himself,into a discussion as objective fact. Then you expect to be taken seriously? You call me subjective?

Did we decide we were going to assume the sadist existed in this discussion? It was evolutionary biology and morality, then objective/subjective morality, suddenly YAHWEH. Wtf? Why? Because YAHWEH!? This yahweh $hit must be some real strong potent stuff brah....

Lol, now you are rambling unnecessarily......

......we had an argument and we settled it with you claiming there is no objective morality while I argued that objective morality does exist. I have allowed you to have it your way but here you are shouting "tyrant" and "sadist".

What is wrong with tyrants and sadists?

As long as you claim that morality is subjective, every moral judgment you make simply has no worth. You cannot have it both ways my dear. Now please stop whining and moaning and go back to worshiping Pikkiwoki.

wiegraf: Btw, don't let me get in the way of your discussion with kay. Can't say I understand all of it, but I want to see where it's headed.

And why aren't you in church?

Lol, I can see that you are concerned about my church attendance.......Thanks, I'll be in church later, It is not yet time.

Mr_Anony:
Lol, now you are rambling unnecessarily......

......we had an argument and we settled it with you claiming there is no objective morality while I argued that objective morality does exist. I have allowed you to have it your way but here you are shouting "tyrant" and "sadist".

What is wrong with tyrants and sadists?

As long as you claim that morality is subjective, every moral judgment you make simply has no worth. You cannot have it both ways my dear. Now please stop whining and moaning and go back to worshiping Pikkiwoki.

Then describe this 'objective' morality for me. Is it as real as yahweh?

wiegraf:

Then describe this 'objective' morality for me. Is it as real as yahweh?

simple, Objective morality means that Good and Evil are definite i.e. that some things are definitely good while others are definitely evil and this is irrespective of individual bias.

Mr_Anony:
simple, Objective morality means that Good and Evil are definite i.e. that some things are definitely good while others are definitely evil and this is irrespective of individual bias.

And where would one find this objective morality, if I may ask?

wiegraf:

And where would one find this objective morality, if I may ask?

lol, you may as well ask where does one find length? or where does one find temperature? etc. You are now grasping for straws.

Mr_Anony:
lol, you may as well ask where does one find length? or where does one find temperature? etc. You are now grasping for straws.

This is a confusing answer. Pls show the foo.lisness of my ways. Who's temperature are you going to measure?

Mr_Anony:
That is the reason why there is need for an objective moral basis. As long as you reject this I can't help you. It is like asking what is 2+1 while denying that anything like 3 exists. You must accept that 3 exists for 2+1 to make any sense.

Anony it is not the same, also you have not explained what "true good" and "true bad" means.

You keep begging the question here.

Mr_Anony:
True but how does this relate to what we are talking about? Are you somehow suggesting that it is possible it wasn't only one God in the beginning?

competing explanations.

But then everything physical did begin to exist or did they not? wouldn't that equally be 'magic' if it all began to exist from nothing?

Claiming a spiritual cause for the physical is as illogical as an ex nihilio cause.

Kay 17:

Anony it is not the same, also you have not explained what "true good" and "true bad" means.

You keep begging the question here.

My friend I don't know what else you want me to do....you deny that there is an objective moral basis for defining what is good and evil and yet you want me to define what is good and evil. How do you expect me to do that?

It is like denying that there is an objective measure of length and then ask me to define definite lengths. How does one do that?

Anony, I'm still waiting for this legendary objective morality...

Mr_Anony:
My friend I don't know what else you want me to do....you deny that there is an objective moral basis for defining what is good and evil and yet you want me to define what is good and evil. How do you expect me to do that?

It is like denying that there is an objective measure of length and then ask me to define definite lengths. How does one do that?

Surely, denying something that exists doesnt make the thing go into non-existence. So explain what you mean by "true good" or "true evil".


Even using your analogy, the objective measure of lenght still exists despite the skeptic's denial! You can explain centimeters or inches to the person.

Logicboy03:



Surely, denying something that exists doesnt make the thing go into non-existence. So explain what you mean by "true good" or "true evil".


Even using your analogy, the objective measure of lenght still exists despite the skeptic's denial! You can explain centimeters or inches to the person.

my point exactly: How do I explain that 5 meters is short and 10 meters is long when the person asking has refused to accept that such a thing as meters or any such thing as a standard unit of measurement exists?

wiegraf: Anony, I'm still waiting for this legendary objective morality...

I have given you a definition, what more do you want?

Mr_Anony:
I have given you a definition, what more do you want?

That's not satisfactory, at all. You say some actions are objectively good and some bad, so how do you determine which are good and which are evil? What is this basis of this objective morality you keep on harping about?

wiegraf:

That's not satisfactory, at all. You say some actions are objectively good and some bad, so how do you determine which are good and which are evil? What is this basis of this objective morality you keep on harping about?

God's nature.

Kay 17: competing explanations.

Remember that here we are talking about viewing the universe from within it. To properly be know that there are two people in the area, you have to be looking at the footprints from the outside and be able to take cognizance of what is in the area around it. For now, you are in a sense within the footprints

Claiming a spiritual cause for the physical is as illogical as an ex nihilio cause.

No it is not. The physical causes spiritual effects all the time. For instance, when a computer causes a virtual world video game, If you were a character in that video game, all you know is your 2d virtual universe. You can trace your existence back to it's origin (which will only really be when the game was switched on). You will have have no idea that a 3d physical entity caused your 'virtual' universe to exist.

Mr_Anony:
My friend I don't know what else you want me to do....you deny that there is an objective moral basis for defining what is good and evil and yet you want me to define what is good and evil. How do you expect me to do that?

It is like denying that there is an objective measure of length and then ask me to define definite lengths. How does one do that?

Simply define what you mean by "true good" and "true bad"! It is not an unreasonable request, you seem to hold some sort of idea on it, so spill it.

Mr_Anony:
God's nature.

I will take this as your definition of true good, right?

Kay 17:

I will take this as your definition of true good, right?

That is my definition of good yes.

Mr_Anony:

No it is not. The physical causes spiritual effects all the time. For instance, when a computer causes a virtual world video game, If you were a character in that video game, all you know is your 2d virtual universe. You can trace your existence back to it's origin (which will only really be when the game was switched on). You will have have no idea that a 3d physical entity caused your 'virtual' universe to exist.

The virtual game world isn't spiritual, neither is there any true bridge btw it and the universe as a whole. Rather its mathematical abstractions and concepts and information. Simple.

Mr_Anony:
my point exactly: How do I explain that 5 meters is short and 10 meters is long when the person asking has refused to accept that such a thing as meters or any such thing as a standard unit of measurement exists?

So because someone doesnt believe something, you cant explain it to the person? Your fallacious thinking knows no bounds. So if I believe that tables do not exist, you would be able to explain what a table is? Fail!


Anyways, I see your problem. The analogy is bad. Meters do not exist in reality, it is just an idea of measurement we use to calculate stuff. On planet xyz, meters could be sretem

Since there is true good and true bad, then there is false good and false bad. In order words, copies of the original morality. But we can establish that all societies have some sort of moral code, and most are imitations of the original one handed to us by God.

Which accounts for the lack of a universal moral code! Owed to the fact that there isn't a universal value belief in the true God) among all societies, so how can you still claim an objective standard?!

Mr_Anony:
God's nature.

*stands up and applauds*

By god, I assume you mean the xtian god. I see, that's some excellent objective right there. You might as well have said santa's nature, but pikkiwokki will strike you down if you attempt such blasphemy (even he is afraid of yahweh, so you're safe for now)

I can't even be too sarcastic anymore, it's a little too much. I'll just refer you the older post and hope you read it carefully. I know, you can't read it properly because there might be a fact or two about the yahweh concept which you're not used to seeing, but I'll edit it a bit later so that it looks more like the propaganda you're used to.

www.nairaland.com/1097131/strategies-dialoguing-atheists/6#13010179


In other matters, you've been in a good mood for a day or two. Church was good?

Kay 17: Since there is true good and true bad, then there is false good and false bad. In order words, copies of the original morality. But we can establish that all societies have some sort of moral code, and most are imitations of the original one handed to us by God.

Which accounts for the lack of a universal moral code! Owed to the fact that there isn't a universal value belief in the true God) among all societies, so how can you still claim an objective standard?!

that's surprisingly poor reasoning coming from you my friend. I noticed how you were harping on "true good" and "true bad". If you recall, I used those terms when arguing that subjectivity can't give us anything definite when it comes to good and evil. Contrasting with "false good" and "false bad" only amounts in cheap wordplay. "false good would simply mean "not good" and "false bad" = "not bad". You have scored no points here.

The whole talk about copies of an original morality is merely an argument you have cooked up so as to force your conclusion in. The fact remains that the consequence of claiming subjective morality implies that we have no standard for it and hence morality becomes meaningless

wiegraf:

*stands up and applauds*

By god, I assume you mean the xtian god. I see, that's some excellent objective right there. You might as well have said santa's nature, but pikkiwokki will strike you down if you attempt such blasphemy (even he is afraid of yahweh, so you're safe for now)

I can't even be too sarcastic anymore, it's a little too much. I'll just refer you the older post and hope you read it carefully. I know, you can't read it properly because there might be a fact or two about the yahweh concept which you're not used to seeing, but I'll edit it a bit later so that it looks more like the propaganda you're used to.

www.nairaland.com/1097131/strategies-dialoguing-atheists/6#13010179


In other matters, you've been in a good mood for a day or two. Church was good?

Read it again, it is still empty.

Kay 17:

The virtual game world isn't spiritual, neither is there any true bridge btw it and the universe as a whole. Rather its mathematical abstractions and concepts and information. Simple.

Lol, what is the big difference? The point of the analogy is to show that one realm of existence can cause another