AuthorTopic: The seed thought for morals and ethics  (Read 22053 times)

Online Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15504
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #15 on: August 21, 2013, 03:25:36 PM »
That's the part of being a suicide bomber I always had problems with....the dying part.

Seriously, I feel very sorry for the poor kids that get pushed into that role, almost as much as I do for the victims. The people who recruit, indoctrinate, and send those wretches out with explosives strapped to their bodies deserve a particularly nasty place in the kind of Christian hell my parents believed in.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline luciddreams

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
    • View Profile
    • Epiphany Now
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #16 on: August 21, 2013, 05:02:23 PM »
Far as the Golden Rule is concerned:

What if you are a Masochist?
then you are diseased in the head.  There is something wrong with you if you want to be in pain.

Quote
What if you are a Libertarian who says, "If I was broke, I wouldn't expect any help from Da Goobermint".

You probably haven't been broke before.

Quote
What if you are a Communist who wants to see all Private Property abolished?

Then you are a communist.

Quote
What if you were abused as a child, and become a child abuser yourself? (often the case)

See the answer for masochism

Quote
What if you are a Christian converted by Missionaries?

I'm a bit confused by this one.  Want to elaborate?

Quote
What if you are a Suicide Bomber?

Then you are dead.




Offline Ashvin

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2013, 05:24:23 PM »
Personally I think moral and ethics are pretty simple and require no God to explain.  Do you treat other people like you want to be treated?  IMO the Golden Rule pretty much sums up ethics.  It's that simple.

Why should we treat the GR as being "right" if there is no source of objective moral values? How can one claim that it is the right thing to do, always and everywhere.

RE (surprisingly  ;)) also makes a good point below - the GR as an abstract concept is not ethical unless it is tied to some objective set of values that actually exist. Generally the GR assumes all people, deep down, want to be treated with love and kindness, but the real principle underlying the GR is that people SHOULD be treated with love and kindness, regardless of what they "want".

That's were God comes in... He is the source of objective moral values, and we treat others with love and kindness because we want to be in communion with our Creator and restore paradise lost, here in the present and more fully in the future. We humbly accept that it is God who provides the path to true love, peace and justice, not "mortal humans" as you say.

Quote
You can watch this process in your own life for verification.  The energy you put out into existence is returned back to you.  If you do nothing but take you will have taken from  you.  If you give you will be given to.  Jesus said as much, as did the Buddha.  It's my opinion that this is just the way of the universe.  It might as well be law just as the laws of thermodynamics.  All religions teach this simple seed of morals.  It can be chopped up as many times as you want, and subdivided, and pigeon holed, but it all boils down to how you treat people.  We all know how we want to be treated.  So we all know how to be ethical by default.

Yet there are plenty of examples of people who put energy in or do good deeds and get nothing but pain and suffering in return. This is a popular conception of "the law of Karma", and I don't see it in action at all. Christianity, on the other hand, does not give us a way to gain material blessings through our deeds or avoid pain and suffering in this lifetime, but rather a way "stand firm" in the face of tribulation and trust in our reconciliation with the God of peace.

http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-the-gospel-of-peace-a-promise-of-ease-and-prosperity/
Quote
First, when the Bible speaks of the gospel of peace, the emphasis is not prosperity but peace with God. “Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior” (Colossians 1:21). Your heart once entertained contemptible thoughts about God. You had an inbred disgust for his principles and precepts. “But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation” (Colossians 1:22). Thus, as soldiers of the cross we can march through life’s battles with a song in our hearts and with our “feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace” (Ephesians 6:15). God does not promise us a panacea, but he does promise us peace in the midst of life’s storms.

Quote
In the end, Religion provides something to belong to, and something to follow, and mostly an explanation for why you don't have to be concerned about your own death.  It provides respite from the fear of the unknown all the while pretending to know about said unknown with certainty due to the words written in a book by mortal men.

Most people need guidance about the big questions.  They need to be told what is true because they lack the courage to figure it out for themselves.  Enter religion.

That is dumping all religions into one over-simplified basket. The Christian faith does not simply give you advice to follow and a group to belong to, but a systematic explanation of our existence, our history and our purpose in this Universe, among other things. It does not in any way attempt to convince us that we should not fear or that we will not experience pain and suffering. Indeed, the perfect image of God, God made flesh, experienced plenty of anguish and a gruesome death as a necessary part of establishing God's Kingdom on Earth as in Heaven.

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3177
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2013, 06:45:14 PM »
Be good and kind to people. 'Nuff said.

WHD

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2013, 07:12:23 PM »
So maybe it should be refined to something like "love others how you want to be loved." ....   Do you really need to be taught to love?
YES!!

How to love selflessly, at least.... And you don't learn it from a book, either, or from an Internet forum, for that matter; you learn it by seeing it in action.

As for a refinement, I'm particularly fond of "love your neighbor as yourself."  ;D  Which does, of course, mean, that you do have to love yourself; that is where the Golden Rule breaks down, when people want to be treated badly because they hate themselves.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline luciddreams

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
    • View Profile
    • Epiphany Now
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2013, 09:54:31 PM »
So maybe it should be refined to something like "love others how you want to be loved." ....   Do you really need to be taught to love?
YES!!

How to love selflessly, at least.... And you don't learn it from a book, either, or from an Internet forum, for that matter; you learn it by seeing it in action.

As for a refinement, I'm particularly fond of "love your neighbor as yourself."  ;D  Which does, of course, mean, that you do have to love yourself; that is where the Golden Rule breaks down, when people want to be treated badly because they hate themselves.

Ashvin...you should take notes from JD's comments on how to be a true Christian...again...if such a thing there be.

JD, again, if you hate yourself you are diseased and your example should not be followed.  I smell straw men with this BS. 

Do any of you actually think that Jesus of Nazareth would argue with the Golden Rule?  That you should love how you want to be loved, that you should care how you want to be cared about...in love, and not suffering.  Is there a Christian in the house that will argue the tenets of love for free?  Selflessly communing with the currents of regeneration and health? 

I don't know what you argue for, or about Ashvin.  You have lost touch with human roots and have grown a brain so logical that it breaks the microscope we view logic through...

Online RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 33314
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2013, 10:44:19 PM »
My responses in Blue.

Far as the Golden Rule is concerned:

What if you are a Masochist?
then you are diseased in the head.  There is something wrong with you if you want to be in pain.

That is your opinion, not the opinion of the masochist.  From the POV of the masochist, following the Golden Rule would be to make sure others experience similar joy in pain.

Quote
What if you are a Libertarian who says, "If I was broke, I wouldn't expect any help from Da Goobermint".

You probably haven't been broke before.

Probably not, but it is still the opinion of the Libertarian and following the Golden Rule.

Quote
What if you are a Communist who wants to see all Private Property abolished?

Then you are a communist.

That was stipulated.  The point is, the Communist is OK with having his Private Property communalized, so following the Golden Rule would make it OK to communalize the property of others.

Quote
What if you were abused as a child, and become a child abuser yourself? (often the case)

See the answer for masochism

See the response to the answer for masochism.

Quote
What if you are a Christian converted by Missionaries?

I'm a bit confused by this one.  Want to elaborate?

If you experienced great JOY in coming to Jeezus because a Missionary turned you on to him, does this make it OK for you to go ring 1000 doorbells a week and harangue everyone in the neighborhood to convert to Christianity?  That is following the Golden Rule.

Quote
What if you are a Suicide Bomber?

Then you are dead.

Indeed, but so are the others you took with you to the Great Beyond.  One can assume if the SB is OK with killing himself along with others, he would also be OK with others killing him along with themselves.  That is the Golden Rule applied to Suicide Bombers.

SAVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN

Offline Ashvin

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2013, 05:21:36 AM »
Ashvin...you should take notes from JD's comments on how to be a true Christian...again...if such a thing there be.

Hopefully we both take notes from the same source... you should join us!

Quote
Do any of you actually think that Jesus of Nazareth would argue with the Golden Rule?  That you should love how you want to be loved, that you should care how you want to be cared about...in love, and not suffering.  Is there a Christian in the house that will argue the tenets of love for free?  Selflessly communing with the currents of regeneration and health?

How about that scraggly looking "zombie" that comes wandering onto your property after the Doomsday clock has run? What happened to your principle of "first protect me and mine", how far does that go? If your love for others is not rooted in anything objectively real, it is not rooted in anything at all.

Can you respond to RE's application of the GR? 

Jesus would certainly condemn many things that people would want to have done to themselves.

Quote
I don't know what you argue for, or about Ashvin.  You have lost touch with human roots and have grown a brain so logical that it breaks the microscope we view logic through...

I'm arguing for the existence of God (who, in case you already forgot, you said is not required), by pointing out He is necessary for objective moral values to exist, such as "love your neighbor as yourself". It's fittingly called the "moral argument" or the "argument from morality", used by philosophers for hundreds of years (such as Kant). CS Lewis puts it this way - "conscience reveals to us a moral law whose source cannot be found in the natural world, thus pointing to a supernatural Lawgiver."

I'm pretty sure both of those guys retained their human roots despite making a logical argument for God...
« Last Edit: August 22, 2013, 05:28:39 AM by Ashvin »

Offline luciddreams

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
    • View Profile
    • Epiphany Now
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2013, 07:41:18 AM »


Indeed, but so are the others you took with you to the Great Beyond.  One can assume if the SB is OK with killing himself along with others, he would also be OK with others killing him along with themselves.  That is the Golden Rule applied to Suicide Bombers.



but I already amended the golden rule, so I'm not defending it any longer RE ;D

I'm not concerned about the opinion of people whom are diseased in the mind.  Sure it's not their opinion, and they can follow the golden rule being diseased in the mind without breaking the golden rule.  So I see your point.

I think "love others the way you want to be loved" works better.  Granted, some people don't want to be loved...at least they think they don't, but it's my contention that everybody wants love and understanding whether they would agree with that or not. 

It's my opinion that all of ethics can be wrapped up in the action of selfless love.  If we all loved selflessly what more would we need?  Before anyone brings it up, let me just clarify that I'm not sittin' here trying to say that we're all going to hold hands and love each other until evil is exercised.  What I am saying is that theoretically love really is all we need. 

Religion is not a requirement for love, and in many cases religion works for the opposite of love.  I trust I don't need to give examples of this since RE specializes in it ::)

So nice try RE, but you have not changed my mind.  Try again perhaps.   :laugh:

Offline luciddreams

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3307
    • View Profile
    • Epiphany Now
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2013, 08:15:52 AM »

How about that scraggly looking "zombie" that comes wandering onto your property after the Doomsday clock has run? What happened to your principle of "first protect me and mine", how far does that go? If your love for others is not rooted in anything objectively real, it is not rooted in anything at all.

Good point Ashvin.  There is no easy way to respond to it either.  If I can't love that zombie just as much as I love my son then my prescription for ethics breaks down.  But then Jesus said to love your enemies as yourself...something like that...I'm sure you know the scripture.  So, following the tenets of selfless love I would give the Zombie what I could by way of food and hope that he moved on. 

But I wouldn't do that if it meant my kids would go hungry.  I love my kids more than I do zombies. 

So my best answer would be to create community.  To create a reality where we need each other for our daily existence.  Where what we do on a daily basis is meaningful and cultivates our natural abilities.  Where all of that creates abundance. 

So, again, the answer is love.  It's superhuman to love your enemies.  The Boddhisattva loves all sentient beings so much that he/she vows to reincarnate until all life is freed from Samsara...the wheel of suffering that is the human condition filtered through our faulty mental perceptions.  Not just the human condition...all life conditions have suffering as a universal.  Dukkha, I believe is how it's spelled (haven't studied Buddhism in a while), "life is suffering." 

The antidote for that suffering is love.  I stand by the spirit of what I'm propounding.  The seed of morals/ethics is love.


Quote
I'm arguing for the existence of God (who, in case you already forgot, you said is not required), by pointing out He is necessary for objective moral values to exist, such as "love your neighbor as yourself" It's fittingly called the "moral argument" or the "argument from morality", used by philosophers for hundreds of years (such as Kant). CS Lewis puts it this way - "conscience reveals to us a moral law whose source cannot be found in the natural world, thus pointing to a supernatural Lawgiver."

I'm pretty sure both of those guys retained their human roots despite making a logical argument for God...

Why does it have to be "moral law" thus requiring a "supernatural lawgiver?"  Why can it not be just the way it is.  Existence is this way because existence is this way and for no other reason.  Why does there need to be a God that created it?  Why can't creation have just always existed without being created?  It is my opinion that existence has simply always been.  I take the middle man out. 

We are all divine beings capable of love.  My point to you, about your big brain, is that it's convinced you that you know you are correct due to thought processes alone.  You think you have arrived at God without faith, at least that's how you come off. 
« Last Edit: August 22, 2013, 08:18:55 AM by luciddreams »

Offline monsta666

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1377
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2013, 09:28:54 AM »
I think "love others the way you want to be loved" works better.  Granted, some people don't want to be loved...at least they think they don't, but it's my contention that everybody wants love and understanding whether they would agree with that or not. 

It's my opinion that all of ethics can be wrapped up in the action of selfless love.  If we all loved selflessly what more would we need?  Before anyone brings it up, let me just clarify that I'm not sittin' here trying to say that we're all going to hold hands and love each other until evil is exercised.  What I am saying is that theoretically love really is all we need. 

To me I always had trouble when people mention the concept of loving yourself or love others as you expect to be loved. To me, loving yourself has the danger of giving rise to things such as narcissism. It is this narcissism and the following self-centred attitude that surround narcissistic behaviour that has played a substantial role in how messed up society is. Self-loving also has the danger of generating excessively large egos or people overestimating ones ability. This combination of self-love, big (but also frail) egos plus arrogance creates a toxic mix. Self-loving can make you self-centred (thus blind to the world outside yourself/ego). Then the big but frail ego makes it difficult to take accept criticism which is again another bad thing. What you really need to promote in people is humility because it is humility that allows to understand our shortcomings, we are not perfect we are not gods and we do make mistakes and it is okay to make mistakes. Humility also allows to understand our limits and more important the limits of society and how we are dependent on each other the community and the environment. I don't think you can appreciate these things if you get absorbed in loving yourself. Even if we do not take this concept of self-love to the extreme I don't think loving yourself even a little bit meets the objectives I laid out very well.

When it comes to these matters I think it is better to express this as saying everyone should respect themselves. A person who respects themselves will not go into a lopsided relationship where all the power is placed on one person. A respectful relationship is one where both parties where power is relatively balanced and each person has the strength to do what they want. One person should not have excessive leverage to coerce other members that is not a respectful relationship. The way corporations or banks hold such power means the relationship cannot be respectful because the inequalities in terms of power and money is too great between people and corporations. Balance is needed in most matters of life. So respecting yourself should cover you against abuses so love is not necessary here. However respecting yourself also means you should treat others in the same manner; with respect and decency. Respect doesn't mean we have to agree with everything the other person says simply we respect their opinion and their ways of living enough we won't ridicule them (provided your habits are not causing unwanted destruction to others) and more important we will not suppress their right to voice/act in that way. Even though religions claim to love everyone it is this failure to respect counter opinions that seriously undermine them.

Online Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15504
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #26 on: August 22, 2013, 10:02:41 AM »
That's an interesting question...what constitutes healthy self-love and what constitutes narcissism? My gut level reaction was that they are very different and not really on the same spectrum. I don't think narcissistic people truly have much real self love. That's part of their problem.

I ran across this, by a psychologist named Betty Phillips"

Self Love or Narcissism?
 

What is a narcissist? Should you love yourself? Many people find this topic quite confusing and anxiety-provoking. Of course the Stress Monster loves your confusion and, as usual, I'm here to defeat the monster.
 

As people are multi-dimensional, you'll need to look at several characteristics to understand the difference between self-love and narcissism: types of self-love; compassion for others; consistency of public versus private identity. Once you understand these differences, you will realize that you should love yourself but beware of loving a narcissist.
 

Let's start with self-love. I do advocate the type of self-love which is positive, warm and caring, appreciating and affirming of yourself, supporting and maintaining appropriate self-esteem. Too often in my psychology practice I see individuals unable to maintain adequate self love, suffering from low self-esteem or even self loathing related to depression or anger turned inward. Some people suffer from a misguided need to act in a self-effacing way out of fear of being called braggarts or "stuck up." Others think they should not love themselves, confusing self-care with selfishness. As you will see, these are quite different. Self-care is a basic necessity; you need to have internal resources in order to be altruistic toward others. Selfish people promote their own welfare and are indifferent or even hostile toward others.
 

Self-love and compassion are linked. The "Golden Rule" is one of our highest ethical and spiritual values. If we are to love others as ourselves, this means that we must first love ourselves! You cannot take care of others adequately unless you can also take care of yourself. That said, compassion and altruism are fundamental positive values leading to inner peace and happiness. We are all a part of humanity. All religions and spiritual practices emphasize the need to care for others in a compassionate manner.
 

The third differentiating characteristic is consistency of public and private appearances. Honest people will be consistent in speech and behavior, whether or not they are trying to impress others. They value speaking their truth and avoid misrepresentations, lies or falsehoods.
 

A self loving, compassionate and honest person will likely be a happy, fulfilled person.  But what about a narcissist? Although the word means self love, this personality type is very different from the self loving person on all three dimensions.
 

The narcissist's so-called self-love tends to be shallow and superficial and dependent upon receiving admiration from others. While this is very true, you wouldn't know this upon first impression. Narcissists are usually rated as attractive, intelligent, likable, charming and entertaining. The narcissist rates him or herself this way and others support this impression. Because narcissists need reinforcement from others, they make sure they project these admirable qualities. You will find many narcissists in influential leadership or political positions. They spend a great deal of time grooming themselves, purchasing stylish apparel, even preening in public. However, as you spend more time with the narcissist, you will notice that their apparent self-love is shallow rather than deep. You will notice they tend to be egocentric and self absorbed, hypersensitive, insecure and defensive about potential criticism.
 

You will find yourself drawn into the narcissists’ charm as they radiate positive qualities. But beware!  Narcissists need to be "top dog," in a power position, meaning that ultimately the narcissist attempts to control others to ensure support for their overblown self-importance. The narcissist's charm turns into vanity and grandiosity, manipulation and exploitation of others. Do narcissists care about others? No. Narcissists care about themselves and maintaining their advantage over others, lacking empathy for others. Narcissists are often very judgmental, criticizing and putting down other people while they praise and call positive attention to themselves. Narcissists often seek sexualized attention from others and may pursue short-term hookups or affairs when they do marry.
 

What about honesty and consistency? Only if they feel the need to project these qualities to maintain their edge over others. Narcissists have a public and a private face. They will conspicuously display positive characteristics in public and profess admirable virtues. However, in private, narcissists will display their true character.
 

Are narcissists happy? Their emotional states are highly variable and inconsistent. They seem happy when they are being admired and when their needs are being satisfied. When narcissists are not in control and are not being admired by others, they will be deflated and insecure and will be driven to restore their power position. When narcissists feel they are not being given their due, they may become more manipulative and aggressive. Narcissists will often seek out new acquaintances or partners to obtain the admiration they crave.
 

Narcissistic behavior can be understood on a continuum when more extensive and serious narcissistic behavior becomes chronic.  A narcissistic personality disorder develops when enduring patterns of narcissistic thinking and behavior are exhibited in a wide range of personal and social contexts, becoming inflexible and maladaptive. The narcissist's personality will appear “entitled” and dishonest, more aggressive and predatory toward others. Even more extreme narcissists may become cruel and hurtful, enjoying harming others for their own benefit. These individuals may be diagnosed as sociopathic or psychopathic.


What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #27 on: August 22, 2013, 10:55:42 AM »
To me I always had trouble when people mention the concept of loving yourself or love others as you expect to be loved. To me, loving yourself has the danger of giving rise to things such as narcissism....Even if we do not take this concept of self-love to the extreme I don't think loving yourself even a little bit meets the objectives I laid out very well.
I disagree with this completely.  Narcissism is an expression of self-hatred; because deep down you hate yourself, you need the constant validation.  Self-respect is important, but I think the article Eddie dug up is much better.

Personally, I felt moved by the lyrics of the second verse of Pink's Fucking Perfect:

Quote
You're so mean (so mean)
When you talk (when you talk)
About yourself. You were wrong.
Change the voices (change the voices)
In your head (in your head)
Make them like you instead.

So complicated,
Look how we all make it.
Filled with so much hatred
Such a tired game
It's enough, I've done all I could think of
Chased down all my demons
I've seen you do the same
(Oh oh)

Pretty, pretty please, don't you ever, ever feel
Like you're less than fucking perfect
Pretty, pretty please, if you ever, ever feel
Like you're nothing, you're fucking perfect to me
« Last Edit: August 22, 2013, 11:08:00 AM by jdwheeler42 »
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline Ashvin

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 2346
    • View Profile
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #28 on: August 22, 2013, 02:31:19 PM »
So, again, the answer is love.  It's superhuman to love your enemies.  The Boddhisattva loves all sentient beings so much that he/she vows to reincarnate until all life is freed from Samsara...the wheel of suffering that is the human condition filtered through our faulty mental perceptions.  Not just the human condition...all life conditions have suffering as a universal.  Dukkha, I believe is how it's spelled (haven't studied Buddhism in a while), "life is suffering." 

The antidote for that suffering is love.  I stand by the spirit of what I'm propounding.  The seed of morals/ethics is love.

Exactly, it is "superhuman" to love your neighbor as yourself or those who persecute you. These are radical ideals to strive for, but that cannot be attained (or, I would argue, even approximated by our own will). But why then should we even strive for them? If they are just a means to an end, such as a stable and prosperous society, then why not experiment with "non-loving" ways of creating such a society? If it is just a matter of our own feelings in any particular place on any particular day, then there is no real foundation for our ethics.

I stand by the spirit of what you are propounding also, but I also insist that this spirit is an eternal verity that must be grounded in an objective source, otherwise we have no good response to the person who says, "show love for others when you feel like it or when it suits your goals, but if you don't or it doesn't, that's OK... try something else".


Quote
Why does it have to be "moral law" thus requiring a "supernatural lawgiver?"  Why can it not be just the way it is.  Existence is this way because existence is this way and for no other reason.  Why does there need to be a God that created it?  Why can't creation have just always existed without being created?  It is my opinion that existence has simply always been.  I take the middle man out.

Even if existence has always been, what basis do we have to say that there are objective ethical duties that go along with existence? Why are only human beings beholden to these duties?

Quote
We are all divine beings capable of love.  My point to you, about your big brain, is that it's convinced you that you know you are correct due to thought processes alone.  You think you have arrived at God without faith, at least that's how you come off.

Your big brain has convinced you that you are correct about many things as well. Please don't tell me there were no "thought processes" involved...

You are married w/ children, correct? Did you just arrive into your marriage without any thought about it? Do you have reasons for why you have committed yourself to other human beings in such a manner? Thoughtful reasoning is not antithetical to faith, but complementary with it.

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: The seed thought for morals and ethics
« Reply #29 on: August 22, 2013, 04:36:43 PM »
So, again, the answer is love.  It's superhuman to love your enemies.
Exactly, it is "superhuman" to love your neighbor as yourself or those who persecute you. These are radical ideals to strive for, but that cannot be attained (or, I would argue, even approximated by our own will).
Again, I agree with your basic idea that love is the answer, but I have to disagree with you that loving your neighbor is somehow superhuman or unattainable.

The key is that it is "Love your neighbor AS yourself".  Not "Love your neighbor LIKE yourself".   Not "Love your neighbor AS MUCH AS yourself".  What makes it seem like a insurmountable task is the conception that you are separate from your neighbor.  This is part of the mindset we inherit as Fallen beings.  This belief in separation is what handicaps us.  "Stone age" tribes don't have that, the people they live with are a part of their identity, like their body parts.  Doing what's best for the tribe comes naturally because they see themselves more as a member of the tribe than as an individual.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
29 Replies
3810 Views
Last post August 08, 2014, 03:53:13 PM
by Ka
0 Replies
420 Views
Last post July 22, 2015, 10:21:26 PM
by Guest
3 Replies
763 Views
Last post July 31, 2017, 06:01:00 AM
by Eddie