Am I losing my faith or just becoming more realistic?

[JoeB131]

Do Joey, is it wrong I am making fun of you?

Yes or no?

Naw, I know that you are a kind of sadist who thinks that making fun of someone's dead mom is "morally" okay.

Decent people have the good sense to not broach the issue.

 

[ding]

Do Joey, is it wrong I am making fun of you?

Yes or no?

Naw, I know that you are a kind of sadist who thinks that making fun of someone's dead mom is "morally" okay.

Decent people have the good sense to not broach the issue.

Thus proving you believe in absolute right and wrong. Thanks for using Idumpforyou.com.

 

[JoeB131]

Is it wrong I am making fun of you, Joey?

Again, you are the one who thinks that it's okay to talk about someone's dead mom... you tell me.

 

[ding]

Is it wrong I am making fun of you, Joey?

Again, you are the one who thinks that it's okay to talk about someone's dead mom... you tell me.

Joey, I do believe in absolute right and wrong so I can say it is wrong.

You on the other hand claim you don't believe in absolute right and wrong, so you can't.

If you weren't dumber than a rock you would understand this.

 

[ding]

I am really surprised that Joey isn't pregnant, right now.

 

[ding]

Joey, I need 15 minutes before I can go again.

 

[ding]

So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

You are a sad little man. DId someone tell you that there was no Santa and made you cry?

Morality is how you are raised. If I were raised by cannibals, I wouldn't see anything "morally" wrong with eating people.

 

[JoeB131]

So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

Except that a code of decency is only because of a social code.

One only needs to look at our own history of racism, slavery and genocide to realize that belief in a God doesn't stop people from doing really awful things and being okay with it.

 

[ding]

You are a sad little man. DId someone tell you that there was no Santa and made you cry?

Morality is how you are raised. If I were raised by cannibals, I wouldn't see anything "morally" wrong with eating people.

Because I am making fun of you? You can't believe that, Joey, you don't believe in absolute right and wrong, remember?

Wrong, Joey, Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.

 

[ding]

So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

Except that a code of decency is only because of a social code.

One only needs to look at our own history of racism, slavery and genocide to realize that belief in a God doesn't stop people from doing really awful things and being okay with it.

Wrong again, Joe. If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

 

[ding]

One only needs to look at our own history of racism, slavery and genocide to realize that belief in a God doesn't stop people from doing really awful things and being okay with it.

The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.

#kickingjoeysass

 

[ding]

#staydownjoeyeveryoneislaughingatyourbeatdown

 

[ding]

You are a sad little man.

^he mad

 

[ding]

Naw, I know that you are a kind of sadist who thinks that making fun of someone's dead mom is "morally" okay.

Decent people have the good sense to not broach the issue.

Hey, Joey, it's almost like you believe a universal right and wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

Because I am making fun of you? You can't believe that, Joey, you don't believe in absolute right and wrong, remember?

again, you are the person who thinks a story about my Mom's funeral is funny. I'm not sure what kind of fucked up Christian you are... but then again, you might be a sociopath.

Wrong, Joey, Morals are effectively standards.

But that's the point. Standards vary.

In the old south, it was "moral" to own other people, to whip them if they didn't work hard enough or tried to run away, to rape them to satisfy your carnal needs. God didn't object to any of this, in fact the "Bible" is full of justifications for slavery and how to abuse slaves.

God didn't change his mind. We changed ours.

The concept that Genocide is wrong is a recent one. The bible is full of rationalizations for Genocide, which is why you'll never meet an Amalekite.

God didn't change his mind, we changed ours.

 

[ding]

God doesn't stop people from doing really awful things

Correct. It is not virtuous if you are forced to be virtuous. He let's us find our own way.

 

[ding]

Because I am making fun of you? You can't believe that, Joey, you don't believe in absolute right and wrong, remember?

again, you are the person who thinks a story about my Mom's funeral is funny. I'm not sure what kind of fucked up Christian you are... but then again, you might be a sociopath.

Wrong, Joey, Morals are effectively standards.

But that's the point. Standards vary.

In the old south, it was "moral" to own other people, to whip them if they didn't work hard enough or tried to run away, to rape them to satisfy your carnal needs. God didn't object to any of this, in fact the "Bible" is full of justifications for slavery and how to abuse slaves.

God didn't change his mind. We changed ours.

The concept that Genocide is wrong is a recent one. The bible is full of rationalizations for Genocide, which is why you'll never meet an Amalekite.

God didn't change his mind, we changed ours.

Again, it is not virtuous if you are forced to be virtuous. He let's us find our own way.

Yes, standards vary but if one does not follow the highest standard, then eventually the reason the highest standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.

 

[JoeB131]

Correct. It is not virtuous if you are forced to be virtuous. He let's us find our own way.

Um, really?

Do you actually READ your bible. There's a whole shitload of things that God said you SHOULD be killed for doing. Like picking up sticks on the Sabbath or having the Gay sex or just having the bad luck of having a torn hymen on your wedding night. (And your parents were expected to help stone you to death!!!)

So God let us figure out on our own that slavery and genocide were wrong, but man, you were totally on your own if you accidently busted your cherry doing hard labor on the farm.

 

[ding]

The concept that Genocide is wrong is a recent one. The bible is full of rationalizations for Genocide, which is why you'll never meet an Amalekite.

Again, The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong