Are people good or bad?

[ding]

cold and hot are subjective human descriptions of temperature.

to prove theyre absolute, i.e. exist in the literal sense....you cant do it by citing humans.

oye vey

ummm.... no. I do it by citing that at the absolute absence of heat, all motion ceases. Nothing subjective or abstract about that. That's what you call a physical phenomenon.

 

[G.T.]

cold and hot are subjective human descriptions of temperature.

to prove theyre absolute, i.e. exist in the literal sense....you cant do it by citing humans.

oye vey

ummm.... no. I do it by citing that at the absolute absence of heat, all motion ceases. Nothing subjective or abstract about that. That's what you call a physical phenomenon.

No, thats what you call the human decision on a temperature scale to decide where "heat" begins, by definition.

 

[Votto]

Can an Omniscient God make a Rock that it cannot move...

Can an Omniscient God make a moral that it cannot change.

Also, is a God even proven to exist in the first place.


These would all need to be answered before it can be said that good and evil exist.(outside of the abstract).otherwise you are just nature bloviating.

God cannot oppose Himself. He cannot oppose His Nature and make a moral change.

God cannot be proven to exist anymore than He can be proven not to exist.

But evidence of His existence can be examined for clues as to his invisible attributes and the purpose of existence.

If he cannot oppose himself, then the God youre describing is not all powerful.

The part about proving a god to exist....youd fail there so lets just not talk about it. Its not been done in human history, ding on USMB isnt going to do it.

He is so powerful He can't oppose Himself. What's not to understand?

"so powerful"


or..."all powerful"



words matter.

if he cant oppose himself, thats a contradiction to being "all" powerful.

Maybe he is just not stupid.

Can I stick my finger in a light socket? Do I have the power?

Sure, so what?

Would I allow someone to oppose me? Sure, if I loved them.

 

[ding]

Good and evil or right and wrong are absolutes. Perception of good and evil and right and wrong are relative. All one has to do to know this is to experience both first hand.

Experience is subjective.

Absolutes are the exact opposite of being "based on experience."

Thats why I asked for the adult table.

You just "declare" things. Thats not how logic works.

"god cannot change his opinion, or else hes not all powerful" is logic.

"good and evil are absolutes...cuz...experience"... is not logic.

Outcomes are not subjective. The greatest organizing principle is virtue.

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

 

[Michelle420]

Can an Omniscient God make a Rock that it cannot move...

Can an Omniscient God make a moral that it cannot change.

Also, is a God even proven to exist in the first place.


These would all need to be answered before it can be said that good and evil exist.(outside of the abstract).otherwise you are just nature bloviating.

Also, God is defined in different ways to different people, different cultures, different religions.

Sometimes I think we are inside of a super computer - but only when Im doing some creative/for fun wondering.

What might happen is that we discover that existence had no beginning, but was eternal - and Universes are cyclic.

Eternal as a word wouldnt even make sense outside of space-time, so that could be a conundrum in and of itself.

At the end of the day, I respect everyones beliefs, but I dont respect anyone who declares its knowledge, in terms of creation, as opposed to belief. Two very distinct terms....knowledge and belief.

Everyone can only come from their own bias, indoctrinations, and experiences. I believe in God and prayer but my definition of God is probably different then other peoples.

I get my own signs of life after death that causes me to think something exists beyond this plane.

One of them is after my sister killed herself, in my family we started to see hearts everywhere that we attribute to my sister being near.

Water spilled turned into hearts, my dog who I got after she passed his leg has a heart shape on his fur, and a bruise I had that looked like a heart etc. An atheist would say it's just a heart means nothing. The heart all look the same in the pics.

 

[G.T.]

Good and evil or right and wrong are absolutes. Perception of good and evil and right and wrong are relative. All one has to do to know this is to experience both first hand.

Experience is subjective.

Absolutes are the exact opposite of being "based on experience."

Thats why I asked for the adult table.

You just "declare" things. Thats not how logic works.

"god cannot change his opinion, or else hes not all powerful" is logic.

"good and evil are absolutes...cuz...experience"... is not logic.

Outcomes are not subjective. The greatest organizing principle is virtue.

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

 

[ding]

cold and hot are subjective human descriptions of temperature.

to prove theyre absolute, i.e. exist in the literal sense....you cant do it by citing humans.

oye vey

ummm.... no. I do it by citing that at the absolute absence of heat, all motion ceases. Nothing subjective or abstract about that. That's what you call a physical phenomenon.

No, thats what you call the human decision on a temperature scale to decide where "heat" begins, by definition.

No. GT. It is a physical phenomenon of nature showing you that cold is not extant. Heat is extant. Same thing applies to good and evil.

 

[ding]

Good and evil or right and wrong are absolutes. Perception of good and evil and right and wrong are relative. All one has to do to know this is to experience both first hand.

Experience is subjective.

Absolutes are the exact opposite of being "based on experience."

Thats why I asked for the adult table.

You just "declare" things. Thats not how logic works.

"god cannot change his opinion, or else hes not all powerful" is logic.

"good and evil are absolutes...cuz...experience"... is not logic.

Outcomes are not subjective. The greatest organizing principle is virtue.

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

 

[G.T.]

cold and hot are subjective human descriptions of temperature.

to prove theyre absolute, i.e. exist in the literal sense....you cant do it by citing humans.

oye vey

ummm.... no. I do it by citing that at the absolute absence of heat, all motion ceases. Nothing subjective or abstract about that. That's what you call a physical phenomenon.

No, thats what you call the human decision on a temperature scale to decide where "heat" begins, by definition.

No. GT. It is a physical phenomenon of nature showing you that cold is not extant. Heat is extant. Same thing applies to good and evil.

No, heat and cold are human terms used to describe physical properties of nature.

Good and evil are abstract terms, and are literally non absolutes shy of proving an absolute standard.

Which is, so far, not humanly possible.

 

[alang1216]

“The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable reality but at the same time the most intellectually resisted fact.” - Malcolm Muggeridge

Good and bad are not absolutes, they are relative to their culture. Were our slave-owning founding fathers good or evil? Evil by today's standards but good by those of their time. Apples and oranges.

Yes and no.

As you point out, during the time of slavery the average consensus was that slavery was not ideal, but it was OK. After decades of being make illegal, however, the notion of slavery is absurdly evil.

The same can be said of abortion. Before Roe vs. Wade, the consensus was that abortion was not moral, but decades after Roe vs. Wade abortion is viewed as not ideal, but OK.

As you can see, people are nothing more than sheep to be herded and told by the state what is right or wrong, just as the Bible states.

The key to both, however, is dehumanizing the victims. In the case of slavery, men were viewed as glorified apes to justify the mistreatment of them, for you see, we all have an internal morality to treat others as we would want to be treated. The only way to then get around this internal policeman is to devalue the entity you wish to oppress, such as calling an unborn child a "fetus".

History is full of such examples, whether it be Nazi's calling Jews vermin or Muslims calling unbelievers infidels.

Dehumanization is the first step towards oppression and genocide.

Humans have always been tribal. Your tribe set the moral tone and everyone in it is a person. Members of other tribes are outsiders and are treated differently. Your tribe can be your clan, kingdom, state, or country. Outsiders may be human but they are still outsiders. If they look or act differently, so much the better to differentiate.

 

[G.T.]

Experience is subjective.

Absolutes are the exact opposite of being "based on experience."

Thats why I asked for the adult table.

You just "declare" things. Thats not how logic works.

"god cannot change his opinion, or else hes not all powerful" is logic.

"good and evil are absolutes...cuz...experience"... is not logic.

Outcomes are not subjective. The greatest organizing principle is virtue.

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No - because theres no absolute measure that you can logically prove that could lead to such an absurd comment.

 

[Votto]

“The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable reality but at the same time the most intellectually resisted fact.” - Malcolm Muggeridge

Good and bad are not absolutes, they are relative to their culture. Were our slave-owning founding fathers good or evil? Evil by today's standards but good by those of their time. Apples and oranges.

Yes and no.

As you point out, during the time of slavery the average consensus was that slavery was not ideal, but it was OK. After decades of being make illegal, however, the notion of slavery is absurdly evil.

The same can be said of abortion. Before Roe vs. Wade, the consensus was that abortion was not moral, but decades after Roe vs. Wade abortion is viewed as not ideal, but OK.

As you can see, people are nothing more than sheep to be herded and told by the state what is right or wrong, just as the Bible states.

The key to both, however, is dehumanizing the victims. In the case of slavery, men were viewed as glorified apes to justify the mistreatment of them, for you see, we all have an internal morality to treat others as we would want to be treated. The only way to then get around this internal policeman is to devalue the entity you wish to oppress, such as calling an unborn child a "fetus".

History is full of such examples, whether it be Nazi's calling Jews vermin or Muslims calling unbelievers infidels.

Dehumanization is the first step towards oppression and genocide.

Humans have always been tribal. Your tribe set the moral tone and everyone in it is a person. Members of other tribes are outsiders and are treated differently. Your tribe can be your clan, kingdom, state, or country. Outsiders may be human but they are still outsiders. If they look or act differently, so much the better to differentiate.

You are correct. Human beings seek collectivism to get a leg up on everyone else.

That's what makes politics so wonderful.

Politics has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with exploiting inequality in regards to your adversary. If politicians treated everyone as equals, there would be no reason to pay them money or even vote.

 

[G.T.]

“The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable reality but at the same time the most intellectually resisted fact.” - Malcolm Muggeridge

Good and bad are not absolutes, they are relative to their culture. Were our slave-owning founding fathers good or evil? Evil by today's standards but good by those of their time. Apples and oranges.

Yes and no.

As you point out, during the time of slavery the average consensus was that slavery was not ideal, but it was OK. After decades of being make illegal, however, the notion of slavery is absurdly evil.

The same can be said of abortion. Before Roe vs. Wade, the consensus was that abortion was not moral, but decades after Roe vs. Wade abortion is viewed as not ideal, but OK.

As you can see, people are nothing more than sheep to be herded and told by the state what is right or wrong, just as the Bible states.

The key to both, however, is dehumanizing the victims. In the case of slavery, men were viewed as glorified apes to justify the mistreatment of them, for you see, we all have an internal morality to treat others as we would want to be treated. The only way to then get around this internal policeman is to devalue the entity you wish to oppress, such as calling an unborn child a "fetus".

History is full of such examples, whether it be Nazi's calling Jews vermin or Muslims calling unbelievers infidels.

Dehumanization is the first step towards oppression and genocide.

Humans have always been tribal. Your tribe set the moral tone and everyone in it is a person. Members of other tribes are outsiders and are treated differently. Your tribe can be your clan, kingdom, state, or country. Outsiders may be human but they are still outsiders. If they look or act differently, so much the better to differentiate.

You are correct. Human beings seek collectivism to get a leg up on everyone else.

That's what makes politics so wonderful.

Politics has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with exploiting inequality in regards to your adversary. If politicians treated everyone as equals, there would be no reason to pay them money or even vote.

Collectivism, like Bible Worship.

 

[alang1216]

“The depravity of man is at once the most empirically verifiable reality but at the same time the most intellectually resisted fact.” - Malcolm Muggeridge

Good and bad are not absolutes, they are relative to their culture. Were our slave-owning founding fathers good or evil? Evil by today's standards but good by those of their time. Apples and oranges.

Yes and no.

As you point out, during the time of slavery the average consensus was that slavery was not ideal, but it was OK. After decades of being make illegal, however, the notion of slavery is absurdly evil.

The same can be said of abortion. Before Roe vs. Wade, the consensus was that abortion was not moral, but decades after Roe vs. Wade abortion is viewed as not ideal, but OK.

As you can see, people are nothing more than sheep to be herded and told by the state what is right or wrong, just as the Bible states.

The key to both, however, is dehumanizing the victims. In the case of slavery, men were viewed as glorified apes to justify the mistreatment of them, for you see, we all have an internal morality to treat others as we would want to be treated. The only way to then get around this internal policeman is to devalue the entity you wish to oppress, such as calling an unborn child a "fetus".

History is full of such examples, whether it be Nazi's calling Jews vermin or Muslims calling unbelievers infidels.

Dehumanization is the first step towards oppression and genocide.

Humans have always been tribal. Your tribe set the moral tone and everyone in it is a person. Members of other tribes are outsiders and are treated differently. Your tribe can be your clan, kingdom, state, or country. Outsiders may be human but they are still outsiders. If they look or act differently, so much the better to differentiate.

You are correct. Human beings seek collectivism to get a leg up on everyone else.

That's what makes politics so wonderful.

Politics has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with exploiting inequality in regards to your adversary. If politicians treated everyone as equals, there would be no reason to pay them money or even vote.

We're a democracy so we get the politicians and the government we deserve.

 

[ding]

Outcomes are not subjective. The greatest organizing principle is virtue.

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No - because theres no absolute measure that you can logically prove that could lead to such an absurd comment.

You are contradicting yourself. If there are no absolute standards then all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

 

[Moonglow]

Yes?

Yes what?

Only the Irish...

 

[Moonglow]

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No - because theres no absolute measure that you can logically prove that could lead to such an absurd comment.

You are contradicting yourself. If there are no absolute standards then all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

Depends which dimension or universe you are in at that time in space..

 

[Moonglow]

Let me see if I can help out with my years of time on God's green Earth.

Man isn't perfect and although always striving for perfection will never achieve it while on Earth. Lucifer who fell from God's grace was allowed to walk the Earth to tempt us which gives us choice. Those that follow the word of the Lord, will again try to be good but since human, make mistakes, so will need to be forgiven. Those that don't follow, because Lucifer has given them an easier way, and have turned away from God, will do what ever "FEELS" good and will continue to follow Lucifer into Hell, where their sins will never be forgiven.

So there are 2 books being followed today, which one do you follow?

Bible - God's Book - Good... Read the Bible. A free Bible on your phone, tablet, and computer. | The Bible App | Bible.com

Rules for Radicals - Lucifer's Book - Evil.... Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

Opening page - Dedication
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”

So you've only seen the green part, no surprise...

 

[G.T.]

Outcomes are not subjective?

Thats a stupid remark. Was Trump winning the Presidency good...or bad?

Ohh...

Nevermind. Youre ding.

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No - because theres no absolute measure that you can logically prove that could lead to such an absurd comment.

You are contradicting yourself. If there are no absolute standards then all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No absolute standard doesnt mean "everything is equal," it means "it varies, based on conscious opinion."

Having non-absolute standards doesnt mean you possess none, it means they vary.

 

[ding]

That's right. Outcomes are feedback.

Let's take an example where you have two guys. One cheats on his wife all the time. The other doesn't.

Can you think of how what happens to them will provide feedback to them as to which behavior led to better outcomes?

I can site my opinion...

but shy of proving a god exists, theres no logical absolute standard outside of opinion

Based on that you must then believe that all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No - because theres no absolute measure that you can logically prove that could lead to such an absurd comment.

You are contradicting yourself. If there are no absolute standards then all behaviors can lead to equal outcomes, right?

No absolute standard doesnt mean "everything is equal," it means "it varies, based on conscious opinion."

Having non-absolute standards doesnt mean you possess none, it means they vary.

I didn't say that no absolute standard meant that everything is equal.
I said if there are no absolutes than any behavior could lead to any outcome. That's what equal outcomes mean, GT.

So, can any behavior lead to any outcome and is that what we see? Or do certain behaviors lead to certain outcomes?