Reason vs. Morality

[dilloduck]

Every one except those referring to God.

The ones referring to God were also arrived at through reason, just flawed reasoning or - perhaps successful reasoning if the intent was to create obedience.

That's not what Christians believe----other religions also believe that morality is an edict from a supreme being or beings. The were given specific instructions as to what was right and wrong---good or bad. Even told what to eat,-- ad infinitum.

I'm aware it's not what they believe.

I'm also aware of how to reason to each of the 10 commandments using logic, and so it's by no stretch of the imagination that they likely came from the reasoning of man. Not even close.

So how does one differentiate between flawed reasoning and accurate reasoning when trying to establish a system of morals ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It needs both. Reason without morality and morality without reason are both justifications for a bloodbath.

Try telling a liberal that. They would be perfect happily if religious people all left America.

Most liberals are religious. There are as many on the right who would have atheists leave as there are those on the left who would have the religious leave. Neither side has any monopoly on idiots.

"Most liberals are religious."

Horsefeathers.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-and-justice-system/365044-liberal-attack-religion-again.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

Wrong.

 

[Zmrzlina]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

 

[dilloduck]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

 

[Zmrzlina]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

Uhh, be a decent human being you sociopath.

 

[dilloduck]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

Uhh, be a decent human being you sociopath.

what's the difference if you act correctly ?

 

[G.T.]

That's not what Christians believe----other religions also believe that morality is an edict from a supreme being or beings. The were given specific instructions as to what was right and wrong---good or bad. Even told what to eat,-- ad infinitum.

I'm aware it's not what they believe.

I'm also aware of how to reason to each of the 10 commandments using logic, and so it's by no stretch of the imagination that they likely came from the reasoning of man. Not even close.

So how does one differentiate between flawed reasoning and accurate reasoning when trying to establish a system of morals ?

You can only refine the wisdom - we do not have another sentient being aside from ourselves to appeal to. Flawed reasoning is pointed differentiated with accurate reasoning through reasoning itself, which is circular, but true.

 

[G.T.]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

I tend to agree.

 

[PratchettFan]

Try telling a liberal that. They would be perfect happily if religious people all left America.

Most liberals are religious. There are as many on the right who would have atheists leave as there are those on the left who would have the religious leave. Neither side has any monopoly on idiots.

"Most liberals are religious."

Horsefeathers.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-and-justice-system/365044-liberal-attack-religion-again.html

Oh well, you are supporting your opinion by citing your opinion. Who can argue with that? No, come to think of it, I believe I will go with facts instead. Call me silly.

 

[G.T.]

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

Uhh, be a decent human being you sociopath.

what's the difference if you act correctly ?

What's the difference? Your legacy and how its impacted other human beings is determined by the way you act, thus, you should act accordingly if you care about your legacy and a second reason would be that it's innate at this point to want to be a good person (it comes natural to most).

Aside from those reasons and barring those reasons, go ahead and be a bad ass and a lawful society will deal with you.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm aware it's not what they believe.

I'm also aware of how to reason to each of the 10 commandments using logic, and so it's by no stretch of the imagination that they likely came from the reasoning of man. Not even close.

So how does one differentiate between flawed reasoning and accurate reasoning when trying to establish a system of morals ?

You can only refine the wisdom - we do not have another sentient being aside from ourselves to appeal to. Flawed reasoning is pointed differentiated with accurate reasoning through reasoning itself, which is circular, but true.

IE ----right and wrong is what we decide it to be unless we are religious in which case right and wrong has been spelled out in scripture and centuries of culture.

 

[jillian]

Morals are arrived at through reason.

Wrong.

morals do not come from religion.

in fact, some of the most immoral people on this board profess belief...and some of the most immoral things done throughout history are done at the hands of religious zealots.

but nice try.

 

[G.T.]

So how does one differentiate between flawed reasoning and accurate reasoning when trying to establish a system of morals ?

You can only refine the wisdom - we do not have another sentient being aside from ourselves to appeal to. Flawed reasoning is pointed differentiated with accurate reasoning through reasoning itself, which is circular, but true.

IE ----right and wrong is what we decide it to be unless we are religious in which case right and wrong has been spelled out in scripture and centuries of culture.

Right and wrong are what the writers of the scriptures decided them to be, also.

 

[PratchettFan]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

Because it is right to do so.

If I find a wallet with money in it and I find the owner to return it to him, that is a moral act. If I find the wallet and return it only because a police officer is watching me and I know I will be arrested if I do not, that is subservience.

 

[dilloduck]

Uhh, be a decent human being you sociopath.

what's the difference if you act correctly ?

What's the difference? Your legacy and how its impacted other human beings is determined by the way you act, thus, you should act accordingly if you care about your legacy and a second reason would be that it's innate at this point to want to be a good person (it comes natural to most).

Aside from those reasons and barring those reasons, go ahead and be a bad ass and a lawful society will deal with you.

Would it make any difference if I gave you food because I wanted to be a decent human as opposed to giving you food so I could go to heaven ?

 

[G.T.]

Behaving correctly because you fear consequences doled out by a supernatural entity in the afterlife is a morally bankrupt position.

What is a better reason for behaving correctly ?

Because it is right to do so.

If I find a wallet with money in it and I find the owner to return it to him, that is a moral act. If I find the wallet and return it only because a police officer is watching me and I know I will be arrested if I do not, that is subservience.

That's a good analogy, and why I feel that being a good person "just because you want to" (innately) is a way more decent disposition then being a good person due to fear (of hell, etc).

 

[G.T.]

what's the difference if you act correctly ?

What's the difference? Your legacy and how its impacted other human beings is determined by the way you act, thus, you should act accordingly if you care about your legacy and a second reason would be that it's innate at this point to want to be a good person (it comes natural to most).

Aside from those reasons and barring those reasons, go ahead and be a bad ass and a lawful society will deal with you.

Would it make any difference if I gave you food because I wanted to be a decent human as opposed to giving you food so I could go to heaven ?

Yes.

One act is selfless, the other is selfish.

 

[dilloduck]

You can only refine the wisdom - we do not have another sentient being aside from ourselves to appeal to. Flawed reasoning is pointed differentiated with accurate reasoning through reasoning itself, which is circular, but true.

IE ----right and wrong is what we decide it to be unless we are religious in which case right and wrong has been spelled out in scripture and centuries of culture.

Right and wrong are what the writers of the scriptures decided them to be, also.

yet religious people adhere to the writers of the scripture and don't make up new morality for every situation.

 

[G.T.]

IE ----right and wrong is what we decide it to be unless we are religious in which case right and wrong has been spelled out in scripture and centuries of culture.

Right and wrong are what the writers of the scriptures decided them to be, also.

yet religious people adhere to the writers of the scripture and don't make up new morality for every situation.

Which doesn't mean much, except to say that they're consistent and good servants of the writers.