Sentences with phrase «if objective morality»
If no objective morality exists, then there is no «right» or «wrong», there is only what you «feel».
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/ Not exact matches
If the God of classical theism existed, an objective foundation for morality would exist.
If we take the objective view and try to apply morality based on current American tradition god is immoral in a number of ways.
Remember, if one thing and only one thing is objectively morally evil or good, the objective morality exists.
The only way to have objective morality is if genocide is always wrong.
Now, hypothetically, if you personally maintained belief in a supreme being (one in which you had no verifiable proof of its existence, but yet what you considered ample evidence to place your faith in) and that being had communicated morality in absolute terms, would you define that morality as subjective or objective?
If there is no objective standard of morality, then there is no way to make a distinction between «good» and «bad.»
Atheist morality is without any objective basis and, if followed with integrity, doesn't allow them to act against others who act contrary to their moral system (as they insist that each subjective moral judgment is equal in value, all being based purely on individual feelings).
Objective morality does not exist... --------------- If that's true, then no one has any grounds to call Hitler a bad person, or that he even did anything bad or wrong at all.
If there is no objective standard of morality, then all is merely opinion, and there is no «right» and «wrong.»
But again, if there is no objective standard of morality, then Catholic priests who molest children are not doing anything bad, because it was right in their own eyes.
Also, i don't remember if you and I have discussed morality in the past, but do you believe morality is objective or subjective?
What I'm simply stating is that if you can offer a plausible argument for how «objective beauty» or «objective love» can or should be defined, then I'll be able to better understand your argument for «objective morality.»
The only way that objective morality can possibly exist is if God exists, otherwise all morality is subjective to the opinions and whims of the individual.
If morality is founded in God's nature and God is unchanging, we have the strongest foundation needed for objective morality.
I will conclude by saying that on the atheistic there is no objective morality anyways so I don't believe that the atheist has any grounds for accusing God or anyone else for that matter if doing anything evil or wrong.
Yes we are, because you feel for it to be worth anything at all you must have an «objective» standard, which even you don't have if you believe that your morality comes from a god.
why feel the need to argue for an objective morality if you don't believe in the objective in the first place?
Incidentally, even if god exists then his does not represent objective morality either.
However, if he commands it because morality is objective, morality can, obviously, exist without a god.
First, if a god commands that something is so, merely because it tickles his fancy, then it is «objective» morality simply because everyone and every thing must follow it.
None the less, if one responds as a whole person, one can have confidence in one's response as one can not have confidence in any objective knowledge or universal prescriptions of morality.
Actually if one is claiming that there can not be objective morality without god it is relevant.
If one is looking for a robust defense of the idea that objective morality can be known on the basis of a naturalized epistemology, one will have to look elsewhere.
If not, then objective morality exists, if yes, then objective morality still existIf not, then objective morality exists, if yes, then objective morality still existif yes, then objective morality still exists.
You could be capable of so much more if there were no objective morality speaking into your life.
«Since the atheist does not believe in objective «right» or «wrong» (received divinely) but that morality is simply the product of culture and genetics - It is fascinating to see how angry they become at rulings like this... almost as if they believed the ruling objectively «wrong» (divinely received) or something...»
He writes: «If evolutionary psychology is on track... we believe the things — about morality, personal worth, even objective truth — that lead to behaviours that get our genes into the next generation.»
The morality system can affect the objectives of your missions, to the point that your co-op buddy can actually become your in - game nemesis if each player's moralities are too divergent.
Science, if anything, has the defence that objective measure can be used to argue against subversion, as it never can be in religion, politics or morality.
If you wouldn't mind, ask him how he determines that an «objective morality» exists?
The objectives may have no particular merit or morality, but they are the client's own, and if they fail it should be because they lacked legal merit, not because the lawyer represented them inadequately.