Sentences with phrase «objective morality as»

The religious think they get to determine objective beauty along with objective morality as they have deemed many many paintings inappropriate and have gone through periods of art burning in the name of their ignorant god.

Not exact matches

The proprietor of the shop obviously has the right to offer this type of discount, but it's sad that in this backwards, demon - haunted country we're still treating a work of fiction supposedly handed down by an magical, omnipotent being as a framework for a moral life, rather than embracing an objective, secular view of morality.

Do you recognize even the POSSIBILITY that objective morality could exist, and that its source could be humanity as a collective?

Once you equate your morality to the morality of a «God», it's just personal opinions framed as «objective» and your opinion of what is God's «morals» carries equal authority with anyone elses.

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?

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).

And while it is purely hypothetical in your particular case, it is nothing short of reality for tf, hence the reason he defines morality as objective.

Or that such a thing as your concept of Objective Morality actually exists.

Why would the HORRIBLE HEARTLESS things done by God qualify him as a good source for anyone's idea of «objective morality?

There are ways to be able to reason morality as objective (not in the usual religious sense however) without attributing it to a higher moral authority (god).

I would point you to Oliner and Oliner's «Altruistic Personality» as evidence indicating morality is best derived from an internal calculus than from a deference to external «objective» rules.

• the capacity to reach objective and universal truth as well as valid metaphysical knowledge; • the unity of body and soul in man; • the dignity of the human person; • relations between nature and freedom; • the importance of natural law and of the «sources of morality,»... • and the necessary conformity of civil law to moral law.

By using genocide as as example of objective morality and not viewing god as immoral when he orders genocide in the Bible you only proving that morality is subjective.

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.

To take up your point on morality, I can not fathom how there is such a thing as «objective morality».

Vivas, for example, posits the «objectivity of evil» as the only alternative to its being merely subjective and defines morality in terms of the opposition between objective duty and subjective inclination:

objective morality, when used as «evidence» of the existence of god is classic circular reasoning; «I believe in god because of the existence of objective morality and I believe in objective morality because I believe in god.

So, as you say, no god = no objective morality.

colin: «To take up your point on morality, I can not fathom how there is such a thing as «objective morality».

William Provine, for example, has been on a crusade to persuade the public that it has to discard either Darwinism or God, and not only God but also such non-materialistic concepts as free will and objective standards of morality.

Quite on the contrary, objective morality is far superior for the cooperative advancement of society instead of morality based on archaic stories that dangle an imaginary afterlife as a magical carrot.

«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...»

Ironically atheists see religion as the great evil due to its content, and are blind to the deficiencies of their own ideologies — even in light of historical evidence of what happens when society purges itself of religion and objective morality.

The bible appears to promote violence in selected passages, but the very fact that Christians analyze scripture with the underlying belief that there is such a thing as an objective truth and morality we don't have the freedom in our doctrine to falsely interpret passages from Leviticus to justify killing while ignoring Christ and the ten commandments.

What is your particular definition of «objective» as it relates to morality?

==== @GOPer «Incomprehension that morality is a societal consensus of conscience; changing and pluralistic:» @Chad «there is no such thing as objective morality without God.

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.

GaryM won't talk to me (because I'm immoral — presumably as determined by his «objective» standards of morality)....

But it is a waste of time debating the issue of integrity with those who deny there is any such thing as objective morality.

Ask him to define that «objective morality,» And ask him to explain how he knows that the 90 % of the American public that he thinks are incapable of critical thinking and who are immoral, don't accept that an «objective morality» (as he defines it) even exists.