Doe it really matter if God exists or not...?

[o_O.Q]

JWeinCom said:

o_O.Q said:

 

"What is "most favorable" for man is an opinion. "

 

so hang on its not objectively better to be fit rather than overweight?

to be informed over being ignorant?

to be social rather than anitsocial? etc?

 

"Different cultures value these things in very different measures."

 

correct, but there are core values all cultures agree on

 

"If you're going to claim that these stories are the best way man has to transmit values, you'll have to support that with some evidence"

 

the evidence is history

"There are, figuring very conservatively, well over a thousand different denominations of Christians who despite all using the same text as the basis of their values have reached wildly different conclusions.  "

 

and that is an inherent flaw in all communication... nothing man creates is perfect, there are always flaws no matter what, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do things

 

"Considering out limited knowledge and predictive powers"

 

despite this we still utilise the scientific method... we don't allow the fact that we are flawed and limited beings stop us from investigating things and reaching conclusions

so hang on its not objectively better to be fit rather than overweight?

to be informed over being ignorant?

to be social rather than anitsocial? etc?

None of those have definitive answers.  And none of them are moral questions.  None of them would require an appeal to a supernatural being.

correct, but there are core values all cultures agree on

Agreeing on some values does not make for objective morality.

 

the evidence is history

You need to be more specific.  

despite this we still utilise the scientific method... we don't allow the fact that we are flawed and limited beings stop us from investigating things and reaching 

That has nothing to do with what I said, since you're only responding to the dependent clause of my sentence.

and that is an inherent flaw in all communication... nothing man creates is perfect, there are always flaws no matter what, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do things

So then belief in god does not enable objective morality.  Cool beans.  Guess it's settled.

 

"None of those have definitive answers"

lol really? so you don't think everyone would agree that its better to be healthy as opposed to unhealthy?

 

"And none of them are moral questions."

i didn't say they were, i used them as examples that some forms of behavior are objectively better than others, isn't that obvious?

 

"Agreeing on some values does not make for objective morality."

 

that's not the case... that's about as close as we can get to objective morality - in that we look at what patterns of behavior are most beneficial for individuals and communities across a civilisations and across a large time period and make conclusions based on those observations

that's the same method we use to produce technology and make conclusions on the nature of reality of our world - the scientific method

but i suppose you first first have to acknowledge that objective reality is a thing... which you seem to be denying right now

 

"the evidence is history

You need to be more specific"

that its been the primary method man has used and still uses to communicate these values and that's a fact

"despite this we still utilise the scientific method... we don't allow the fact that we are flawed and limited beings stop us from investigating things and reaching 

That has nothing to do with what I said"

"Considering out limited knowledge and predictive powers, I fail to see how you can have objective morality, with or without god or religion.  "

 

so again your point is apparently that there is no such thing as objective reality... if you are going down that road then what's the point having a conversation to begin with

 

"and that is an inherent flaw in all communication... nothing man creates is perfect, there are always flaws no matter what, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do things

So then belief in god does not enable objective morality.  Cool beans.  Guess it's settled."

no what i said there is that the means of communication we use are flawed... that's a seperate issue from the information we are trying to convey being incorrect... you understand the difference?

if i shout from a mile away that 2+2 = 4 but you hear me say 2+2= 7 what is the problem here? the means of communication? or the message?