A loving god?

34 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
Mintaka - "Why doesn't that

Mintaka - "Why doesn't that count as evidence for its "objective" reality?...We might disagree on the particulars..."

I'll stop you right there. Remember what I quoted before?

"Objective judgment or belief refers to a judgment or belief based on objectively strong supporting evidence, the sort of evidence t̲h̲a̲t̲ ̲w̲o̲u̲l̲d̲ ̲b̲e̲ ̲c̲o̲m̲p̲e̲l̲l̲i̲n̲g̲ ̲f̲o̲r̲ ̲a̲n̲y̲ ̲r̲a̲t̲i̲o̲n̲a̲l̲ ̲b̲e̲i̲n̲g̲.̲"

If we are disagreeing on the particulars, your goal of objectivity is in serious jeopardy.
Mintaka - "You seem to think "there is no way to demonstrate" that morality can be objective."

Right, I don't think there is a way. I patiently await you to demonstrate otherwise, but until then I will stick with the null hypothesis.

Travis Hedglin's picture
I hate to wade into

I hate to wade into discussions already in progress, but this is really just rehashing an older argument I had not long ago, and misses the SAME point. In almost every instance we use the word "objective" we are referencing something that is accepted, not universal or absolute, just something that is authoritative. For instance, both our Hindu-Arabic numerals and tourney chess rules are considered "objective", so morality could be easily be classed as objective as well. What makes something "objective" isn't something like universal absolutism or even empirical evidence, but rather the authority it has, which is why secular law is objective and religious law is not. Secular law is enforced, authoritative, and binding; while the BULK of religious law has been scrapped as immoral or unethical(if not plain stupid).

Under the common definition and usage of the term "objective", we already have such a morality, and it is an evolving paradigm that changes with the society. It is NOT a weakness, it is a strength, and is what has let it stay in authority while religious law has lost any semblance of real commitment or obedience long ago.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Mintaka - "We have, for

Mintaka - "We have, for example, two different theories of gravity, both have experientially yielded valid results, but Newton's version fails at the subatomic level and quantum fails on a larger scale."

Newtonian gravity has never been shown to the wrong at the small scale (no one has ever figured out how to test gravity at that scale); and there is no tested quantum theory of gravity (at any scale!).


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.