Funny… Have you ever fallen in love?
Albeit (I’ll bite)
How do you determine all this metaphorical examples without having experimental proof to back it up? Just because you read does not give you the right to determine how people feel...
Just an opinion Anna
Eliezer: David, I’ve dealt with her before.
That’s news to me. We’ve never dealt anything. You haven’t ever questioned anything, you already presumed.
Take care Eliezer;) Anna
My apology, it’s a long post but they are my final thoughts.
Eliezer: “Robin, I would indeed put someone who called themselves a Unitarian in a different class from someone who called themselves a Zoroastrian or Christian. It’s still a big blatant mistake, but so long as the person is willing to take strict personal responsibility for their own moral judgments, it’s a less urgent matter.”
I’m not really clear as to why? Do you not think Unitarian has some affiliation to Zoroastrian or Christianity? Where do you think moral judgements come from? The laws written in any given literature are clear interpretations as to what was going on in that particular time frame, that does not mean they where right or wrong, it means they exist for a reason.
Eliezer, I believe you are a smart, highly inquisitive individual but your expertise does not reach the realm of belief as you clearly demonstrate an ignorance in regards to religion, spirituality, enlightment or such pretense. Please read more thoughts in regards to religion within history, scriptures, books, psalms, philosophy, psychology, etc., before judging the belief of belief. Your video example of the Jesus Camp was an awakening for me as I acknowledged that not all individuals are aware of the science behind religion and in fact, religion may be used as a source of irrationalism. The bias approach you took was in only refering to the “kooks” of religion instead of realizing that there exists many that are religious that don’t exhibit that behavior. Within the context of kooks, I understand the need to promote Atheism but that does not mean that Atheists are more rational than the Christians if both have not done the research to understand the possibilities within the religious context.
Anyhow, it’s been a pleasure. Thanks Robin (and many fascinating contributors) for creating Overcoming Bias. It might not appear but I have learned a great deal about bias. If your intention was to teach, you are doing a great job. At first, it was hard to grasp the concept but with time i’ve learned quite a lot.
It’s time for me to go as I can’t possibly stay and listen to people talk about overcoming bias and yet reply “your not smart enough to undertstand”, that kinda contradicts the whole idea.
Without being aware, thanks to the many that have aided in my education.
Take care and I wish you well, Anna
Eliezer: “did religionists execute what William Bartley called the retreat to commitment, “I believe because I believe.”
Yes, they believe because they believe. Have you taken the time to ask why? Oh, my apology, I wasn’t aware I wasn’t knowledgeable enough to post.
Anna
Eliezer, my understanding is: “belief is to believe in something”.
Whether you call it science fiction, heuristics, overcoming bias, history, a belief is a belief. You can’t prove belief as it’s self-subjective. You can’t tell someone what they feel is wrong. Each individual has there equation when it comes to understanding the “dragon” within themself. If dragons can’t be verified as they have never been verified based on history, why do people still feel the need to believe in dragons and continue to discuss the subject and be fascinated by it?
Just Curious Anna
I’ve thought about the Jesus Camp video you presented to me. I am curious, why those particular examples to get your point accross regarding the post?
Just Curious Anna
Joe: When you think about the commercialization of Christmas, is the perpetuation of Santa and presents still a noble lie? Or does it now become a perverse destruction of what was supposed to be a religious celebration of the birth of Christ?
Just a thought. Maybe the initial story behind “The Clause family” was created to help people understand about generosity. Feeling grateful of family and friends. Taking the time to appreciate and celebrate.
I’m not sure how it literally became a man in a red suit and reindeer when in turn it has been clearly associated to the birth of Jesus but i’m pretty sure that there is either a moral and ethical story behind it or a marketing strategy.
Obviously if the story survived this long, there must have been something good and worthwhile about it.
Anna:)
I asked: “What happens if you take faith out of the equation, will people be more or less inclined to want to be moralistic and can ethical behavior exist without the rules and regulations that have been governed by faith?”
Kevembuangga: My point was, ethical behavior is not “governed” by faith, it is endorsed by faith.
For you. A religious person may feel that their ethical behavior is governed by their faith.
suppose you are a theist, aren’t you?
I believe in Something as opposed to Nothing but I am not a theist. I don’t believe in Gods or Goddesses. I don’t see how that’s relevant.
Regarding:
that the whole idea of bringing “rationality” to moral dilemmas is futile and dangerous.
I agree that it’s futile.
Rationality is about looking at it from someone else’s point of view and deciding if it is “right for you” or “wrong for you”, without judgement.
Morals are about beliefs and faith.
Ethical behavior is about “right or wrong”.
I have wondered? “How can I believe myself to be rational and logical and still believe in something that I can’t see, hear, touch, taste or smell.”
I apologize, (yes, that’s weird to you, I know) if my post was too long.
Weirder and weirder, why would this thread have been titled “Consolidated Nature of Morality?”
Weird because I apologized for bringing up faith when the thread was about Morality?
On top of that idiosyncratic cultural traits have been built which sometimes run counter the “basics”....
I have no idea how this reflects the question I was asking regarding that if faith is taken out of the equation will people be more or less inclined to want to be moralistic. I guess this weird one is not smart enough to grasp your intellectual ideas. Thanks for your time, it has been interesting.
Kevembuangga: Aren’t you confusing morality with fear of retribution? I am curious to know what you think morality is about!
For me, morality is about the ethical behavior of individuals or groups.
Many people associate morality with faith. The example of the fear of retribution is what makes them strive to be moralistic. I was curious to know what happens when you take faith out of the equation? Will people no longer strive to be moralistic? Can ethical behavior exist without the rules and regulations that have been governed by faith?
I know these questions don’t fit into the main discussion of the thread, my apology.
Benquo, question #6 was too easy.
Bruce thank you for your point 8, it made me think.
Hal: Individual morality looks at the net impact on oneself as well as the group.
Thanks. Your answer regarding question 4 made me think.
Robin: It is striking to me that people who want to think more carefully about moral issues seem to feel little inclination to read the academic literature on this subject. There are in fact specialists who consider these issues; why reinvent the wheel?
Sometimes even the specialists need to be reviewed:)Maybe law and moral have many things in common?
If anybody has a moment, I am curious to know how morals can exist without faith?
Anna
And I thought you where intelligent...well I guess not..maybe mathematical..but you keep doing the same thing...but you will lose...sry..I thought you learned...good bye