|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: God and morality - 5/18/2008 9:40:52 PM
|
|
|
NobodyImportant
Posts: 38
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
How about happiness, contentment, care, public well-being, preservation, or rights? I fail to see how these concepts are not founded in reality, any more than a transcendent creator God.
That definition was not provided until just now so I never said, or even had a chance to say, that they weren't. My point was fairly self-evident. We can't have this abstract conversation about 'morality' without first defining what 'morality' means. To a Christian, Morality means something entirely different than it would to Nietzsche's Übermensch. - So these attempts to communicate without addressing this - which is the crux of the issue anyway - is futile.
_____________________________
How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: God and morality - 5/18/2008 9:49:52 PM
|
|
|
hammurabi
Posts: 117
Joined: 10/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
That definition was not provided until just now so I never said, or even had a chance to say, that they weren't. My point was fairly self-evident. We can't have this abstract conversation about 'morality' without first defining what 'morality' means. To a Christian, Morality means something entirely different than it would to Nietzsche's Übermensch. - So these attempts to communicate without addressing this - which is the crux of the issue anyway - is futile.
So people have different ideas about morality; morality is an intersubjective and doubly-articulated experience; and provided in part by social structures and history? That's pretty self-evident too. I think you miss Nietzsche's point. The Übermensch experiences a forgetting and a striving. He knows what morality means and forgets what morality means, in order to create his own.
quote:
Considering that 'Morality' as a concept depends on a right\wrong behavior comparison, having some objective arbiter is necessary to even have this discussion.
Maybe I'm just getting confused about your word arbiter, though. Arbiter implies the act of judging. Artiber's judge. I thought you were following to the "objective moral code is impossible without God" line.
quote:
Otherwise you're using a dictionary without any objective anchors in reality - just an endless spiral of meaningless synonyms.
Maybe you should have read Husserl before you read Derrida. Floating is still floating on. Unanchored words still exist and everyone uses them as anchors.
_____________________________
miscellanea, a blog.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: God and morality - 5/19/2008 2:03:45 AM
|
|
|
NobodyImportant
Posts: 38
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hammurabi
So people have different ideas about morality; morality is an intersubjective and doubly-articulated experience; and provided in part by social structures and history? That's pretty self-evident too. Yes, exactly.
quote:
I think you miss Nietzsche's point. The Übermensch experiences a forgetting and a striving. He knows what morality means and forgets what morality means, in order to create his own. I didn't miss his point, else I wouldn't have used it. I could have used his version of the master-slave dialectic to similar effect. The distinction between two (or more) separate moral evaluations was the point of my statement.
quote:
Maybe I'm just getting confused about your word arbiter, though. Arbiter implies the act of judging. Artiber's judge. I thought you were following to the "objective moral code is impossible without God" line. I am.
quote:
Maybe you should have read Husserl before you read Derrida. Floating is still floating on. Unanchored words still exist and everyone uses them as anchors. It doesn't matter. They are still anchoring to (or floating on) something, and even the terms anchoring\floating are connected to material experiences (or a simulacrum) in our minds. This is really beside the point.
My point was that you can't invoke a concept without a definition and then attempt to discuss it. It's meaningless. You may as well be speaking in tongues. Until morality has an objective definition, it's useless for a person to compare themselves or others to it. Moving beyond this, the purpose of my point is to eventually contend that such a morality does not exist.
_____________________________
How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: God and morality - 5/19/2008 2:31:33 AM
|
|
|
hammurabi
Posts: 117
Joined: 10/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
It doesn't matter. They are still anchoring to (or floating on) something, and even the terms anchoring\floating are connected to material experiences (or a simulacrum) in our minds. This is really beside the point.
My point was that you can't invoke a concept without a definition and then attempt to discuss it. It's meaningless. You may as well be speaking in tongues. Until morality has an objective definition, it's useless for a person to compare themselves or others to it. Moving beyond this, the purpose of my point is to eventually contend that such a morality does not exist.
You can invoke the general concept under constraints of what a word would mean, which is of course historically, socially, and culturally limited, created at some point, under the influence of a dialectic, enforced by power...the list goes on.
So the terms float on a socius, the social plane, like capital floats on capitalism and its modes of production. Morals are normative commands or rules for action governing the individual; morality is the codification or thought thereof; and in a general sense, this encompasses all other words triggering the moral - good, bad, evil, ugly, beautiful, happiness, etc.
So you're denying that morality doesn't exist? or that morality doesn't objectively exist? or that morality has no objective correlate existing somewhere out there in imaginary hyperspace? Obviously by your (and my - I think I agree with you) definition, morality as such can't exist. That doesn't mean people can't discuss it as if it does in a hypothetical manner which, by your definition, doesn't preclude the nonexistence of the objectivity you deny.
_____________________________
miscellanea, a blog.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: God and morality - 5/19/2008 7:25:34 PM
|
|
|
NobodyImportant
Posts: 38
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hammurabi
You can invoke the general concept under constraints of what a word would mean, which is of course historically, socially, and culturally limited, created at some point, under the influence of a dialectic, enforced by power...the list goes on. ... and at each iteration the result becomes less relevant.
quote:
So the terms float on a socius, the social plane, like capital floats on capitalism and its modes of production. Even if you form a unified 'economy' from the 6.6 billion 'social planes' that exist, 'capital' still assumes that it will be pointing at 'items' of 'value'.
quote:
Morals are normative commands or rules for action governing the individual; morality is the codification or thought thereof; and in a general sense, this encompasses all other words triggering the moral - good, bad, evil, ugly, beautiful, happiness, etc. It's debatable whether aesthetics or morality has the right-of-way. This goes back to the Übermensch and 'Master\Slave' morality.. Or to Genesis 3:6.
quote:
So you're denying that morality doesn't exist? or that morality doesn't objectively exist? or that morality has no objective correlate existing somewhere out there in imaginary hyperspace? Obviously by your (and my - I think I agree with you) definition, morality as such can't exist. In a sense, both. I'm saying that the world - and therefore philosophy - ends with Nihilism. This should be easy for philosophically inclined atheists to agree with, and it's stated repeatedly in Ecclesiastes and elsewhere so it should be no surprise to Christians either.
quote:
That doesn't mean people can't discuss it as if it does in a hypothetical manner Which is what we are doing now. However, this thread was built apon the assumption that morality does exist and has specific qualities. I'm challenging this assumption.
quote:
which, by your definition, doesn't preclude the nonexistence of the objectivity you deny. My goal isn't to preclude God's non-existence. One could only do that by becoming him.
_____________________________
How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: God and morality - 5/28/2008 10:35:43 AM
|
|
|
NobodyImportant
Posts: 38
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
What, you guys don't want to get sandwitched between God & Nihilism?
_____________________________
How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
