Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nadaka]

Personally I think religion is just getting further and further from the source materials. Not to mention the fact that you can say anything and use the bible to justify it. Need to go to war? Use the old testament for an eye for an eye speech. Want peace? Use the new testament for a turn the other cheek speech. To use the whole book as a moral compass would be silly, because you might even be able to justify the crusades where millions died.

If you take the key stories such as the Ten Commandments then you should be fine in using it as a moral compass. Otherwise I'd read it with a grain of salt and think about it.

Religion is nothing more than an infectious memetic agent that corrupts the neurological function of its host to spread. That corruption weakens the host and allows others to control it. Morality based on religion is inherently corrupt and flawed. True morality is rational and compassionate, not programmed.

Nietzsche had a similar approach, but the problem with morality is that no one sets it. Subjective morality is a dangerous thing, because a killer might see the act of killing as something morally correct. Most morals however are taught by the parent, and in most cases it works well. In others, such as criminals in jail (to use a realistic example), religion can also act as a new moral compass separate from their original morality.

EDIT: Fool uses Philiosophic Exploitation. It's super-effective. The thread is now slowed.

Ah no. I do not believe in subjective morality. Subjective morality uses bad logic and false equivalencies to create a false sense of morality just as certainly as morality prescribed by religious programming. Rational morality does not mean rationalizing morality to get what you want. It means constructing a fact based framework of ideal behavior.

Are you seriously pointing at the 10 commandments as an example of good morality? The first 4 are not morality at all, merely subjugation before a supposedly omnipotent authority. 5 is inherently immoral if your parents are unworthy of honor or demand immorality of their children. The 10th is a mind game. The remaining 4 are violated at every turn by not only the representatives of the religion but by their god himself.

[Criptfeind]

Can I ask what your guys definition of a moral compass is before I respond?

Because it seems to be: Magicness that makes you do everything right at all times.

[Phmcw]

Can I ask what your guys definition of a moral compass is before I respond?

Because it seems to be: Magicness that makes you do everything right at all times.

The compass is the thing that give you the magnetic north, most of the time.
So a moral compass would be something that make you able to distinguish right from wrong, most of the times.

[GlyphGryph]

A moral compass is something that, by its nature, indicates whether or not something is moral, or at least is inclined to do so.

Note the difference between a regular compass (which will always attempt to point north) and an arrow (which can be pointed north, but is not actually inclined to point in that direction any more than in another)

Religion is an arrow - it points people, yes, but there is nothing inherent about it that points people towards the "good".

Society is the based upon which the arrow stands, and it is society that determines where that arrow points.

[The Fool]

1. I'm not religious, I actually prefer the occult, but I still study into other religions. Just saying.
2. Rational reasoning needs a rational basis, and therefore cannot be known before being created. Society mainly is the cause of this rational basis, but in some cases an external morality appears from another society. In this way street gangs have their own subjective morality. I had to write a paper on this before, and I would love to debate this.
3. I apologize for using the 10 commandments. I remembered the don't kill/steal and took a leap at it. My mistake.

Like I said. Most bible stories you really need to ask yourself, was this intended to inspire morals? Most weren't. Most were about something else whether it be devotion to the religion, or otherwise. For this reason I think it is stupid to use the WHOLE book as a moral compass. I'm also not saying that it should be the only thing that creates your moral compass, because that would be silly. You also have to remember that all the books were written by different people, some of which may or may not have been on the ball.

Should it be a moral compass, no. Can it supplement a moral compass? Yes. There are some things to take away from most religious texts, mainly to not kill, or steal. The key fact is that religion says that these acts are always 'punishable', even if no one saw it. Society can't deter something it doesn't witness, but religion can. In this way it can supplement a moral compass.

[Willfor]

Can we please get off the religion derail? Pretty please?

[Phmcw]

People really need to go over the whole "the bible say don't kill don't steal !Wow, it's wonderful". Virtually all societies have laws against theft and murder, and those who don't have an elaborate set of law around it. That's not the basis for a sound morality, that's not even basis for morality at all, seeing as those were only principle. Principle that were meant to be used withing the community, and when other laws didn't overrules them.

My whole morality rely on cause, consequences, and the knowledge I am but an insect in the eye of a wonderful world that I don't understand, and that I can take nothing for granted. It suit me for now, and I never saw anything better.

(PS I use wonderful in the old sense.)

Edit: Sorry for the derail. I guess we should take it somewhere else.

[The Fool]

I'm up for a change in subject. Anyone know a good subject?

[ChairmanPoo]

Astronauts vs cavemen. Who would win?

[The Fool]

I'll go with cavemen. They have experience with ambush tactics, and weaponry.

Do these astronauts have weapons?

[Gunner-Chan]

Maybe you guys should legitimately change the subject instead of pretty much continuing derailing.

And to think Vector just said she was pretty pleased to see this topic didn't go out of control the other day.

[Nadaka]

I've mostly been doing work at work today, not a lot of time to troll for news articles that piss me off. Sorry I couldn't help.

[Phmcw]

To change subjsct a little bit of rage worthy news? Anyone remember the old mud volcano who erupted due to drilling a few years back? Well it still is, and the oil company won't pay for the (incredible) damages.

[EveryZig]

This was on Slashdot if you want to change subjects:  (Since I know there are some Math geeks around here...)
New Study Concludes Math Gender Gap Is Cultural, Not Biological ... PDF

Here is a rather amazing article on a similar subject: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/11/25/15-minute-writing-exercise-closes-the-gender-gap-in-university-level-physics/
(source study here: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6008/1234.full)

Coincidentally I just turned in an English paper about that subject today (and I also ended up writing most of it today also >.> ).

[Willfor]

As long as we're going with the environment, Canada's out of the Kyoto Protocol business. Not exactly a shocking turn of events if you've been following Canadian politics, but I do believe this is rage worthy?