Science of Morality, Anyone?

catefrances

sponger wrote:

I recommend taking the implicit association test to see if you are truly that .00001% of the population that harbors no racist tendencies.

i dont need to take a test to know what i am or arent. im misanthropic not racist.

chopitdown

catefrances wrote:

hmm tolerate. what exactly is this word telling us to do?
i am a racist bastard but because the law says i can not express my deep hatred of certain people, i shall keep all my hatred inside my body and seethe until i die.

why do we have crimes specifically labelled hate crimes? why is it(or is it?) worse to murder or beat someone up because they are gay or Black? shouldnt the crime of murder itself be the ultimate disgrace?

any one who believes in a God and yet condones war or capital punishment is a hypocrite. and not a true person of faith.

I would say anyone who condones unjust war or unjust capital punishment would have a much harder time reconciling their faith. But that's just the problem, if you have a science of morality there has to be something that everyone agrees on to be the basis of society. Hammurabi, the bible, the torah, the new testament, the koran...you won't get universal agreement on a standard.

chopitdown

heart&desire wrote:

I have to admit I find the bible contradictory. Some good stuff, though some of it is not to be taken literally. There is a certain amount of allegory and deeper thinking needed in understanding.

God didn't write it. Jesus didn't write it. Man wrote it and rewrote it and rewrote it and then it was translated and translated ... don't fully trust it, and those who take it literally.

I do not mean to be disrespectful or argumentative just sharing a point of view.

that's a fine point of view. And you're right, even for those who believe the bible, there is a way to study it and interpret each book...some ARE meant to be taken as allegory, others you must know the context or understand the situation of that time for it to make more sense and get some of the deeper meanings.

The hard part with your 2nd paragraph, is that the bible is said to be God breathed, or inspired by God. While he didn't physically write it, I believe that he was instrumental in it's writing.

Regardless if people agree with it 100%, there are (as you have mentioned) good things to take away from it. Just as other religious texts have some very good points to take away.

chopitdown

sponger wrote:

On the same token, your parents could've achieved the same end without resorting to violence. They chose the quick and dirty solution as opposed to one that would've utilized their communication and problem-solving skills.

you can't prove that though; you can say it could've been different, but you won't ever be able to substantiate that circumstance.

On a side note, you have to find what works for the child. For me, it was a spanking...a timeout or talking to didnt work or make me feel remorse or want to change. a few quick swats really did the trick. For other kids a timeout may be the way to go. I see a lot of kids who's parents try the timeout approach and the reasoning approach and those kids own the parents and can do what they want.

heartdesire

chopitdown wrote:

that's a fine point of view. And you're right, even for those who believe the bible, there is a way to study it and interpret each book...some ARE meant to be taken as allegory, others you must know the context or understand the situation of that time for it to make more sense and get some of the deeper meanings.

The hard part with your 2nd paragraph, is that the bible is said to be God breathed, or inspired by God. While he didn't physically write it, I believe that he was instrumental in it's writing.

Regardless if people agree with it 100%, there are (as you have mentioned) good things to take away from it. Just as other religious texts have some very good points to take away.

I can understand where you are coming from on "the hard part with your 2nd paragraph ...". Yes, the bible is said to be God breathed, or inspired by God, this I do believe, feel and know in the deepest part of me is true ...

I have read parts of the bible and felt yeah I do understand this, and other parts where I feel in my gut hmmmmmmm, something is off, this doesn't equate, even after great deliberation.

That being said, it comes circular due to the variety of rewrites and interpretations. What is the level of understanding and intentions of the individual(s) interpreting the origin, the rewrites and on ... it all gets a bit hazy to me.

Thanks for your perspective and understanding. Greatly appreciated. : )

Jack_C_Gregory

sponger wrote:

On the same token, your parents could've achieved the same end without resorting to violence. They chose the quick and dirty solution as opposed to one that would've utilized their communication and problem-solving skills.

Resorting to violence? It's not like we duked it out in the basement Fight Club style.

melodious

checking in for higher good...

is that religion

i have met someone who can apply laws of thermodynamics to scripture...peace

science, after all did arise after God..

Cosmo

Collin wrote:

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39 )

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26

...
Nice soundbite...
Here is the Full Text of Matthew 10... read it and place your soundbite in its proper context:

He (Jesus) called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil[a] spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.
These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions:
"Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.' Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.

"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

"Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues. On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

"A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the student to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebub, how much more the members of his household!

"So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw— a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

"He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me. Anyone who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and anyone who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will receive a righteous man's reward. And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward."

"After Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and preach in the towns of Galilee.
...
There... it becomes much clearer on what Jesus meant, don't it?

Collin

chopitdown wrote:

hate is better (correctly) translated as love less. You can and SHOULD have great love for your family, but it should be less than you love God.

How bout the greatest commandement in the bible...love the lord your god with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself...i don't think those are unreasonable commands

That might be, but the question was; "Would you choose Jesus over your brother?"

And the answer is; of course, Jesus demands it of every good christian.

I've asked this question to one of the religious folks on this board (might have been you even), if someone held a gun to your children's heads and asked you to deny god otherwise he'd shoot your children, would you do it? The answer was "I would not deny my god."

To me, that's almost murder. What good is love your neighbour, then? What does "love your neighbour" mean when you're in a position to save 50 kids if you deny your god, but you can't because of his rules.

Now, I thought this all-forgiving, wise god would see that by denying god you are saving children and not really denying him. He'd see inside your heart that you love him, and you love the children as well. I guess it makes sense now, he doesn't like to share your love.

Collin

Cosmo wrote:

...
Nice soundbite...
Here is the Full Text of Matthew 10... read it and place your soundbite in its proper context:

He (Jesus) called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil[a] spirits and to heal every disease and sickness.
These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions:
"Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.' Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.

"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

"Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues. On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

"A student is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the student to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebub, how much more the members of his household!

"So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw— a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

"He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me. Anyone who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and anyone who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will receive a righteous man's reward. And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward."

"After Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and preach in the towns of Galilee.
...
There... it becomes much clearer on what Jesus meant, don't it?

Actually, yes. It still means exactly the same. Although, I don't know what he meant with "raise the dead".

"... it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. "

Always nice to hear as an atheist who doesn't accept Jesus and god.

"But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. "

See my other post. And again, thanks Jesus! See you when you send me to hell to suffer for all eternity!

You can choose to interpret the bible loosely and see a veiled message in it, but then you should be consistent and perhaps realise that when a man is ready to put a bullet to your child's head that the rules aren't as strict and that god's word is more like god's vague, not accurate or perfect guideline...

catefrances

Collin wrote:

Actually, yes. It still means exactly the same. Although, I don't know what he meant with "raise the dead".

...

ZOMBIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cosmo

Collin wrote:

Actually, yes. It still means exactly the same. Although, I don't know what he meant with "raise the dead".

"... it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. "

Always nice to hear as an atheist who doesn't accept Jesus and god.

"But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. "

See my other post. And again, thanks Jesus! See you when you send me to hell to suffer for all eternity!

You can choose to interpret the bible loosely and see a veiled message in it, but then you should be consistent and perhaps realise that when a man is ready to put a bullet to your child's head that the rules aren't as strict and that god's word is more like god's vague, not accurate or perfect guideline...

...
In full context, Jesus is giving instructions to His disciples the shepperd in the Children of Israel (Jews). He says, "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans."
His instructions are for His disciples to tell them (Jews, that have lost their God), not ask them, to return to God's love.
The way you put it... singling out that one passage... you make it sound like Jesus was out to kick some ass and divide families and kill people. I don't see it that way... because I read it in its full context, not just a small bit to fit whatever point I am trying to make it fit. Jesus instructs His disciples to order lost Jews to accept God, through His message... regardless of what your Father (or brother) tells you.
...
I have heard many Christians (not you.. not in this context) use this passage to justify War. Jesus is not condoneing War, here. He is instructing His deciples to spread His teachings... directly, not passively.

OutOfBreath

coberst wrote:

Science of Morality, Anyone?

Where, in American culture, is the domain of knowledge that we would identify as morality studied and taught?

I suspect that if we do not quickly develop a science of morality that will make it possible for us to live together on this planet in a more harmonious manner our technology will help us to destroy the species and perhaps the planet soon.

It seems to me that we have given the subject matter of morality primarily over to religion. It also seems to me that if we ask the question ‘why do humans treat one another so terribly?’ we will find the answer in this moral aspect of human culture.

The ‘man of maxims’ “is the popular representative of the minds that are guided in their moral judgment solely by general rules, thinking that these will lead them to justice by a ready-made patent method, without the trouble of exerting patience, discrimination, impartiality—without any care to assure themselves whether they have the insight that comes from a hardly-earned estimate of temptation, or from a life vivid and intense enough to have created a wide fellow-feeling with all that is human.” George Eliot The Mill on the Floss

We can no longer leave this important matter in the hands of the Sunday-school. Morality must become a top priority for scientific study.

It is. It's called philosophy. Within philosophy major fields are the philosophy of science (which should be part of the curriculum for all higher education, and is, at least in Norway) and ethics.

Philosophy should perhaps be more focused on, but it's already there.

Peace
Dan

chopitdown

Collin wrote:

I've asked this question to one of the religious folks on this board (might have been you even), if someone held a gun to your children's heads and asked you to deny god otherwise he'd shoot your children, would you do it? The answer was "I would not deny my god."

To me, that's almost murder. What good is love your neighbour, then? What does "love your neighbour" mean when you're in a position to save 50 kids if you deny your god, but you can't because of his rules.

Now, I thought this all-forgiving, wise god would see that by denying god you are saving children and not really denying him. He'd see inside your heart that you love him, and you love the children as well. I guess it makes sense now, he doesn't like to share your love.

I'm not sure how I'd respond to be perfectly honest. The sunday school answer is to not deny God...the real life answer is this...i hope and pray I never (or anyone for that matter) have that situation presenting itself. Since I don't know God's mind or thoughts I can't possibly answer that question correctly. My guess is God would want you to save the kids; however, you don't know in that situation if you say yes, i wont deny my God...that God won't somehow allow the kids to be saved and the gunman to be captured.

sponger

chopitdown wrote:

you can't prove that though; you can say it could've been different, but you won't ever be able to substantiate that circumstance.

On a side note, you have to find what works for the child. For me, it was a spanking...a timeout or talking to didnt work or make me feel remorse or want to change. a few quick swats really did the trick. For other kids a timeout may be the way to go. I see a lot of kids who's parents try the timeout approach and the reasoning approach and those kids own the parents and can do what they want.

Proving or disproving it is really beside the point when you consider the obvious.

An example of the obvious being overlooked is your comment about being that certain kind of child for whom spankings just "work."

What you're essentially saying is that you were born needing to be intimidated with physical aggression in order to behave according to your parents' expectations. Do you really believe that?

Consider the fact that there are millions upon millions of children who eventually develop into well-adjusted, well-behaved adults without ever having been struck by their parents.

What makes you so different? Genetics?

Obviously, when you were born, you were born a child with just as much potential as any other to learn and subsequently exhibit desired behaviors.

All children are born with a need for approval from their parents. Is that something that you need proof of?

And it's that need for approval that causes children to be receptive to commands from their parents. And as long as parents are upholding their end of the bargain by showing that approval and thus nurturing their childrens' need to receive it, those children will continue to behave accordingly.

However, the probem with many parents is that they more often than not assume the role of a "disciplinarian" more than as a provider of approval and affection.

Eventually, the sacred environment of trust between parents and their children becomes diminished as children become bogged down by the imbalance between reward and discipline, and eventually the need for approval is replaced by feelings of resentment and a breakdown in communication.

And that's when spankings become the "last resort" that parents who spank claim spankings to be.

Eventually, you grew up believing that those spankings were your fault, as you were the one who did not "listen" as your parents valiantly and patiently tried the alternatives.

And I can't help but think of how sad and horrifying it is that deep down you really believe that you are to blame for your parents' short-sightedness and poor communication skills, and that you just happen to have been the sort of kid who needed to be intimidated with physical aggression in order to follow instructions.

Of course, I didn't make any of this up. This is well-documented child psychology doctrine, and the proof of its validity is the fact that children really do respond to positive reinforcement more than spankings, and that the notion of "children walking all over their parents" because they aren't being spanked is a complete myth that has never been substantiated.

It doesn't take a social scientist to know that when you randomly select a child with severe behavioral problems, it's an absolute certainty that the child was either physically or emotionally abused, or severely neglected.

The odds that the child simply "wasn't spanked" are slim to none, and you will never find evidence to the contrary. Like I said, it's nothing other than a fairy tale invented for the sake of justifying a deplorable solution to one of society's many long-standing problems, which is absence of trust between parents and their children.

Again...you won't find any of that in the bible, and the idea that a certain percentage of the population consults the bible for child-rearing guidance is downright scary.

Collin

Cosmo wrote:

...
In full context, Jesus is giving instructions to His disciples the shepperd in the Children of Israel (Jews). He says, "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans."
His instructions are for His disciples to tell them (Jews, that have lost their God), not ask them, to return to God's love.
The way you put it... singling out that one passage... you make it sound like Jesus was out to kick some ass and divide families and kill people. I don't see it that way... because I read it in its full context, not just a small bit to fit whatever point I am trying to make it fit. Jesus instructs His disciples to order lost Jews to accept God, through His message... regardless of what your Father (or brother) tells you.
...
I have heard many Christians (not you.. not in this context) use this passage to justify War. Jesus is not condoneing War, here. He is instructing His deciples to spread His teachings... directly, not passively.

I was responding to this:

However, religion, like politics, will prompt someone to turn on someone else, even a loved one, at the drop of a hat. I've seen siblings stop talking altogether because of something as stupid as religion.

Would you choose Jesus over your brother? Would you blow up a bus or an office in the name of an invisible man? Would you kill someone for not agreeing with your book of fairytales?

Even if full context I don't think it changes anything about my point. Religion, any religion, will divide people, families included - not always of course but in some cases.

To me it's clearly there.

And I entirely disagree that I made it sounds like "Jesus was out to kick some ass and divide families and kill people."

See the "Would you blow up a bus or an office in the name of an invisible man? Would you kill someone for not agreeing with your book of fairytales?" in the original question?

I left that out because I don't think this passage supports violence, but I do think many christians will choose Jesus over their brother. In fact, it's exactly what Jesus expects.

Collin

chopitdown wrote:

I'm not sure how I'd respond to be perfectly honest. The sunday school answer is to not deny God...the real life answer is this...i hope and pray I never (or anyone for that matter) have that situation presenting itself. Since I don't know God's mind or thoughts I can't possibly answer that question correctly. My guess is God would want you to save the kids; however, you don't know in that situation if you say yes, i wont deny my God...that God won't somehow allow the kids to be saved and the gunman to be captured.

Well, I hope no one will ever be in that situation. If you'd refuse to deny your god, you're just as guilty of murder in my eyes.

It's a gamble with someone else's life. You're hoping on a miracle when a simple lie could save them. Sure, god would send you to hell where you will suffer the most horrible pains for eternity, but you saved your children.

I'd call someone who does that a martyr... God would call him a fool.

chopitdown

Collin wrote:

Well, I hope no one will ever be in that situation. If you'd refuse to deny your god, you're just as guilty of murder in my eyes.

It's a gamble with someone else's life. You're hoping on a miracle when a simple lie could save them. Sure, god would send you to hell where you will suffer the most horrible pains for eternity, but you saved your children.

I'd call someone who does that a martyr... God would call him a fool.

i guess we'll not agree on this one. Also, I wouldn't go so far as to say what God would call that person.

coberst

OutOfBreath wrote:

It is. It's called philosophy. Within philosophy major fields are the philosophy of science (which should be part of the curriculum for all higher education, and is, at least in Norway) and ethics.

Philosophy should perhaps be more focused on, but it's already there.

Peace
Dan

Philosophy is the mother of science but is no substitute for scientific empirical study similar to other human sciences. I think that psychology and SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) can be useful in starting such an effort.

Also, I think that there is confusion regarding the meaning of ethics and the meaning of morality. Thus further evidence for the need for an empirical science of morality.

I think that there is also a good bit of confusion as to the meaning of the word "science". I use the word 'science' here to mean a systematic and disciplined study of a domain of knowledge. I do not restrict the word to mean only those domains of knowledge that can be measured with a scale and/or calipers.

heartdesire

Collin wrote:

Well, I hope no one will ever be in that situation. If you'd refuse to deny your god, you're just as guilty of murder in my eyes.

It's a gamble with someone else's life. You're hoping on a miracle when a simple lie could save them. Sure, god would send you to hell where you will suffer the most horrible pains for eternity, but you saved your children.

I'd call someone who does that a martyr... God would call him a fool.

Collin ...

I have a few questions that you may or may not want to answer as they are personal ...

Do you truly believe there is a "hell"?
A physical hell? A mental hell? A spiritual hell?
Do you believe that God actually condemns one to "hell"?
You believe God would actually call someone a fool?
Do you believe in love, or the power of love?