Message from @FrostyCrits
Discord ID: 644336377944866846
I need some sort of proof, not words
No, I am not talking about laws. Not murdering is an objective moral.
If you say you want to debate someone on a topic it's up to that person to prove their position. Don't think that was achieved
All I got as an answer was it'sd true
Thought thatr why we are here to prove that
That either requires more explanation or doesnt make sense
tl;dr I believe it so you should as well; if you are a good human you do if not be gone with you.
Thats all I got outta this'
I suspect thats not a charitable interpretation of what was said. Call me crazy
That’s the problem with having preaching that tries to enforce belief. You can share the ideas of God and Christianity but you don’t have a right to force it on people. Those that will listen, will listen, and the others will go on not believing. You did your job by sharing the word.
Pius argued that you can only subtract 1 from the universe so far before you hit Ø; And Ø is God.
Honestly, @Fondboy, we were depending on you, and you failed us. Utterly. 😤
"we"
People were depending on anyone in this debate?
This is the clostest you will get to this question
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_oQkSh2lq8&t=50s
@Mandatory Carry im not sure why you were depending on me lol. I hope by viewing this people may see me as more honest
thump thump thump
Moral objectivity is based primarily in preservation and advancement. Empathy is an instinct and allows us to formulate order in a world full of things that seem cruel and chaotic. Divinity is an unnecessary factor, even if its contemplation yields transcendent works of art and philosophy.
I go door to door on the weekends converting heathens whats your addy legalize, i'll stop by with my bible .. lol
the problem is what is the point of man's existence in a reality that has no defintive purpose
@YokoHaloless Could you elaborate on that first sentence?
Circles have no corners either
What do you mean by "preservation and advancement"?
You just mean that's generally how we decide what moral principles we hold?
If I kill someone for their land, isn’t that for my advancement and preservation?
Okay fair question, but supposing that there IS an end based in any given religion, then what is the purpose after. Religion just supposes you have one now. Eventually you won't
@lanceleader Technically yes. But in that context you only factor in your own selfish gains and not even things such as consequences
that's what I was getting at btw, without an objective divine revelation, you'll never be able to found an objective morality
@YokoHaloless Like the consequence I too could be killed? Coz I considered that. And the other guys gone.
As we are a social and relatively compressed species, it would be absurd to maintain that level of self importance
Apologies I read that wrong.
It would cause us to devolve ver quickly
Bit still makes sense.
We won out over the violent and solitary because of our willingness to work together
That only lasts for so long.
@Beemann Precisely
What does?
Can't well all just get along and say 🍑 Ass Uber alles
For a time God was a very important part of that
Moral objectivity doesn’t take into account your own gains or consequences. It’s either right or wrong.
moral objectivity ignores an individual enviroment or value because it represents a value overriding all others