Absolutes

Philosophers and rhetoricians, Welcome!
Post Reply

Do you believe in an absolute right and wrong?

Yes.
18
50%
No.
18
50%
 
Total votes: 36

threewood14
Textkit Fan
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Southie

Post by threewood14 » Sun May 02, 2004 12:43 am

But if you have infinite knowledge, you don't make mistakes, because you know the exact consequences of eveything.
The statements contradict each other. In order to have infinite knowledge in the first palce, you must make an infinite amount of mistakes. Otherwise, you will not have an infinite amount of knowledge.

However, since God has been around forever in His 'time' realm, in theory He has had this infinite amount of knowledge for an infinite amount of times. But then again, I said somewhere a while back that logic seems to disappear when talking about super-natural beings and I would consider God a super-natural being. I think you agreed about that, but I'm not sure.
Now of course I know you don't agree with what I just said, where exactly don't you agree?
Probably the place I disagree most is...
we are like God, why do we die, why are aren't we all-knowing, why do we have limited capabilities and why do we have bodies and so on...
I think you would agree that this says that God is human like, but He is not a human. He resembles human qualities like the mistakes He has made, but He also has this infintie knowledge soit kind of contradicts itself once again. I do not think that God is like a human although He looks like one. Just because He is slighty flawed does not mean that He is a human. A human I would say has flaw too, but has much more than God. ITs kind of like the Greek Gods. The were divine, but had human traits. But when they fought each other like in the Trojan War, there must be a winner and a loser. The point I'm trying to make is that if two Greek Gods fought each other, then somebody must lose right? If they are both unflawed, then it would be like a sword that can cut anything against a shield that can defend against anything.

Again, logic seems to disappear when talking about a supernatural being...
phpbb

User avatar
Apotheosis
Textkit Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:25 pm

Post by Apotheosis » Sun May 02, 2004 1:06 am

Again, logic seems to disappear when talking about a supernatural being...
...that's because the definition of supernatural is illogical...
phpbb

threewood14
Textkit Fan
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Southie

Post by threewood14 » Sun May 02, 2004 1:11 am

exactly
phpbb

xon
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:15 pm

Post by xon » Sun May 02, 2004 3:40 am

I believe in Absolute Good and Absolute Bad.

Its is the pursuit of Good which drives humanity onward, and the disdain for Bad which keeps it from falling by the wayside.

If one culture (A) believes strictly in monogomous relationships and therefore is likely to be less susceptible to AIDS, and another (B) believes in polygamous relationships and therefore is wiped out by AIDS... then perhaps culture A's version of Good and Bad, regarding relationships, is more "correct" than culture B.

There is Absolute Good and Absolute Bad, just that different people pursue it in different ways and with differing opinion of what Good and Bad actually is.

threewood14
Textkit Fan
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Southie

Post by threewood14 » Sun May 02, 2004 9:33 pm

To tell you the truth, I'm still not exactly sure what you mean by absolute good and bad.
phpbb

xon
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:15 pm

Post by xon » Mon May 03, 2004 2:58 pm

Thank YOU threewood14!

I don't know for sure, and you don't know for sure. No one will be entirely sure.

However, I do know that certain moral restricitions do give certain people an evolutionary advantage. Recall my AIDs example.

Jews and Muslims don't eat pork. Pigs can be infected with flesh-eating worms that harden into cysts, even after the pig is dead. They come alive in the human host who has eaten the pig, and then the host is at risk of death. So is that moral tradition an evolutionary advantage? Yes. Or at least it was :wink: .

The funny thing is, morals often have nothing to do with the physical world, but do have evolutionary implications!

threewood14
Textkit Fan
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Southie

Post by threewood14 » Mon May 03, 2004 9:55 pm

We have to relate it to the point in time and ones take on a matter. Without that, its really hard.
phpbb

primitive
Textkit Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 11:27 pm
Location: Boston

Post by primitive » Wed May 05, 2004 12:16 am

I think right and wrong are not facts. They are the opinions of persons and no more. However, many people may have the similar opinions about a certain thing.
phpbb

Michaelyus
Textkit Fan
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 8:47 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Michaelyus » Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:56 pm

I think there should be some things that are completely wrong; can murder ever be justified? I don't think so. There might be reasons, something that isn't actually the person's fault, but then that person should not have killed that victim.

I think that God is perfect, and why we are so imperfect is that Adam and Eve disobeyed God, knowing the implications. They were perfect, until Satan persuaded them to sin. They could have restrained themselves... but they didn't. If God had destroyed them there and then, then Satan's challenge to God:
People would be better living without God
would have been unresolved. Would we be better ruling themselves, or do we need God to rule us? So he left them to live (he didn't know that Satan was going to rebel; he created him as an angel; after his rebellion, God still let him live, on account of that challenge). We are then their offspring. Satan is trying to prove his claim, God is trying to prove his.

In my opinion, God isn't omniscient or omnipresent , but he is eternal and omnipotent. I don't believe in the Big Bang, nor in the belief that God created the universe in 168 hours (what does יוֹם mean?). Because God has perfect wisdom, he has set absolutes for some things, while non-absolutes for others.
phpbb

User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Post by Emma_85 » Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:12 am

can murder ever be justified? I don't think so
Neither do I. I can think of many reasons why murder is not justifiable, reasons I think any human with even only half a brain should be able to understand. The thing is though, that our conception of what is right and wrong changes as time passes and is/was different in other cultures.
Of course we think that our conception is right. But what about future generations? Will they be shaking their heads and calling us the most immoral civilisation ever, because most things we did were, in their opinion, wrong? For example we drive cars, which in part causes global warming, which again might lead to hundreds of thousands dying. Driving a car to work is not considered wrong now, but in the future they might call it wrong. This is probably not a good example, maybe vegetarianism or war would be better, but I hope you get my point. Our perceptions of what is right and wrong seem to change over time. And causing death and destruction is an important issue.
So for one culture at a certain time, certain things are right and others wrong. It's the people that decided what is and isn't, based on facts, beliefs, reasoning, logic, feelings and so on.

I understand your reasoning, it is the Christian reasoning.
Why is there so much evil in the world, when we have a perfect God? Because Adam and Eve messed it all up for us. You know what, if I were you I would really, really hate Adam and Eve :P .
Now of course you already know that I'm not Christian, but everything you have said so far makes sense to me if you believe in the Christian God, except for one thing.
How can you believe in Adam and Eve, that God created these two and so on, but not believe that God created the earth/universe in 7 days (I think it was only 6 though, he had a nap on the 7th :wink: ). I mean, that too is in the Bible, so if you don't believe in the 7 day theory, why do you believe in Adam and Eve? The only 'evidence' you have of Adam and Eve is the holy book, but if you believe a part of the holy book to be wrong, why not the other part? Is there a certain reason why you believe that one part of the text is incorrect?
phpbb

Post Reply