DislikedI am sorry, but your question is foolish. You need to study the bible before asking such a question. I do not mean to be rude, but come on.Ignored
DislikedI am sorry, but your question is foolish. You need to study the bible before asking such a question. I do not mean to be rude, but come on.Ignored
DislikedI am sorry, but your question is foolish. You need to study the bible before asking such a question. I do not mean to be rude, but come on.Ignored
Quoting GEfxDislikedI'll answer, but I need some more information from you. Is the person that is stealing the food
A) Doing something wrong with justification (a good reason to do something wrong)?
B) What he is doing is right?Ignored
DislikedDo tell him I thoroughly enjoyed his book and it was far less full of holes than the Bible.
But I'm not comparing contributions to mankind as you well know. I am saying that my source for this particular discussion is well documented and unless he made the whole study up, true. There are no such guarantees with the other book.
I do think we should not discuss it further though. From my personal experience, believers expect their faith to be treated with respect, but have no respect for other people's right not to believe - if they did then...Ignored
DislikedEven if we observe that some people do follow different ethical rules (meaning ethics is perceived as being relative), we can still ask whether or not all people should follow exhibit universally preferable behavior.
Whatever metaphysical background a person has (religious, scientific, skeptical, etc), we should be concerned with his or her behavior and it's impacts.Ignored
DislikedBy the way, isn't saying "it's all relative" using universality to show that universality doesn't exist?Ignored
DislikedI have to disagree with this too. I find it a little annoying when religious people say this sort of thing. Some of us do not need a higher power to tell us that certain things are wrong. I would not steal, rape or murder regardless of the existence of God, for example. I don't do those things because I feel they are wrong, not because of any other reason.Ignored
DislikedHypothetically... your children are starving to death and there is a man with plenty of food, a lot more than he needs, but he refuses to give you some of that food to feed your kids.
Now a question for you (and i would also like to hear what LasVahGoose would answer):
Would you watch them starve to death or would you steal from the man?
Is your morale relative, and therefore depending on the circumstances, would you steal or kill...? or would you let your children die to uphold your morale code?Ignored
Dislikedexactly.
But morality is a relative concept. It differs from person to person depending upon their personal understanding of the subject. As evolutionary psychology suggests we make our decisions based on the environment we are actively participating in, our immoral (or moral) activities may be justified under the prevailing conditions. what is perceived as moral by the current society my look immoral to a person with more orthodox ideas.
In the end it all depends upon the frame of reference through which you are watching the movie....Ignored
Disliked... By refusing to give (or sell) you the food he, the bad guy, is initiating an act of aggression by threatening your survival. It doesn't take a big stretch of the imagination to classify this clearly immoral behavior as attempted murder. ...Ignored
DislikedThe question presented here was about morality and trading. Seems the thread has evolved into a general discussion about morality. People, when left to their own devises, are basically immoral. If it were not for God's influence on us, then the world would quickly become (return to) a very dark place. This is why we discuss issues of morality all the time, asking question about right and wrong, etc. It's because our natural tendencies are towords immorality, so discussing it helps us stay on the moral path.Ignored
DislikedThese little exercises in moral reasoning are easy to solve when the true aggressor and the true defender are identified. The man possesses food in abundance. By refusing to give (or sell) you the food he, the bad guy, is initiating an act of aggression by threatening your survival. It doesn't take a big stretch of the imagination to classify this clearly immoral behavior as attempted murder. By taking the food from him you, the good guy, are committing the fundamentally moral act of self defense.Ignored
Quoting LasVahGooseDislikedYou might as well be a nihilist, since relative morality ultimately is a belief in nothing.Ignored
DislikedDo tell him I thoroughly enjoyed his book and it was far less full of holes than the Bible.
But I'm not comparing contributions to mankind as you well know. I am saying that my source for this particular discussion is well documented and unless he made the whole study up, true. There are no such guarantees with the other book.
I do think we should not discuss it further though. From my personal experience, believers expect their faith to be treated with respect, but have no respect for other people's right not to believe - if they did then...Ignored
Disliked
In Islamic countries polygamy is not unusual, but in western countries is polygamy not only regarded as immoral, it is also punishable by law.
On the other hand in western countries usury (lending for interest) is perfectly legal a by most not regarded as immoral but usury is prohibited in Islamic world.Ignored
Disliked... i agree with you that this is easily solvable as there is no genuine morale dilemma present (i think almost anyone would agree that saving a live is clearly more important than not to steal and therefore it is easy to decide what to do).Ignored
DislikedI am sorry, but your question is foolish. You need to study the bible before asking such a question. I do not mean to be rude, but come on.Ignored