Gadianton wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:33 am
wiki on abolition wrote:Lewis criticises the authors for subverting student values and claims that they teach that all statements of value (such as "this waterfall is sublime") are merely statements about the speaker's feelings and say nothing about the object.[3] Such a view, Lewis argues, makes nonsense of value talk. It implies, for example, that a speaker who condemns some act as contemptible is really only saying, "I have contemptible feelings.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Abolition_of_Man
Nice. we now have DCP's source for his sound-bite on morality not grounded in "tastes and preferences." (He forces this subjectivism upon every non believer, which is a very minority moral theory as opposed to consequentialist theories.) "Men are that they might have Joy". lol.
Is it wrong to kill an innocent person for no reason if there is no guarantee of an afterlife with eternal punishments and rewards for our actions?
The question he cannot answer.
25 years ago, I came to the conclusion that the Church wasn’t true. I wanted to know what was true, and all I knew is that the Church wasn’t it. Everything else was open for consideration. I joined an email group and asked for suggestions on where I could find the truth. Several suggestions were made, including several book recommendations. Two of the books really pissed me off, but for opposite reasons.
The first book that pissed me off was C. S. Lewis’s
Mere Christianity. The argument that it makes for the existence of God and the correctness of Christianity goes something like this. People feel guilty for stuff. We know that. Since we feel guilty, there must be right and wrong. And since there is a choice between right and wrong and we still sometimes bewilderingly choose the wrong, then there must be supernatural forces that are trying to entice us to do wrong. Therefore Satan exists, therefore God exists, therefore we need a Savior.
That’s Mere Christianity in a nutshell. It really upset me. I wanted to know what was real; not more myths to substitute with the ones I had discarded.
The second book that really pissed me off was
Atheism: The Case Against God. I didn’t want to be an atheist. But damn; the logic in that book was clear and convincing. It was like waking up from a long, strange dream and taking an ice-cold shower. I asked for the truth, and I found it. It wasn’t pleasant, but it was exhilarating.