The substantial cost of theistic morality

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
Alphus and Omegus
Area Authority
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Alphus and Omegus »

drumdude wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 6:13 pm
DP doesn't have a problem thinking atheists can be moral. He just doesn't think their morality is more than skin deep. He compares it to monkeys picking insects off each other. Or robots who are programmed to be moral.

There's nothing special about it. There's no magic to it. That's what DP wants. He wants morality to be as transcendent and numinous as a fairy garden.
It's really quite hilarious. He regards his religious views as arguable, but then wants to make his morality absolute.

But absolute truth isn't predicated on tenuous claims.

I can see why he stopped posting over here. These high school debate arguments would be torn to shreds in real time and he has to preserve his illusion of intellectualism.
User avatar
DrStakhanovite
Elder
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:55 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by DrStakhanovite »

Gadianton wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 6:03 am
The absolute refusal of the critics here to engage the argument of my little essay
Can someone tell me if he had an actual argument, or if he just made a pronouncement?
There is fundamentally two arguments in play: (i) Naturalism cannot "ground" morality because there is nothing in nature to metaphysically anchor it to and (ii) Naturalism cannot provide a motivation to be moral that doesn't reduce to something akin to "do what needs to be done to keep myself and my community alive and functioning".
Image
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 7062
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by canpakes »

.
I’m going to ask one or more stupid questions, because I’m an idiot on this subject and possess absolutely no depth of knowledge regarding sources that have been presented so far (although I hope to get a chance to read some of these sources in a decade, when the kids are older and I have a moment, lol).

That said -
DrStakhanovite wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 8:34 pm
There is fundamentally two arguments in play: (i) Naturalism cannot "ground" morality because there is nothing in nature to metaphysically anchor it to and (ii) Naturalism cannot provide a motivation to be moral that doesn't reduce to something akin to "do what needs to be done to keep myself and my community alive and functioning".
Regarding ‘grounding’ morality, does Dan have a particular definition of morality that he prefers to use for the sake of these arguments? I would have a question about (i) based on that.

Isn’t (ii) basically the backbone of what religious morality is? Rules to ensure social order, to “keep myself and my community alive and functioning"?

I’ll happily thank anyone in advance who is willing to entertain these questions and to help lift my veil of ignorance. : )

ETA: I just noticed your new thread, Stak, and will dive into that for more …
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 2769
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by doubtingthomas »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:53 am
I don't think we have nearly enough evidence to draw a blanket conclusion about the overall effect of religion on health.
My point is that a lot of religious people in the US are fighting stem cell research; causing progress to slow down. Would you agree? We can make the argument that religion is preventing us from being healthier.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:53 am
My best guess is that the health effect of religious involvement is highly dependent on the characteristics of the religion, the nature of the religious community, and self-selection in joining a religious community.
It doesn't matter what some religions believe. The majority of religious people who go to church every week, are conservative. Long-term stress and overtime work are contributing to the rise of heart disease and obesity in the US. Conservatives value overwork.

Outside the US, religion is doing way more harm than good. In Latin America, violent gangs use religion (or Folk Catholicism) to justify murder. I am sure gang violence affects the economy and mental health.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus. :roll:
User avatar
DrStakhanovite
Elder
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:55 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by DrStakhanovite »

canpakes wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 8:57 pm
Regarding ‘grounding’ morality, does Dan have a particular definition of morality that he prefers to use for the sake of these arguments? I would have a question about (i) based on that.
He doesn't use a particular definition and I think that is purposeful. Traditionally, moral virtues are "grounded" in the being God and become normative for us via divine commands (e.g. Scripture). As others have pointed out in this thread, that doesn't really describe the doctrine of Gods that Mormons understand their own faith by, because that "roadmap to a perfectly happy life with your eternal family" law is external to Jesus, the Holy Ghost, and Elohim.

Really, this is just Daniel using another person's work to do heavy lifting for him and he can't even be bothered to modify it enough so that it is at least conceptually compatible with the actual living religion of Mormonism.
Isn’t (ii) basically the backbone of what religious morality is? Rules to ensure social order, to “keep myself and my community alive and functioning"?
You can totally argue that it is; any moral system that includes features where benefits are to be had for acting morally and consequence for acting immorally is susceptible to this kind of objection.

I mean the idea of a "covenant" is just an ancient form of a contract where two parties agree on what behavior is acceptable or not, and the rewards/consequences for each.
Image
User avatar
DrStakhanovite
Elder
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:55 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by DrStakhanovite »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
Sat Jan 01, 2022 4:49 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:56 am
This argument always amazes me. The notion that Peterson would be a full on Eugenicist but for his belief in God says much more about his own moral character than it does about any atheist’s.
Very true. It's striking just how lacking in sophistication his arguments are in this vein, but then again, when you consider the audience he's pandering to, I guess it makes sense. Basically, Godwin's Law is about as deep as he ever manages to get: "Atheism leads to the Holocaust!" When you think about it, his exploitative use of Holocaust victims to advance his dumb argument is incredibly gauche.
This reminds me of Dan's blogpost: 'How to be a Good Apologist'
Daniel Peterson wrote:So, yes, it would be more gratifying always to work on a sophisticated level, and, yes, the arguments of sophisticated atheistic thinkers absolutely merit serious attention and faithful response...More than once, I myself have lamented the time and energy that I’ve felt that I had to allocate to analyzing the works of such relatively dim bulbs as Ed Decker, John Ankerberg, and John Weldon (as here and here), and the effusions of the balmy loon Loftes Tryk, when I ought rather to be engaging Plato, Plotinus, Proclus, al-Farabi, al-Kirmani, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), al-Ghazali, Ibn Rushd (Averroës), and St. Thomas Aquinas, as I was trained to do, as I want to do, and as I set out on my career to do.
lol
Daniel Peterson wrote:But I did feel the obligation. It seemed to me a pastoral duty. In fact, at the risk of sounding vainglorious, it seemed to me something of a “calling.”
Because God knows there is no middle ground here, you either sit perched atop the ivory tower pouring over Neoplatonists or you shitcan Ed Decker.
Image
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9569
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Res Ipsa »

doubtingthomas wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 9:09 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:53 am
I don't think we have nearly enough evidence to draw a blanket conclusion about the overall effect of religion on health.
My point is that a lot of religious people in the US are fighting stem cell research; causing progress to slow down. Would you agree? We can make the argument that religion is preventing us from being healthier.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:53 am
My best guess is that the health effect of religious involvement is highly dependent on the characteristics of the religion, the nature of the religious community, and self-selection in joining a religious community.
It doesn't matter what some religions believe. The majority of religious people who go to church every week, are conservative. Long-term stress and overtime work are contributing to the rise of heart disease and obesity in the US. Conservatives value overwork.

Outside the US, religion is doing way more harm than good. In Latin America, violent gangs use religion (or Folk Catholicism) to justify murder. I am sure gang violence affects the economy and mental health.
You’re simply making a ton of assertions about associations and claiming they show causation. If religion suddenly disappeared from the earth, do you think the violent gangs to which you refer would start giving out hugs instead of killing people? The fact is, you have no idea at all about the effect that the disappearance of religion would have on gang violence in Latin America. Your have opinions based on nothing more than personal biases against religion. We all have biases, but we shouldn’t fill ourselves into thinking there anything More than that.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Meadowchik
Priest
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Meadowchik »

The world we build for others is the same world we must inhabit. Therefore do unto others...
QED
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 2769
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by doubtingthomas »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 10:41 pm
If religion suddenly disappeared from the earth, do you think the violent gangs to which you refer would start giving out hugs instead of killing people?
Violent gangs wouldn't use folk Catholicism to justify murder. A lot of gang members believe some invisible spirit is protecting them.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:53 am

The fact is, you have no idea at all about the effect that the disappearance of religion would have on gang violence in Latin America.
Gang members wouldn't have the balls to risk their own lives and future. Gang members believe god or a spirit wants them to commit murder. I am not kidding! It is well documented!

I used to think Islam was the worse religion, not anymore.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus. :roll:
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Philo Sofee »

I am just truly sincere when I ask does Peterson actually think there is an objective morality when even Joseph Smith proved it is relative? He is on record as saying in one instance God says do not kill, and you cannot do so, or it is wrong since God said so. But God has also commanded to kill, and in that instance, you had better do so or you are wrong to disobey God. So no killing is actually just relative depending on circumstances, not objectively moral. Am I off?
Post Reply