This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

If God exists, are ethics and esthetics inherently linked?

#21FoxTheSwiftPosted 8/12/2011 9:56:41 PM
I think the argument is something like this.

1. There is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolence, omniwhatever god.
2. As a result of omnipotence, omniscience, omniwhatever, this god creates or finds morality and aesthetics and these are absolute values.

Therefore

3. Because they share the same source, the two must be linked.

Problems with this are as follows:

1 may not be true. The god may not be omni-anything.
2 may not be true, unless omnibenevolence is a feature, then I think its more up to question. Either god doesn't have the motivation to create them, or they aren't to be found, or if he is omnibenevolent, maybe benevolence is a feature that only exists in him and thus morality doesn't really exist for us humans.
3 of course also has problems. If he just found the two values, they don't need to be linked. Or he can create them separately.
#22mercuryinkPosted 8/13/2011 5:42:57 PM
I've never done that.

And I beg to differ. When you said "If everyone held the belief that killing is never justified, I would have been killed.” in response to me writing “If everyone thought like you, it would be one thing, HOWEVER, dot dot dot”, and you responded as though I said “if everyone thought like you, dot dot dot would happen”. Bam. It’s really a regular occurrence.

you so civilly called me a suicidal hippy
I referred to a belief you held as being suicidal (on the grounds that thinking in those terms is, in fact, begging for something terrible to happen), calling it hippy nonsense. That you cannot see the difference is telling of the utter failure your educators did at teaching you communication, and nothing else. That you MAINTAIN that view in spite of being given a rational reason to believe otherwise shows you are too bloody stubborn to learn, so then again, maybe it isn’t your teachers’ fault. Driving at 200 mph on a winding, curvy road in a blizzard is "suicidally reckless behavior"; that doesn’t make the schmuck behind the wheel “suicidal” in the psychological sense. If this is still confusing for you, please, don’t tell me. Just give up on the English language, because it’s not for you. In fact, I’d give up on all languages in which words have more than one definition, any language with slang or a vernacular, and all languages with homonyms, just to be on the safe side.

That was a misunderstanding;
One whose SOLE cause is your refusal to actually read what other people write, but instead to imagine your opposition AND their argument and then address them thusly. You’ve done it to me in the last two discussions we’ve had, and I fully expect it to happen again. When you deliberately cause the misunderstandings by being too smart to actually read, you don’t get to just write them off.

In fact, it seems like the big, overarching problem here is you acting like a nudzh, then blaming everyone else for it.

My problem, before you ask, is that given the slightest pretext to drop the veil of courtesy, I will.
---
Some people are proof that G-d exists; evolution would have prevented them.
New Jersey Devils -- Stanley Cup Champions -- 1995-2000-2003