The Philosophy Discussion Forum

I don't say anything about that. I just ask secularists to show, with reference to nothing but their secularism, how they can justify imposing any moral duty, obligation, law, precept or requirement on anybody, including themselves. And they can't seem to do it. That's really telling. And that's th...

No, the question at THIS POINT is not about "secularism". Yeah, it is...and only about that. You want to switch away for this reason: that you have no answer. But that makes you the same as every other person who tries to do it. It cannot be done. You insist the secularists can't do this ...

You are also using presumptions about what this God wants to do, intends, This isn't true, but it has nothing to do with the question anyway. So I could grant it to you for argument's sake, and stilll, you've said nothing to the point. The question is about what secularism can warrant by its own li...

I'll simply ask you the question again: what's your evidence that you have a moral duty , not just a feeling? My evidence is in the life I have lived and the person I have been consistently. You can't have a clue about these things, so I guess you're not meant to know. I don't need to insist on a r...

Because I've asked the question a hundred times, and nobody is ever able to give one secular justification for even one moral precept. A 100% record of failure is pretty darn convincing. WHAT SECULARIST? Are you really not paying attention? You aren't getting your divine basis for morality JUST bec...

Why don't you tell me the answer: why is it wrong for an Atheist to cheat? Because if society would benefit from everyone playing by the rules and a society has set up a reasonable set of rules to better serve the welfare of the society of citizens, then it is counterproductive to others for someon...

So can you elaborate more on what you mean by saying morality is "mutable"? A) Do you mean that morality can be shaped by circumstances of our given reality? For example, if we lived in a world where women actually universally enjoyed being raped, then rape would be permissible; however, ...

If I believed that this is really the world in which I have found myself -- and I mean really believed it, not just said it -- if I believed it with all my heart, and with all the confidence with which anybody ever believes anything. If I felt certain that my wisest choice was to invest my belief i...

In the case of morality, are you suggesting that, if things had been different, human beings could have evolved to have a different morality than we currently do? So, for example, had we turned out like Chimpanzees, we could have incorporated rape as an approved behavior, and it would seem "mo...

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2026 3:46 pm What do those comments relate to? Certainly nothing I wrote.

They refer to whether morality could be eternal/immutable.

Since we can document philosophy going back a couple thousand years it is only relatively recently, a few hundred years, that philosophy split into specialties. Before that, a philosopher would be aware of what was going on n other aras of philosophy. Mathematics, Natural philosophy (what we now fur...

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2026 2:02 pm The inherent consciousness aspect of his language is not known by me

He would have spoken in Aramaic.

Aramaic is not quite yet a dead language.There still are native speakers of Neo-Aramaic (you expect languages to change over 3000 years).

Two swings, two misses. Still you have not bothered to even learn the slightest thing about what you fool yourself you are arguing against. All so you can try to railroad me over something I wrote that wasn't even remotely about you. Do you believe that we humans are/have been immutable over time? ...

PS: If you want to argue that the situation is different (with morality) than those examples from math and physics. Some seven million years ago lived the last common ancestor (LCA) of chimps, bonobos, and us. If you believe human morality is an eternal/immutable objective truth than it must have be...

You should watch the video, because if you watch and pay attention and don't sit there just seething about your own obviously superior argument, seeing instead what you can glean for your own future purposes from their methods and arguments, you will improve. And before you waste your umbrage on me...