I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

[Science Fan]

You are merely engaged in question begging --- assuming the very thing at issue. You were asked to provide any actual proof for objective morality, and you respond by claiming that morality is subjective. Prove that morality is subjective then. There are no proofs going either way. No one knows whether morality is subjective or objective. As far as the Nazis, what we do know is that their claims against the Jews were based on lies. It's hard to reconcile such violence against millions of children based on lies as seeming to be moral under any standard, which is why I like to think that morality is morally objective, but, I readily admit I have no proof for such a claim.

[Greatest I am]

You are merely engaged in question begging --- assuming the very thing at issue. You were asked to provide any actual proof for objective morality, and you respond by claiming that morality is subjective. Prove that morality is subjective then. There are no proofs going either way. No one knows whether morality is subjective or objective. As far as the Nazis, what we do know is that their claims against the Jews were based on lies. It's hard to reconcile such violence against millions of children based on lies as seeming to be moral under any standard, which is why I like to think that morality is morally objective, but, I readily admit I have no proof for such a claim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4w_8Z8 ... re=related

This next shows the requirements mentioned by Dawkins, like reason and logic in terms of judging and how all issues must be subjectively looked at so as to decide the right moral response and the application of Harm/Care to the other.

https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haid ... anguage=en

If Harm/Care is to be our response to anything coming at us, that makes most moral decision we make subjective.

Regards
DL

[Immanuel Can]

I cannot gage parental influence on others. I can only gage if the Father Complex makes sense and it does.

You don't understand it then.

The "father fixation" isn't the natural desire for a REAL father, or the absence of a REAL father, whether yours, mine or anybody else's. It's Freud's suggestion that the wanting or not-wanting of a father figure in adults, is the way to account for people's desire to believe or disbelieve in God.

Who taught you to suckle if not some internal instinct?

That's something we ought not to persist to do in adulthood, just like crying when one doesn't get one's way, and pooping one's breeches.

But again, wanting or not wanting a father is not, in Freud's thought, a healthy or normal instinct. It's a result of unhealthy fixation, because it persists into adulthood, when it ought to have been left behind with the grasping and the suckling instincts.

[surreptitious57]

No one knows whether morality is subjective or objective

Morality can be either subjective or inter subjective. It cannot be objective because it would have to be mind independent. There would also
have to be a mechanism such as proof or deduction to determine its objectivity but no such mechanism exists. And any one claiming that it is objective is actually making a subjective statement not an objective one. As just thinking or believing that it is objective does not make it so

[Greatest I am]

I cannot gage parental influence on others. I can only gage if the Father Complex makes sense and it does.

You don't understand it then.

The "father fixation" isn't the natural desire for a REAL father, or the absence of a REAL father, whether yours, mine or anybody else's. It's Freud's suggestion that the wanting or not-wanting of a father figure in adults, is the way to account for people's desire to believe or disbelieve in God.

Who taught you to suckle if not some internal instinct?

That's something we ought not to persist to do in adulthood, just like crying when one doesn't get one's way, and pooping one's breeches.

But again, wanting or not wanting a father is not, in Freud's thought, a healthy or normal instinct. It's a result of unhealthy fixation, because it persists into adulthood, when it ought to have been left behind with the grasping and the suckling instincts.

From Wiki.
Father complex in psychology is a complex—a group of unconscious associations, or strong unconscious impulses—which specifically pertains to the image or archetype of the father. These impulses may be either positive (admiring and seeking out older father figures) or negative (distrusting or fearful).

Sigmund Freud, and psychoanalysis after him, saw the father complex, and in particular ambivalent feelings for the father on the part of the male child, as an aspect of the Oedipus complex.[1] By contrast, Carl Jung took the view that both males and females could have a father complex, which in turn might be either positive or negative.[2]

Key Phrase --- which specifically pertains to the image or archetype of the father.
Key phrase --- and in particular ambivalent feelings for the father on the part of the male child, as an aspect of the Oedipus complex.

You are wanting to discuss the Oedipus Complex while I am focusing on the Father Complex.

Archetype of the father quoted above, to me, indicates an archetypal instinct pattern that one gains from our parents who lived long enough to pass them on. Reproduction is our most important instinct and males get that from their parents if the DNA is passed along without mishap.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

No one knows whether morality is subjective or objective

Morality can be either subjective or inter subjective. It cannot be objective because it would have to be mind independent. There would also
have to be a mechanism such as proof or deduction to determine its objectivity but no such mechanism exists. And any one claiming that it is objective is actually making a subjective statement not an objective one. As just thinking or believing that it is objective does not make it so

No argument. I agree that most moral issues are subjective.

A question though.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few seems to only need enough thinking to decide what is being threatened. I cannot think of any situation where this rule would not be used and followed.

That makes it an objective moral tenant. No?

Regards
DL

[surreptitious57]

You are still equating popularity with objectivity. They are not the same. Something that is popular may
be objective but that is purely coincidental. As it is also possible for something that is popular not to be
objective. And in the case of morality this is always true. And so regardless of how popular it actually is

[Immanuel Can]

You are wanting to discuss the Oedipus Complex while I am focusing on the Father Complex.

Nope. I didn't even mention the OC, nor any of its fixtures. We can all agree that the Oedipus Complex is rubbish, except for in cases of abnormal psychology, controversially.

You used the FC to attempt to "explain away" Theism. I showed you decisively that it can also be used to "explain away" Atheism, and that even Freud conceded this weakness in the theory.

The real problem is that it's just ad hominem and arbitrary. That should be obvious.

[Greatest I am]

You are still equating popularity with objectivity. They are not the same. Something that is popular may
be objective but that is purely coincidental. As it is also possible for something that is popular not to be
objective. And in the case of morality this is always true. And so regardless of how popular it actually is

I do not get much of whatever you are trying to say.

Give me a scenario or example of what you describe as "popular may
be objective", as I know of no objective moral tenant except the one we are discussing.

Regards
DL

[Seleucus]

No one knows whether morality is subjective or objective

Morality can be either subjective or inter subjective. It cannot be objective because it would have to be mind independent.

What is ob-jective is not mind independent since it has to be ob-served.

For what's it's worth, I'll share with you the perspective on morality I took away from my studies of counseling .

Nothing is per say is good or bad, saying so is projection.

Some feelings we shrink from and want to escape the situations and things we associate with them, others we pursue. This is essentially a mind-game since we generate our own emotions and then try to extinguish them/generate them through performance of rituals.

We generate feelings (muscular contractions, heart rate, etc) from the comparison of internalized schema (thoughts) with reading of sense input (perception).

Internalization of schema is semi-unconcious and has something to do with identification with, performance for, and imitation of desire.

When we slow down, this whole process becomes observable. Most peoples' days are spent running around as dupes to their own internalizations and projections.

I'd recommend this video on YouTube if you can tune into what he's saying, "Satsang with Stuart Schwartz~ remembering silence".

[Seleucus]

Failure to follow through on commitments. We need more and deeper involvement, not less.

Why? Hasn't seemed to have worked so far. If you want to get deeper involved try doing what the radical islamists are doing on the ground for the poor and provide a social welfare system with free schools and health care.

1. Extradition of all returning jihadists to death penalty countries for trial and execution.

2. Life sentence for all material assistance and incitement to terrorists.

3. Internment and deradicalization for all supporters and associates of terrorists.

4. Ban Muslim immigration which is not nuclear family only, student or high tech worker. Extreme vetting.

5. Repatriation or off-shore refugee detention for all Muslim refugees.

6. Significantly increase monitoring and investigations.

7. Discontinuation of all Sharia family courts.

8. Review all grants to Muslim organizations.

9. Vet applications for mosques and Islamic centers.

10. Segregated prisons for radical Muslims.

11. Escalation of drone projects.

12. More boots on the ground.

13. Expanded air missions.

14. Permanent military, naval and airbases in Muslim countries.

15. Establishments of USAID education projects, American schools and universities in all Muslim counties.

16. Philosophy Now online in Arabic.

[Greatest I am]

[

Many suggestions but would persuasion via dialog and debates of their ideology not prove more worthy?

Is it not better to go to the root of the problem, their ideology and have Muslims themselves alter or adjust it, than to kill the leaves on the tree?

Kill the roots, and the tree dis on it's own without costing the West any lives.

Better a war of ideas than a war of bodies.

Regards
DL

[surreptitious57]

What is ob jective is not mind independent since it has to be ob served

Objective simply means anything which is beyond subjective interpretation
It is not necessary for minds to exist in order for something to be objective

[surreptitious57]

You are still equating popularity with objectivity. They are not the same. Something that is popular may
be objective but that is purely coincidental. As it is also possible for something that is popular not to be
objective. And in the case of morality this is always true. And so regardless of how popular it actually is

I do not get much of whatever you are trying to say

Give me a scenario or example of what you describe as popular may
be objective as I know of no objective moral tenant except the one we are discussing here

I cannot give an example of an objective moral fact because none exist but objective facts do and that is
what I was referring to. The objectivity of a fact is not dependent upon how popular [ or unpopular ] it is

[Belinda]

Greatest I Am wrote;

Kill the roots, and the tree dis on it's own without costing the West any lives.

Can you suggest how to prevent superstition?