Christian Morality

[Immanuel Can]

Theistic moral objectivism collapses in a question-begging mess.

I don't think it does. I'm not even sure what question would be left for it to "beg."

Peter's right.

Does no one on this forum, besides Peter and I, understand what "question-begging" means.

I know. But it still has no application here, so far as I can see. Maybe you can enlighten me as to what particular question it "begs."

[RCSaunders]

I don't think it does. I'm not even sure what question would be left for it to "beg."

Peter's right.

Does no one on this forum, besides Peter and I, understand what "question-begging" means.

I know. But it still has no application here, so far as I can see. Maybe you can enlighten me as to what particular question it "begs."

Why don't you go to the link and learn what begging the question means instead of repeatedly advertising your ignorance.

Einstein was right. The difference between stupidity and genius is, genius has its limits.

There is no question! Duh!

[Immanuel Can]

Peter's right.

Does no one on this forum, besides Peter and I, understand what "question-begging" means.

I know. But it still has no application here, so far as I can see. Maybe you can enlighten me as to what particular question it "begs."

Why don't you go to the link and learn what begging the question means

I already know: that's why.

It means, essentially, "not providing an answer to a question implied by a particular premise." I want to know what question you think is being "begged," what "question" I owe it to you to answer before presuming what premise.

Are you high?

There is no question! Duh!

Ah! So it's you that doesn't understand "begging the question." You think it means "begging the...nothing"?

[RCSaunders]

I know. But it still has no application here, so far as I can see. Maybe you can enlighten me as to what particular question it "begs."

Why don't you go to the link and learn what begging the question means

I already know: that's why.

It means, essentially, "not providing an answer to a question implied by a particular premise." I want to know what question you think is being "begged," what "question" I owe it to you to answer before presuming what premise.

Are you high?

There is no question! Duh!

Ah! So it's you that doesn't understand "begging the question." You think it means "begging the...nothing"?

Beg the question

This expression has become an issue of controversy and confusion only because so many people use it incorrectly. Increasingly, beg the question is being used as a synonym for prompt or raise the question. For example, in the sentence, “Some churches are now sanctioning gay marriages, which begs the question why did they once abominate them?” Strictly speaking, the person making this statement is not begging the question but is merely prompting or raising the question. The guiding rule is, if the word ‘prompts’ or ‘raises’ can be substituted for the word ‘begs’, without altering the meaning, as in the example just quoted, then these are the words that should be used instead of ‘begs’, strictly speaking. Of course, many expressions that are used wrongly do become Standard English and this may well happen with beg the question but, until that time, it is best to avoid this incorrect usage.

This confusion arises because the word beg has two meanings. The OED confirms beg can simply mean to ask, as in beg for money, beg for pardon, or beg to differ etc. Beg in this sense dates from at least the 11th century. Its second meaning, however, is to take for granted or assume something as in begging the question. This meaning of begging the question dates from the late 16th century.

The word ‘question’ itself has two meanings. It can simply signify the interrogative as in asking a question, but it can also mean a topic or an issue and it is this latter meaning that is used in begging the question.

According to the OED, to beg the question in this sense is first attested in English from 1581 and means take an issue for granted or simply to assume that something or other is the case. This is completely different to prompting, raising, or asking a question.

If you try very hard, I think even you can understand this. "Begging the question," has nothing to do with seeking an answer to any kind of interrogative. It is nothing more than assuming something is true. In simple English it means the same as, "assuming the case or issue," and nothing more. It only becomes a problem in reason or logic when it is used as a premise in an argument.

[popeye1945]

There is no Christian morality there is but human morality for morality is a human extension and more properly should be based upon our common biology our common well-being.

[Immanuel Can]

"Begging the question," has nothing to do with seeking an answer to any kind of interrogative.

Ironically, I never said it did. I said it meant "presuming."

The one who has to pose the relevant "question," exposing the presumption, is the objector. Peter did not do that. Neither did you.

Again, I have to ask: are you high?

[Immanuel Can]

There is no Christian morality there is but human morality for morality is a human extension and more properly should be based upon our common biology our common well-being.

But as Hume pointed out, there is nothing that biology "says" morally. I has nothing to offer that equation. And "well-being" is not a fixed thing: it means different things for girl scouts, heroin addicts and serial killers.

[popeye1945]

There is no Christian morality there is but human morality for morality is a human extension and more properly should be based upon our common biology our common well-being.

But as Hume pointed out, there is nothing that biology "says" morally. I has nothing to offer that equation. And "well-being" is not a fixed thing: it means different things for girl scouts, heroin addicts and serial killers.

Hume was wrong, where do you think anything comes from other than rocks and water. I rather think youv'e miss quoted Hume, have you a direct quote.

[RCSaunders]

"Begging the question," has nothing to do with seeking an answer to any kind of interrogative.

Ironically, I never said it did. I said it meant "presuming."

You said:

It [begging the question] means, essentially, "not providing an answer to a question implied by a particular premise." I want to know what question you think is being "begged," what "question" I owe it to you to answer before presuming what premise.

[RCSaunders]

There is no Christian morality there is but human morality for morality is a human extension and more properly should be based upon our common biology our common well-being.

But as Hume pointed out, there is nothing that biology "says" morally. I has nothing to offer that equation. And "well-being" is not a fixed thing: it means different things for girl scouts, heroin addicts and serial killers.

Hume was wrong, where do you think anything comes from other than rocks and water. I rather think youv'e miss quoted Hume, have you a direct quote.

Oh Hume said it alright. It's referred to as Hume's. "is/ought." problem and it has plagued all of philosophy, with all the other Humean absurdities since.

From An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding [1739], "Section IX Of the Reason of Animals:"

“In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remark'd, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when all of a sudden I am surpriz'd to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, 'tis necessary that it shou'd be observ'd and explain'd; and at the same time that a reason should be given; for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it.”

Hume's argument is essentially that there is no logical way to get from a description of what is to what ought to be or what one ought to do.

Of course you've pointed out the obvious absurdity of that assertion, but the religious and philosophical idealists just love it.

[popeye1945]

Your confusing ought with existence.

[RCSaunders]

Your confusing ought with existence.

Who is the, "your," the, "confusing ought with existence," belongs to? Or did you mean, "you're (you are)," in which case, who is the, "you?" It would be helpful if you indicated who your responses were to, because you're confusing people. At least learn how to use the quote, '', function at the top right of posts.

[popeye1945]

Nice distraction.

[RCSaunders]

Nice distraction.

Distraction from what?

You are a very difficult person to reason with. Why so confrontational.

If you read my post carefully, you would see I was agreeing with you, not making a point. I only quoted Hume to show IC was correct that Hume really did have the absurd view that no ought could be deduced from an is. I certainly was not defending the view.

The previous post was only to help. If you learned how to use the quote function others would know who you were responding to, and would also be notified when you had. Why do you want to be on a forum and not want to know how to use it. For a brilliant person like yourself, it really shouldn't be that difficult.

[popeye1945]

You are a very difficult person to reason with. Why so confrontational.

If you read my post carefully, you would see I was agreeing with you, not making a point. I only quoted Hume to show IC was correct that Hume really did have the absurd view that no ought could be deduced from an is. I certainly was not defending the view.

The previous post was only to help. If you learned how to use the quote function others would know who you were responding to, and would also be notified when you had. Why do you want to be on a forum and not want to know how to use it. For a brilliant person like yourself, it really shouldn't be that difficult.
[/quote]

RC.
My apology, knee jerk response, will take your advice and make myself more familiar with the quote function.