tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post7808125852893479779..comments2024-03-22T06:22:08.010+00:00Comments on Stephen Law: Notes on "Morality without religion has no firm foundation"Stephen Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-22292612053818626682011-11-07T08:58:09.797+00:002011-11-07T08:58:09.797+00:00The problem I have with all this is : what is this...The problem I have with all this is : what is this "religion" that sets top-down laws and enforces them? This is a particular, and limited, definition of religion, so I'm not sure what the value of the original question is. What it's really asking is "does morality have to be imposed top-down", it seems to me.<br /><br />As an illustration : the 'set readings' for yesterday's Sunday services included the following from the prophet Amos : <br /><br />"I, the LORD, hate and despise your religious celebrations and your times of worship. I won't accept your offerings or animal sacrifices — not even your very best. No more of your noisy songs! I won't listen when you play your harps. But let justice and fairness flow like a river that never runs dry."<br /><br />Is this a religious morality or not?<br /><br />Or again, in Mark 11:12-22 (in my reading of it) Jesus curses a fig tree (a symbol of the key religious institution of his day, the Jerusalem Temple) for sucking all the goodness from the 'vineyard' but producing no good fruit (figs are particularly demanding). He tells his disciples that if they have enough 'faith' this 'mountain' (i.e. the Temple Mount, symbol of all that was most holy) will be dumped in the sea. He then constitutes the 'new Temple' by saying to his followers "when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins." The story goes on to recount how "religion", in collusion with alien occupying political power, has him executed<br /><br />So is this a religious morality, or are Amos and Jesus 'humanists'? They talk a bit too much about God for humanists.<br /><br />I think that to argue that you can have morality without religion, you have to define 'religion' in such a way that the answer you want pops out. Which seems a little pointless.Dick Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09111414869380445624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-3461380423564116182011-11-03T21:52:36.994+00:002011-11-03T21:52:36.994+00:00Sounds like an interesting debate and a more fruit...Sounds like an interesting debate and a more fruitful topic than the Craig one as at least it was dealing with concrete issues that can be examined and analysed. Thanks for sharing your notes. <br /><br />I'm presuming the other mob used similar versions of Craig's moral argument and ideas such as the west being a degenerating relativist anything goes social disaster society.<br /><br />All that was missing was naming the objective foundation that underlies the morality Secular Humanism speaks about.Alan Millhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00462577914066400107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-8558565007794606872011-11-03T11:20:24.048+00:002011-11-03T11:20:24.048+00:00Rob, thanks for alerting us to that Zuckerman arti...Rob, thanks for alerting us to that Zuckerman article. The link in your post didn't work but this one should: http://bit.ly/cpGG7iThe Atheist Missionaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07191035196328725888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-77341041523358146002011-11-03T09:13:35.196+00:002011-11-03T09:13:35.196+00:00Commenting myself.
...Would prefer Scanlonian cont...Commenting myself.<br />...Would prefer Scanlonian contractualism to Rawlsian. <br /><br />Cassanders<br />In Cod we trustAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-34855973862753831582011-11-03T09:07:21.683+00:002011-11-03T09:07:21.683+00:00While I by and large second your appraoch, I wonde...While I by and large second your appraoch, I wonder if you may want to replace the <i>indivduality</i> outlined in #4 with a more <i>general/generic</i> approach? <br /><br />What if the "moral subject" in #4 is "morally corrupt"? ("god of eth'ish")?<br /><br />I am not sure how it could be improved, but I would prefer forms of contractualism before Rawls.<br /><br />Cassanders<br />In Cod we trustAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-50545145759636152442011-11-02T17:39:49.482+00:002011-11-02T17:39:49.482+00:00I think that Phil Zuckerman's work in sociolog...I think that Phil Zuckerman's work in sociology provides the most comprehensive scientific evidence against the assumption that morality requires a religious foundation.<br /><br />Zuckerman's article, "Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions" can be found here:<br /><br />http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/Zuckerman_on_Atheism.pdfRob Snoreply@blogger.com