Hint: It's false because right and wrong *is* 'making it up as you go along'. That's reality, whether you like it or not. Morality is subjective opinion, and if someone claims that morality can't be real unless it's objective then they are claiming that morality doesn't exist, which is self-evidently untrue - It does exist.
2006-07-10 05:35:28 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
grgyssf: I take your point but it's the easiest way of responding to people who make comments like that in other questions.
2006-07-10 05:45:30 · update #1
santafe_dreamer: The concept of a god who 'makes' morals is self-defeating. The very essence of morality is to have your *own* feelings of what people ought and ought not to do - That's what a conscience is. You can't have someone 'make' a moral for you. The idea is a nonsense.
2006-07-10 05:49:06 · update #2
There are some famous debates between Christian apologists and Atheists that dealt with this (IMHO both deal in absolutes and both are too arrogant).
Many Christians claim that without God there can be no morals. But morality is nothing more that trial and error. Humanity came up with the most basic of morals early:
"I don't like it when someone hurts (steals from, lies to, kills...) me, so maybe it's bad to do that to someone else."
Then we branched out:
"Helping someone who has less then I do is good because maybe someday I'll be the one with less."
And so on. But the bible is hardly an irrefutable guide to morals. If you ever met someone who followed every guideline the bible sets out, you would think they were a monster (take a look at the vast bulk of the old testament. And as a pre-emptive point, it is an entirely different issue about what old laws should be rationalized as "legitimate".)
The parts that are morally useful in the bible are found in almost every major religion and social code throughout history.
2006-07-10 06:04:23 · answer #1 · answered by Eldritch 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's false because right and wrong *is* 'making it up as you go along'. That's reality, whether you like it or not. Morality is subjective opinion, and if someone claims that morality can't be real unless it's objective then they are claiming that morality doesn't exist, which is self-evidently untrue - It does exist.
2006-07-10 12:37:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
False. There is no reason why there cannot be absolute right and wrong in the absence of a god. I believe that there are absolute morals, but I certainly don't believe in gods or anything of that sort. In fact "because god said so" is a remarkably shallow basis for a morality.
2006-07-10 13:01:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay, back to the basics.
We have theology, philosophy, ethics, and legality. They actually have nothing to do with each other.
Being legal does not mean it is moral, or visa versa.
Ethics are man-made, theology (morals) are God made.
We tend to use the terms 'right and wrong' to mean all of these.
No, you do not make any of them up as you go along. Legality is the closest to this, since laws can eventually be written to condone or condemn anything.
I think we have inborn in us certain taboos, including murder and theft. This comes from our inborn empathy for others. True, many out there have killed this empathy in themselves, but it was once there.
The bare absolutes are not to do anything that hurts yourself or others.
Santa Fe
2006-07-10 12:44:23 · answer #4 · answered by santafe_dreamer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
False, like any assertion that right and wrong can be subjective opinion in evolutionary thinking. The only right in evolution is net survival or reproductive advantage to the individual or species in its environment and the only wrong is net survival or reproductive disadvantage in its environment. Evolutionary development of man precludes right and wrong being any more than that and neither of them are matters of opinion. Admittedly they includes such activities as maintaining or creating a favourable environment where the abilities of the species allow. One who holds evolution to be the only mechanism of mans development should have no need or desire to discuss or consider morality from any other perspective.
Here's the definition of moral I have assumed in morality. It is from The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior
I think it's a reasonable assumption in this context!
2006-07-11 08:22:42 · answer #5 · answered by Engineer Smurf 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
FALSE!
We all come equipped with a conscience. This is a part of your spirit that tells you weather something is right or wrong. (some people believe it is knowledge from other spirits that is tapped by your spirit) Many people will lose this ability because they do not use it, they are being told by someone else what is right or wrong.
Really, more people need to engage this ability more often.
2006-07-10 12:42:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there is no language, then there is no sophistry. True and False. Hint: it's neither since both are correct and you can therefore only use language when you make it up and either can be made up without language which is self-evident when its truth is falsified, unless of course you're just making it all up.
2006-07-10 12:43:05 · answer #7 · answered by bonzo the tap dancing chimp 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If God is wrong I don't want to be right. What do you have against God's morality anyway, its in the book, right here, page 77, slavery is permissible, its in the book, I get this from God.
2006-07-10 12:43:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
False.
2006-07-10 12:38:37 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But there IS a God. Not believing that doesn't change that He is God and He is alive and very real and all powerful.
2006-07-10 12:38:23 · answer #10 · answered by Carol M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋