The bible fails egregiously in terms of moral values. Within its books ethnic cleansing, genocide, patriarchy-misogyny-marital rape, homophobia, slavery, authoritarianism, self-abnegation, poverty-masochism, neurotic guilt, superstition, scapegoating (purgitive lynching), vicarious redemption via human sacrifice, denialism, etc are advocated and even in some cases ritually memorialized. Bronze Age barbarism co-opted by – transfigured into – Iron Age statecraft. — 180 Proof
Agreed.
And yeah, I subscribe to absurdism (Zapffe/Camus) with respect to moral judgment, though the 'genealogy' of my ethical naturalism (e.g. Spinoza, Peirce-Dewey, Philippa Foot) begins with epicureanism and then extends through spinozism with refining detours through humeanism, nietzscheanism & pragmaticism. Immanence sans transcendence (i.e. cranes, not sky-hooks). Moses & Jesus, Plato & Augustine have nothing to teach that isn't 'otherworldly' (i.e. nihil as per F.N.), or, as Dennett might say a 'sky-hook' for tyrants and other (malignant, bad faith) fantasties. — 180 Proof
... we - humans - are the ethical foundation of the universe.
I'm not gonna leap off that faith-heap with you, Fool. Not only doesn't this statement follow from your naturalist observations, but Nature, of which we're a part, long precedes and far exceeds 'human existence' so much so that saying we're it's "foundation" (of any kind) is like saying birds gliding on the wind are the aerodynamic foundation of the sky or mating fish are the procreative foundation of the sea. :sweat: This 'immanent sky-hook' you're desperately grasping at, Mad Fool, is oxymoronic and anachronistically violates the mediocrity principle. — 180 Proof
No. I'm resistant to your claim, Fool, because (a) it's incoherent and (b) is inconsistent with the mediocrity principle without sufficient warrant.Perhaps your resistance to the idea that humans are the foundation of morality arises from the fact that humans,despite how I've presented them above, are also the worst offenders... — TheMadFool
So what? Astrology was "one of the first" attempts to explain the world in terms of the wider, encompassing cosmos. Nonetheless it's useless for scientific or ethical inquiry. Like biblical religion.Thus, even if it's true that "The Bible fails egregiously in terms of moral values" it mustn't be forgotten that it counts as one of the first steps made by humanity into the world of morality/ethics ...
No. I'm resistant to your claim, Fool, because (a) it's incoherent and (b) is inconsistent with the mediocrity principle without sufficient warrant.
Thus, even if it's true that "The Bible fails egregiously in terms of moral values" it mustn't be forgotten that it counts as one of the first steps made by humanity into the world of morality/ethics ...
So what? Astrology was "one of the first" attempts to explain the world in terms of the wider, encompassing cosmos. Nonetheless it's useless for scientific or ethical inquiry. Like biblical religion.
The story I prefer to tell myself is one of metacultural development from mythos (infancy) to logos (adolescence) to ethos (adulthood) to philosophos (maturity) ... such that biblical religion aka "divine, or sovereign, right" is nothing but atavistic, infantilizing, (therefore eusocially effective at religare) mythology. Doesn't ethics as a secular discourse begin with the dialectic of mythos & logos, or the latter as critique-epochē of the former? — 180 Proof
Nope. See either Socrates or Confucius for a "clumsy attempt" at ethics. Religion never makes an "attempt" in so far as philosophy raises questions from aporia, or dilemmas, where as scriptures, like myths, tell stories that purport to resolve all moral questions with (divine) "Mysteries" which, of course, merely beg the question (e.g. g/G says "do not bear false witness" ... ok but why? ... Because it's "the will of" g/G (Plato's Euthyphro)), or, in other words, just gaslighting whomever about whatever's at issue. Biblical religion doesn't "attempt" ethics, or philosophy, because in order to cultivate abject credulity in gullible masses its sermons need only massage somnambulent "belief" and avoid provoking thinking for oneself (i.e. reflective inquiry).Doesn't religion look like a clumsy attempt at ethical philosophy? — TheMadFool
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? — 1 Corinthians 1:18-20, KJV
ok but why? — 180 Proof
You've lost me a bit with that (rhetorical) non sequitur, but ok. To be continued whenever. — 180 Proof
Let's get the facts straight. We know, almost to the point of certainty, what to do and what not to do. — TheMadFool
I wish that were true. — Tom Storm
Yes and no. :naughty:↪180 Proof Do you suppose that the Abrahmic religions are not about morality and are about something else entirely and we've completely missed the point of these faiths. — TheMadFool
Inshallah ... Im yirtze hashem ... Deus vult ... :pray:Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told. Obedience is doing what is told regardless of what is right. — sayeth THE SAGE OF BALTIMORE
Yes Abrahamic religions are not "about morality" but about – Kierkegaard is instructive here – "the teleological suspension of the ethical" or, in lay terms, obeying the "will" (PLAN) of the ALMIGHTY — 180 Proof
Some people find the Bible so comforting, but I find it the exact opposite. — Jack Cummins
Actually, I am interested in the whole discussion of comparative religion and my own thread on religion was meant to be general but the majority of people who engaged in discussion with me focused upon Christianity. Strangely, no one discussed Islam. Personally, I have never felt drawn towards Islam but I am not against it. I have friends who are Muslim and they are very open minded people. I think that stereotypes around terrorism do a lot of harm to perceptions of Islam. — Jack Cummins
Apart from Madfool's discussion about women's dress, Islam doesn't seem to be discussed much on the forum. I am not sure why. — Jack Cummins
I became a Non-Theist from reading the Bible with a skeptical eye. But I later became an Agnostic after my introduction to nuanced philosophical thinking in college. Eventually, I became a Deist, due to the inherent evolutionary logic of Physics & Biology. Finally, I became an Enformationist after putting all of the above together.The best way to become an atheist is to read the Bible — Dan Barker
A penny for your thoughts. — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.