Remember me
▼ Content

why



Page 2 of 2<12
11-12-2020 03:58
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9086)
tgoebbles wrote:Objective morality does not require a deity.

At issue is that objective morality can involve a deity, not that one is required.

tgoebbles wrote: Those who describe themselves as atheist, ironically, usually reference an universal morality

I do, and there is nothing ironic about it.


tgoebbles wrote: ... and can read a priest the riot act on how amoral their religion is.


1) "Reading the Riot Act" is giving a stern warning to cease and desist. It is not a rebuke.

2) A religion's morality can be immoral but cannot be amoral.

tgoebbles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:I doubt that's the full quote in full context.
Well those are Trump's words.

More total dishonesty.


Step 1: Demonize someone based on something said, not anything done.
Step 2: Paraphrase an absurd oversimplification
Step 3: Strip away all necessary context.
Step 4: Commit felony mischaracterization.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-12-2020 09:41
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:...objective morality can involve a deity,...
"Objective" by definition would be independent of perspective. So if there is objective morality then it doesn't change if someone shows up to discuss it with a deity or not.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Those who describe themselves as atheist, ironically, usually reference an universal morality
I do, and there is nothing ironic about it.
Well universal morality is arguably a religious belief. A religious atheist is ironic (most Atheists claim to have no "religion", not just that it's not deist).

IBdaMann wrote:...immoral but cannot be amoral.
no real difference there.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:I doubt that's the full quote in full context.
Well those are Trump's words.
More total dishonesty...
Try actually making your point by citing what I've done and not just pretending it's obvious.
11-12-2020 16:22
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9086)
tgoebbles wrote: Well universal morality is arguably a religious belief.

Not when it's not.

tgoebbles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...immoral but cannot be amoral.
no real difference there.

Not if you're a moron. Learn English.

Science is amoral and not immoral.

tmiddles wrote: Try actually making your point by citing what I've done and not just pretending it's obvious.

Try actually reading my post and not just pretending that I didn't write anything.

You were totally dishonest.

Step 1: You demonized Trump based on something said, not anything done.
Step 2: You oversimplified in a paraphrase
Step 3: You did then provide a quote but with all necessary context stripped.
Step 4: You opened and closed with felony mischaracterization.

... and it's all totally obvious.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-12-2020 17:12
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2051)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...immoral but cannot be amoral.
no real difference there.

There's a huge difference, actually.
A 'moral' action is a "good" or "correct" action with regard to human behavior.
Immoral means 'not moral'. It refers to actions that are "bad" or "wrong" with regard to human behavior.
Amoral means 'without morals'. It means than actions are neither "good" nor "bad", and are neither "correct" nor "wrong".

As IBD said, science is amoral. It does not concern itself with such right or wrong behavior. It is also atheistic. It does not concern itself with God or no-God.
Edited on 11-12-2020 17:23
11-12-2020 22:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:...morality (especially with regard to epistemology) is subjective..
I don't agree but that's a broader philosophical topic.
...without making any consideration to the existence of any particularly defined god/s, ....
Objective morality does not require a deity.

There is no such thing as objective morality.
tmiddles wrote:
Honesty is objective I think you'd agree.

No, honesty is a state of being.
tmiddles wrote:
From there you have a large portion of basic morality covered.

No. You are assigning honesty as 'moral'. Honesty is not necessarily moral. You first have to define what 'moral' is. That is a subjective term.
tmiddles wrote:
Those who describe themselves as atheist, ironically, usually reference an universal morality and can read a priest the riot act on how amoral their religion is.

The Church of No God is a religion. It is inherently a fundamentalist religion. Atheists don't argue about god or what is 'moral' with any particular religion. They are atheists. They have no opinion about any god or gods.
tmiddles wrote:
But that's a big topic all it's own, though certainly interesting.

Not really. The Church of Global Warming is another fundamentalist style religion. So is the Church of Green. So is the Church of Karl Marx.
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:..."good" and "evil", in the same way that one would objectively determine "high-fidelity" and "low-fidelity" ...
But good/evil translates to right/wrong. A stereo making sound and not making sound is also objective.

False equivalence. You cannot compare subjective terms to objective terms. Doublespeak.
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...Trump...Putin:
"...he's been a leader. Far more than our president has been a leader."

Praising a particular quality of a person, or being friendly towards a person, is not praising everything about a person nor is it embracing despotism.
Certainly true and one nice thing about Presidents if you have a track record and a lot to work with. Trump's interview Oreilly when Orielly called Putin a killer and Trump defended him says it all.

Putin hasn't killed any more than most any other national leader. Trump is correct if you maintain context, which you typically don't.
tmiddles wrote:
But he's had ample opportunity to set the record straight.

Contextomy fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:I doubt that's the full quote in full context.
Well those are Trump's words. Investigate further as you please.

Contextomy fallacy.
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...where is the a pecedent for what he is doing?

The Constitution of the USA.
I precedent I should have written. He is the first US president to reject the election.

What election? Fake ballots are not an election.
tmiddles wrote:
So there is no precedent from a President.

There is plenty of precedence of fake ballots being cast as 'votes'.
It's a habit of the Democrats.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
11-12-2020 22:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...objective morality can involve a deity,...
"Objective" by definition would be independent of perspective. So if there is objective morality then it doesn't change if someone shows up to discuss it with a deity or not.

There is no such thing as objective morality. Morality is a subjective term.
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Those who describe themselves as atheist, ironically, usually reference an universal morality
I do, and there is nothing ironic about it.
Well universal morality is arguably a religious belief.

There is no such thing as a 'universal' morality.
tmiddles wrote:
A religious atheist is ironic (most Atheists claim to have no "religion", not just that it's not deist).

There is no such thing as a religious atheist. The Church of No God is a religion. Atheists have no religion.
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...immoral but cannot be amoral.
no real difference there.

WRONG. 'Amoral' means no morals at all. 'Immoral' means something that goes against a given moral.
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:I doubt that's the full quote in full context.
Well those are Trump's words.
More total dishonesty...
Try actually making your point by citing what I've done and not just pretending it's obvious.

You haven't done anything.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
15-12-2020 09:03
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:
tgoebbles wrote: Well universal morality is arguably a religious belief.

Not when it's not.

What is your definition of "religious"?

IBdaMann wrote:
Science is amoral and not immoral.
And we were talking about:
IBdaMann wrote:...A religion's morality can be immoral but cannot be amoral.
So again, what is your definition of "religion"?

IBdaMann wrote: You demonized Trump based on something said, not anything done.
Presidents lead with their words and making statements is doing something.

IBdaMann wrote:...You oversimplified in a paraphrase
How? You failed to explain why you think so.

IBdaMann wrote: necessary context stripped.
Again, how? What is your point? What context is missing?

IBdaMann wrote: mischaracterization.
This again is as useless a statement as "you got it all wrong" without bothering to supply your version of what getting it right is.

gfm7175 wrote:
Amoral means 'without morals'. It means than actions are neither "good" nor "bad", ...
No it's not referring to the result but to the actor. An immoral actor is doing something they know is wrong while a amoral actor isn't considering morals at all. You are confusing the psychological motive of someone doing something with the results of their actions.

A completely senseless murder can be committed by someone who is acting in either an immoral or amoral sensibility.
Edited on 15-12-2020 09:07
15-12-2020 17:56
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9086)
tmiddles wrote:What is your definition of "religious"?

"pertaining to one's theism"

tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:Science is amoral and not immoral.
And we were talking about:

... your stupid assertion that the words "immoral" and "amoral" somehow carry the same meaning.

Just out of curiosity, who did your thinking for you on that one?

tmiddles wrote: Presidents lead with their words

Nope. Presidents carry out their duties, i.e. actions, to serve We the People by executing the laws as set forth by the Legislative branch as specified in the Constitution.

Actions. The Constitution makes no mention of tweets.

Just out of curiosity, who did your thinking for you on that one?

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Amoral means 'without morals'. It means than actions are neither "good" nor "bad", ...
No it's not referring to the result but to the actor.

You really need to bitch-slap the person doing your thinking for you because he's blowing chunks. First you claim both words carry the same meaning but now, rather than admit that you were simply mistaken you are required to double down on your claim of omniscience and defend your nonexistent credibility of always being right.

Immoral: counter to morality (as Into the Night pointed out)
Amoral: not pertaining to morality; lacking any morality component

Asexual: lacking sexuality or any sexuality component
Apolitical: lacking politics or any political component
Atheist: lacking theism or any theism component
Amorphous: lacking form (or structure)
Asynchronous: lacking synchronicity or synchronization, or any need for such
Amoral: lacking any morality component

tmiddles wrote: An immoral actor is doing something they know is wrong while a amoral actor isn't considering morals at all.

You're a moron. When you selected those who would do your thinking for you, you got lemons.

An actor is amoral because his operating environment lacks any morality component upon which he can act (either for or against). A senseless murder is NOT somehow devoid of any morality component and therefore is not amoral but is totally immoral.

Learn English.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-12-2020 22:46
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:What is your definition of "religious"?

"pertaining to one's theism"
Ah so you would not include anything that doesn't include a belief in a "God" or "Gods" ? Your definition of "religion" is simply that it's the same meaning as Deism/Theism?

IBdaMann wrote:your stupid assertion that the words "immoral" and "amoral" somehow carry the same meaning.
Didn't say they were the same I said there was "little" difference in that context.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Presidents lead with their words

Nope. Presidents carry out their duties, i.e. ...tweets.
Trump does tweet a lot. One of his favorite activities. Presidents are the chief diplomats among other duties. It makes a huge difference. Call Nazi's good people, host a screening of BIRTH OF A NATION at the white house as Wilson did. It matters a great deal.

IBdaMann wrote:Immoral: counter to morality (as Into the Night pointed out)
Amoral: not pertaining to morality; lacking any morality component
No those are not the definitions. You've defined the results/actions. Get a dictionary.

IBdaMann wrote:Atheist: lacking theism or any theism component
So bubble gum is atheist?

Your shoes...also atheist shoes.
15-12-2020 23:17
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:What is your definition of "religious"?

"pertaining to one's theism"
Ah so you would not include anything that doesn't include a belief in a "God" or "Gods" ? Your definition of "religion" is simply that it's the same meaning as Deism/Theism?

IBdaMann wrote:your stupid assertion that the words "immoral" and "amoral" somehow carry the same meaning.
Didn't say they were the same I said there was "little" difference in that context.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Presidents lead with their words

Nope. Presidents carry out their duties, i.e. ...tweets.
Trump does tweet a lot. One of his favorite activities. Presidents are the chief diplomats among other duties. It makes a huge difference. Call Nazi's good people, host a screening of BIRTH OF A NATION at the white house as Wilson did. It matters a great deal.

IBdaMann wrote:Immoral: counter to morality (as Into the Night pointed out)
Amoral: not pertaining to morality; lacking any morality component
No those are not the definitions. You've defined the results/actions. Get a dictionary.

IBdaMann wrote:Atheist: lacking theism or any theism component
So bubble gum is atheist?

Your shoes...also atheist shoes.


Random nonsense statements. False authority fallacies. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate why:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact