Penn and Teller: BS!

[ScottotD]

 

bravo Sir.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

Not when you ask a question that can only be answered within the presupposition of a metaphysical answer, i.e. that there is a moral absolute standard as set by a divinity

lol, who said i beleive in a divinity.  I know i sure didnt say divinity in my question, as sure as i am that i didnt say an absolute standard either.  I merely said objective. 

Look this is one of the most basic questions in any ethics 101 class.  It has little if anything to do with religion.  The question is simple. Is moraltiy subjective?  It comes with the basic follow-on if it is subjective does it still hold any value?

Metaphysics is something COMPLETELY different.

[pyro]

First things first, so if we don't get a moral code from the Bible... where do we get it?  Oh yeah, there is relativism, which is impractical on a large scale in that it would be prone to rapid abuse (a whole lot more than people abuse the biblical moral code), commits injustice to victims, and would be a beaurecratic nightmare for all the possibilities that have to be logged and then changed.  Penn and Teller, your comments make as much sense if you use the same criteria against the Constitution in that since Thomas Jefferson and the other founders were slave owners that article is unusable as a code of law since that is now against the law.  What happened to taking articles of written work at face value?  Does the Ten Commandments themselves say anything that is not advantageous to law and order?

Way to go, you've managed to do exactly what you claim they did by using one of the most overused and tiresome arguments for religion in your first point.

[Teaflax]

The question is simple. Is moraltiy subjective?  It comes with the basic follow-on if it is subjective does it still hold any value?

Yes. No. So?

Metaphysics is something COMPLETELY different.

Not if you're attempting to make morality an ordained absolute.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

Not if you're attempting to make morality an ordained absolute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

Yes. No. So?

sweet now we are getting somewhere.

I take this to mean YES morality is subjective and NO ethics or morality holds no inherent value. 

Then the conversation takes a different course.  Arguing about what is right what wrong, even what is good and what is bad is pointless and silly.  When you say christian ethics are wrong (or anyone elses) all you really seem to mean is I feel this is wrong.  You might even be able to go as far as "my culture beleives its wrong" but thats as big a claim as you can make.  If its subjective doing things like calling the nazis evil is silly and pointless, CLEARLY they didnt think they were evil. 

[Reductio_ad_absurdum]

I ask where we can go for a moral code besides the Bible because it is the most obvious answer to ask.  As I said in that other derailed thread, it is engrained in man to care for those who depend on them, but what of others beyond this scope?  What moral code do we give ourselves for our enemies who would in effect contradict this natural ethical state?

Yes I am changing how I'm speaking now.  I am ashamed at my stupidity in my earlier responses here.

EDIT:  I argued the penn and tiller episode as best, and in reflection the worst, I could.  I have much to train in my debating. My earlier posts were devoid of any wanting of debate so I became an asshat in responding to criticism raised.

[Sharktopus]

Here's why religion causes so many problems. Mister Christian says that society needs the Bible for a moral code. Mister Jew says we need the Torah. Mister Muslim says we need the Qur'an. Mister Hindu says we need the Vedas. Et cetera. And, even though all those scriptures espouse pretty much the very same moral code - i.e. don't kill people, don't steal their stuff, and generally just be nice to each other - we still end up killing each other, because we can't agree on which book is the Right One. Bottom line? No, we don't need The Bible to tell us how to live - just ask a Hindu. They get along just fine without The Bible.

And my personal opinion? If you need a book or a person to tell you what's right and wrong, then there's somethiong seriously wrong with you.

[MrTorso]

And my personal opinion? If you need a book or a person to tell you what's right and wrong, then there's somethiong seriously wrong with you.

 

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

Mister Christian says that society needs the Bible for a moral code

not really.  This is the common misconception so im not surprised to see this.  However chrisianity is not a code of ethics.  Not really.  Thats the whole point, if it was MERELY a code of ethics it wouldnt be important at all. 

ps this is covered pretty darned well in the first couple chapters of mere christianity, if anyone wishes to read a REAL intellectual man. 

EDIT:  I argued the penn and tiller episode as best, and in reflection the worst, I could.  I have much to train in my debating. My earlier posts were devoid of any wanting of debate so I became an asshat in responding to criticism raised.

thanks for clarifying.  (i mean it)  it too rare that people apologize.  

[Sharktopus]

Mister Christian says that society needs the Bible for a moral code

not really.  This is the common misconception so im not surprised to see this.  However chrisianity is not a code of ethics.  Not really.  Thats the whole point, if it was MERELY a code of ethics it wouldnt be important at all. 

I understand that Christianity, and most religions, are belief systems incorporating, but not limited to, a moral code. However, I've had many a so-called Christian tell me that I am a sinner and will go to Hell simply for not believing Jesus was the son of God, etc... That's pretty much my general problem with Christianity  - the "if you don't believe us you're going to Hell" crap. I love Jesus. He was a smart, cool dude. I happily follow everything he preached up until the "God is my dad" part. And frankly, if I live a good, virtuous life but don't get into Heaven because I didn't get down on my knees and worship God... Well, y'know what? I don't think I want to go there anyway if he's gonna be such a jerk.

[ScottotD]

I ask where we can go for a moral code besides the Bible because it is the most obvious answer to ask.

Choice?

And my personal opinion? If you need a book or a person to tell you what's right and wrong, then there's somethiong seriously wrong with you.

I concur fully.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

And my personal opinion? If you need a book or a person to tell you what's right and wrong, then there's somethiong seriously wrong with you.

since everyone wants to banty this around so much lets REALLY examine it.  Does this mean that people intrinsically know what right and wrong is?  Further is it a genetic thing?

[ScottotD]

To me it means making behavioral decisions based on your own thoughts and ideas is more valid than doing something  because you read it in a book.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

any particular reasoning behind it? 

[ScottotD]

One is a conscious decision based on personal belief on what is right or wrong and acting that way because you feel it's the appropriate way to behave, the other is blindly following a rulebook because you think you'll be punished if you don't and rewarded if you do.