Ken: If right and wrong is in our own consciences, and moral standards are universally recognized, wouldn’t that mean everybody is capable of determining right and wrong on their own?
Of DETERMINING it? No! God's basic moral standards / our sense of basic right and wrong have been inherently given to everyone - we do not DETERMINE God's universally given moral standards. As for understanding them, yes!
I didn’t ask if we are able to determine God’s moral standards, I asked if we were able to determine the difference between right behavior vs wrong behavior.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:
And no, there isn't really any scientific or evolutionary explanation for it since, well, IF the driving force for life is procreation and reproduction ( which according to evolutionary biology, it is) then the ONLY notion of right and wrong that we SHOULD have is that it is right to procreate ( no matter HOW it is done) and wrong NOT to procreate.
Evolutionary Biology has nothing to do with morality.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:
And no, there isn't really any scientific or evolutionary explanation for it since, well, IF the driving force for life is procreation and reproduction ( which according to evolutionary biology, it is) then the ONLY notion of right and wrong that we SHOULD have is that it is right to procreate ( no matter HOW it is done) and wrong NOT to procreate.
Evolutionary Biology has nothing to do with morality.
Ken
Correct.
Regardless how much Sam Harris and others like him, would like to think so.
PaulSacramento wrote:
And no, there isn't really any scientific or evolutionary explanation for it since, well, IF the driving force for life is procreation and reproduction ( which according to evolutionary biology, it is) then the ONLY notion of right and wrong that we SHOULD have is that it is right to procreate ( no matter HOW it is done) and wrong NOT to procreate.
Evolutionary Biology has nothing to do with morality.
Ken
Correct.
Regardless how much Sam Harris and others like him, would like to think so.
Sam Harris and others like him do not make up the rules. They can be as wrong as anybody else.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Hortator wrote:Have you guys covered the "polyamory" definition yet? Polyamory is basically the re-branding of open-relationships in modern times.
(think about what polyamory means, poly-many or much, amor- love. The more love the better,right?)
I'm not sure as to what extent polyamory has been accepted as an official term yet, but my auto correct seems to recognize it.
On other websites, polyamory will be referred to as cuckholdery. Which I can't argue with.
I think the difference between polyamory and polygamy, is polyamory is just playing the field, where as polygamy is illegally getting married to more than one person
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote:Polygamy is from The Devil.
How do I know this?
Only The Devil would convince males that having MORE than ONE woman to deal with is a good idea !
This is a philosophical part of the forum. Mind keeping such comments out of here?
RickD wrote:
Kenny wrote:
If right and wrong is in our own consciences, and moral standards are universally recognized, wouldn’t that mean everybody is capable of determining right and wrong on their own?
Kenny,
You still misunderstand what you failed to grasp when you first came to this board.
Ontology vs Epistemology.
Mind elaborating on this, Rick? I know what both are, but I fail to see how those are connected to what Ken is saying. Explain, please.
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me.
PaulSacramento wrote:Polygamy is from The Devil.
How do I know this?
Only The Devil would convince males that having MORE than ONE woman to deal with is a good idea !
This is a philosophical part of the forum. Mind keeping such comments out of here?
RickD wrote:
Kenny wrote:
If right and wrong is in our own consciences, and moral standards are universally recognized, wouldn’t that mean everybody is capable of determining right and wrong on their own?
Kenny,
You still misunderstand what you failed to grasp when you first came to this board.
Ontology vs Epistemology.
Mind elaborating on this, Rick? I know what both are, but I fail to see how those are connected to what Ken is saying. Explain, please.
Simply that Kenny doesn't understand the difference. It goes back to some conversations that I, and others have had with him. It came up a lot when objective morality was the topic.
John 5:24 24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
It seems a growing number of adults are practising polygamy. Many adults state that we all love each other and it works for us. About half million. However, the children in these relationships don't want to practice polygamy
