Ignoring the problems with Kant, I don't see that this helps you.

Also it's a strange argument that music exists independent of the senses when it's defined by our sense of sound.

Aggrad08 said:

---

Ignoring the problems with Kant, I don't see that this helps you.

Also it's a strange argument that music exists independent of the senses when it's defined by our sense of sound.

---

And after taking a Music Appreciation class, one can grow their sense of sound, for example.

Circle back to the point, you are left with the task of proving music or beauty is objective.

This is a hopeless cause, they are literal examples people use when teaching the concept of subjective verse objective

Aggrad08 said:

---

Circle back to the point, you are left with the task of proving music or beauty is objective.

This is a hopeless cause, they are literal examples people use when teaching the concept of subjective verse objective

---

I'll concede that beauty may in some cases be in the eye of the beholder. But there is a reason why attractive men with wealth pick from the cream of the crop, so to speak.

Edit: and I'm fat and a poor

But circling back from trophy wives, there is something different about a good song or an inspiring movie. There is a spiritual realm to it that the atheistic world of materialism can't account for, in my opinion.

That's because these are
transcendental truths and phenomena.

And there has to be a transcendental truth for those born
poor and less attractive to the majority of people.

This is where the Gospel of Christ makes the most sense to a suffering and dying world.

Goodnight

TheGreatEscape said:

---

If we were farmers in east Texas during the depression, then eating squirrels would be tasty.

---

If you've never tried squirrels, they are pretty tasty any time.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

AGC said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

AGC said:

---

I think people who are humble and ignorant ask questions and listen rather than dictate to others or post things like, 'I hope you become an atheist.'

---

I'll respond to the rest of your post, but, out of curiosity . . . what is objectionable about 'I hope you loose your faith in your religion and become an atheist' that doesn't equally apply to 'I hope you find God and become a Christian'?

I actually don't care if he becomes an atheist or not - I posted what I did to make a specific point. . . . and I'm just glad that someone bit.

---

It undermines your argument that you're just a humble guy admitting your ignorance. The only context in which those are equivalent is if what he believes is untrue - because then who cares either way (in which case you prejudice your knowledge and experience over his). If it is true it's a benevolent, kind act even if you don't like it and it's a jerk move to wish ill on him

---

First - being humble and ignorant does not disqualify someone from believing something to be true or that some change is in someone else's best interest.

Now, I'm not actually hoping for him to lose his faith and become an atheist. Certainly not actively, I made the comment to make a point.

We each have our own world views. And to each of us, these world views help us make sense of the world around us, they inform our beliefs and actions, they bring us comfort, they help us live.

According to you, my hoping for him to abandon faith and become an atheist is "a jerk move" and I am "wish[ing] ill on hiim". Those are your words. But, when a Christian says they hope I find God, this is at worst "who cares" and at best a benevolent and kind act. Do you not see the double standard here?

For me to find God and become Christian would require a massive upheaval of who I am. It may very end my marriage and mean my kids would grow up in a broken home. It would change how I interact with my family, my friends. It would mean abandoning a worldview which I find comfort in. Its not a small thing. All of this is NOT why I haven't accepted Christianity. But, these are very much part of the consequences you are wishing for when you wish for me to find Christianity.

I am very much aware that no one actively wishes these hardships on me or my family when they pray for me to find God. Yet, it is, as you have demonstrated, very much assumed to be the motivation when I hope for someone to lose their faith. And I think that is bull***** I'm not certain its bull***** Thats just my opinion.

---

Your belief about worldviews doesn't engage with his completely. You see them as interchangeable, simply one or the other, whatever helps people cope. He sees his as the only true one and that which leads to the best life.

When he wishes such a thing he wishes you the best life. And certainly he wishes that for your family and thinks it possible. To wish him the opposite or different, simply swapping out one battery pack for another, does not come close to having the same good will or intention for him. You cannot offer such good will or happiness, for you have none to offer as the universe is an unknown of chaos and absurdity. Even the best intentioned atheist can only provide that, no?

Or am I missing something?

aggrad02 said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

If we were farmers in east Texas during the depression, then eating squirrels would be tasty.

---

If you've never tried squirrels, they are pretty tasty any time.

---

Actually, it grosses some people out. But I ate them growing up with my pa pa.

AGC said:

---

Your belief about worldviews doesn't engage with his completely. You see them as interchangeable, simply one or the other, whatever helps people cope. He sees his as the only true one and that which leads to the best life.

When he wishes such a thing he wishes you the best life. And certainly he wishes that for your family and thinks it possible. To wish him the opposite or different, simply swapping out one battery pack for another, does not come close to having the same good will or intention for him. You cannot offer such good will or happiness, for you have none to offer as the universe is an unknown of chaos and absurdity. Even the best intentioned atheist can only provide that, no?

Or am I missing something?

---

Ha! Yes, I think so.

I don't go so far as to say my worldview is the 'only true one'. I would say its my best guess. But, that doesn't mean I don't think it leads to the best life. If I felt a different worldview would lead to better results, that is what I would turn to.

Your post clearly assumes there is no possible benefit to secularism and that it is necessarily empty, joyless, and meaningless. I wonder if you've ever known an atheist.

Secular ideologies provide me a pathway for respect, acceptance, and love for other people. My beliefs are compatible with freedom of belief, tolerance, personal autonomy, science, human value, equality, and human rights. I get to love my neighbor without condemning their lifestyle or judge what they worship. I get to be empathetic of other people without the roadblock of dogmas and objective 'truths'.

The idea of loving the sinner and hating the sin is so strange to me. How do you tell someone that their faith is demonic or their love is perverse, but you love them? How do you have friendships with people like that? Or get to know them? Or understand their position? "Hi, your lifestyle is sinful and the result of the devil's influence, I love you. Lets be friends!" Would you want to be friends with someone like that?

I replace the 'magic' of God with the beauty of reality and the wonder of the unknown.

It replaces the safety net of God with personal responsibility. If God isn't going to make it all okay some day, then its up to us to do our best now!

If God has always been part of your life, then a life without God is scary. I went through that when I left the church some 23 ish years ago. And now its absolutely freeing. I'm free to wonder, free to love, free to think, free to imagine. All in a way that I don't think I was permitted to as a Christian.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

AGC said:

---

Your belief about worldviews doesn't engage with his completely. You see them as interchangeable, simply one or the other, whatever helps people cope. He sees his as the only true one and that which leads to the best life.

When he wishes such a thing he wishes you the best life. And certainly he wishes that for your family and thinks it possible. To wish him the opposite or different, simply swapping out one battery pack for another, does not come close to having the same good will or intention for him. You cannot offer such good will or happiness, for you have none to offer as the universe is an unknown of chaos and absurdity. Even the best intentioned atheist can only provide that, no?

Or am I missing something?

---

Ha! Yes, I think so.

I don't go so far as to say my worldview is the 'only true one'. I would say its my best guess. But, that doesn't mean I don't think it leads to the best life. If I felt a different worldview would lead to better results, that is what I would turn to.

Your post clearly assumes there is no possible benefit to secularism and that it is necessarily empty, joyless, and meaningless. I wonder if you've ever known an atheist.

Secular ideologies provide me a pathway for respect, acceptance, and love for other people. My beliefs are compatible with freedom of belief, tolerance, personal autonomy, science, human value, equality, and human rights. I get to love my neighbor without condemning their lifestyle or judge what they worship. I get to be empathetic of other people without the roadblock of dogmas and objective 'truths'.

The idea of loving the sinner and hating the sin is so strange to me. How do you tell someone that their faith is demonic or their love is perverse, but you love them? How do you have friendships with people like that? Or get to know them? Or understand their position? "Hi, your lifestyle is sinful and the result of the devil's influence, I love you. Lets be friends!" Would you want to be friends with someone like that?

I replace the 'magic' of God with the beauty of reality and the wonder of the unknown.

It replaces the safety net of God with personal responsibility. If God isn't going to make it all okay some day, then its up to us to do our best now!

If God has always been part of your life, then a life without God is scary. I went through that when I left the church some 23 ish years ago. And now its absolutely freeing. I'm free to wonder, free to love, free to think, free to imagine. All in a way that I don't think I was permitted to as a Christian.

---

That only works if atheism is an actual belief system with consistent moral teaching and practice. But it's not, thus whatever you, personally, find valuable isn't inherent and can't really be offered as equivalent.

You're a parent. It should be quite easy to love someone and not approve of or discipline them for what they do. But I suppose you could be a bad parent and not know that or do it but I don't think that's the case.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Respectfully, is that a serious post?

---

Did I misunderstand you? I took your response as, secularism allowed you to believe whatever you want, and you in particular chose those values. Obviously you can't call those the 'best' values though because it could lead anywhere (unless it's a system). So it can't claim 'best' at all, it can only claim it leads you where you want to go, which is where you are. 'I hope you wind up where you are' just doesn't have the same ring as best life.

What did I miss?

Also what's wrong with the parenting analogy? Do you hate your children if they wreck your car? Or do you love them anyways. I would argue people who don't know what love is won't get the concept (but that's because loving is willing the good of the other and not oneself).

It all works just fine as long as Christianity is false. That's all iit takes is to want someone to not be misled. I think the odds of Christianity being false are tremendously high. I think not believing this false thing is a benefit and has been to me and others I've known. Being kind towards others would include not wanting them to believe this false thing either.

Aggrad08 said:

---

It all works just fine as long as Christianity is false. That's all iit takes is to want someone to not be misled. I think the odds of Christianity being false are tremendously high. I think not believing this false thing is a benefit and has been to me and others I've known. Being kind towards others would include not wanting them to believe this false thing either.

---

What if it is not false? I am staking my life it is true.

That possibility is why it's not a meanspirited thing for great escape to wish Christianity upon kurt. He's not wrong to wish well from his perspective.

Neither kurt or Great escape are in the wrong here, only AGC's position that kurt wish is of a different nature makes no sense.

Aggrad08 said:

---

It all works just fine as long as Christianity is false. That's all iit takes is to want someone to not be misled. I think the odds of Christianity being false are tremendously high. I think not believing this false thing is a benefit and has been to me and others I've known. Being kind towards others would include not wanting them to believe this false thing either.

---

How does it work? You don't offer truth. You offer 'every other option but that one'. The odds of being false are the same for everything unless you weight the scales towards your personal beliefs and experience (which no one else can have).

Notice again that 'not believe this false thing' is not the same as 'the best'. The value exchange is unequal. An extra fry in my happy meal isn't the best because I could always have two, or a different tou, or two toys, etc.

AGC said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

How does it work? You don't offer truth. You offer 'every other option but that one'. The odds of being false are the same for everything unless you weight the scales towards your personal beliefs and experience (which no one else can have).

---

---

I think your beliefs prove false if you weight the scales toward logically sound and empirically founded beliefs. I never said people can't have personal experiences, I just find these unreliable and most often simply reinforcing whatever faith geography put nearby.

Quote:

---

Notice again that 'not believe this false thing' is not the same as 'the best'. The value exchange is unequal.

---

I don't know that human beings can believe the "best" thing about anything. You'd have to know everything to know what is best. I think we can only believe better and worse things, we can only compare what we know. I think there is excellent thoughtful reason to believe your beliefs are worse.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but it seems a lot of your belief system is based on moral relativism and that there is no absolute truth?

There are no absolute moral truths. But it's true that mice exist, and the earth revolves around the sun, and that 2 and 2 make 4.

The questions of the truth of christianity is an objective one, even if not available for us to absolutely know.

The question of if and when it's ok to lie isn't something the universe has an answer to.

Aggrad08 said:

---

There are no absolute moral truths. But it's true that mice exist, and the earth revolves around the sun, and that 2 and 2 make 4.

The questions of the truth of christianity is an objective one, even if not available for us to absolutely know.

The question of if and when it's ok to lie isn't something the universe has an answer to.

---

Respectfully disagree my friend.

I know, and the objective morality threads have been done many times on this board so my opinion on that is easy to find as well as how I address the common arguments.

1. You have a very kind atheist who gives to the poor and loves his spouse.

2. You have a mean atheist who only a few like because he's just a mean type.

3. You have a Christian who is kind to all and gives to the poor type.

4. You have a Christian who is mean and screams at children for being on his lawn type.

Now which one is living more consistent with his worldview?

And which one is living the most inconsistent with his worldview?

Aggrad08 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

How does it work? You don't offer truth. You offer 'every other option but that one'. The odds of being false are the same for everything unless you weight the scales towards your personal beliefs and experience (which no one else can have).

---

---

I think your beliefs prove false if you weight the scales toward logically sound and empirically founded beliefs. I never said people can't have personal experiences, I just find these unreliable and most often simply reinforcing whatever faith geography put nearby.

Quote:

---

Notice again that 'not believe this false thing' is not the same as 'the best'. The value exchange is unequal.

---

I don't know that human beings can believe the "best" thing about anything. You'd have to know everything to know what is best. I think we can only believe better and worse things, we can only compare what we know. I think there is excellent thoughtful reason to believe your beliefs are worse.

---

Logic and empiricism? With no absolute truth how can these exist? What can they prove? How did you remove your own experience and belief when applying them (seems a bit unfair that your experience tips the scales instead of someone else's)? How do you have enough knowledge to apply them appropriately? How do you know with certainty you're applying them fairly (and not forgetting something or introducing your own bias)? It's fairly circular. All you can say is, 'it's the best I can do as far as I know, not relying on anyone else.'

I think that leads in well to the second part. It's not about believing the best, but wish the best for others. The Christian wishes the best for others which comes only through knowing God. The person who wishes atheism for others doesn't wish the best but merely something else. It's not the same as, 'I want the best for you in life.' There is no equivalent value exchange.

AGC said:

---

Logic and empiricism? With no absolute truth how can these exist? What can they prove? How did you remove your own experience and belief when applying them (seems a bit unfair that your experience tips the scales instead of someone else's)? How do you have enough knowledge to apply them appropriately? How do you know with certainty you're applying them fairly (and not forgetting something or introducing your own bias)? It's fairly circular. All you can say is, 'it's the best I can do as far as I know, not relying on anyone else.'

---

Just because morality is relative doesn't mean there are not objective facts. This is a silly idea. These limitations apply to everyone, believing in Christianity doesn't magically make you an exception. But given the limitations that apply to everyone and the tools we have available I find the Christian arguments fail. And I do rely upon others, just as we all do, I didn't discover the totality of human science and philosophy by myself.

Quote:

---

I think that leads in well to the second part. It's not about believing the best, but wish the best for others. The Christian wishes the best for others which comes only through knowing God. The person who wishes atheism for others doesn't wish the best but merely something else. It's not the same as, 'I want the best for you in life.' There is no equivalent value exchange.

---

This is just circular reasoning within your own worldview that there is no good will towards others outside of god. Once we abandon that premise this argument becomes quite silly.

And the idea of how "nice" the wish is as having bearing on it's value is particularly absurd. I could have some belief that god would create heaven on earth next Thursday and that everyone would find perfect contentment. This is superior to even the best Christian scenario it doesn't make you wishing for someone who believes this to become a Christian a non-equivalent value exchange.

AGC said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Respectfully, is that a serious post?

---

Did I misunderstand you? Yes. I took your response as, secularism allowed you to believe whatever you want I never said that, and you in particular chose those values I never said that. Obviously you can't call those the 'best' values though because it could lead anywhere (unless it's a system)I also never did that. So it can't claim 'best' at all Guess what! never said that, it can only claim it leads you where you want to go Nope, which is where you are Nope. 'I hope you wind up where you are' just doesn't have the same ring as best life. Never said that

What did I miss? 100% of what I said

Also what's wrong with the parenting analogy? Do you hate your children if they wreck your car? Or do you love them anyways. I would argue people who don't know what love is won't get the concept (but that's because loving is willing the good of the other and not oneself).There is a difference between "you made a mistake and wrecked your car, but I love you, lets be friends." and "your religion or your value systems is demonic, but I love you, lets be friends." Do you really think that analogy works?

---

I wasn't sure if your post was serious because you fundamentally misrepresented everything I said. Literally nothing in your last two posts is anything but strawman.

I described my beliefs as best as I could. If you want, lets chalk this up to my poor communication skills and move on.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

1. You have a very kind atheist who gives to the poor and loves his spouse.

2. You have a mean atheist who only a few like because he's just a mean type.

3. You have a Christian who is kind to all and gives to the poor type.

4. You have a Christian who is mean and screams at children for being on his lawn type.

Now which one is living more consistent with his worldview?

And which one is living the most inconsistent with his worldview?

---

I reject the question on the grounds that it is not possible to discern a person's worldview from those labels. Ask a million atheists about morals and get a million answers. Ask a million Christians and get a million answers. I would expect the million Christian answers have less variability. But, I think the objection stands.

AGC said:

---

I think that leads in well to the second part. It's not about believing the best, but wish the best for others. The Christian wishes the best for others which comes only through knowing God. The person who wishes atheism for others doesn't wish the best but merely something else. It's not the same as, 'I want the best for you in life.' There is no equivalent value exchange.

---

Trying once more -

Your paragraph is written from the perspective of a person that believes in God and that the best is achieved through knowing God. To wish for them anything else is to not wish for the best.

From the perspective of a person who does not believe in God, wishing for them to find God is not equivalent to wishing for them the best. Wishing for them to be free of a religion might be equivalent to wishing them the best.

I believe that through this discussion you have been completely incapable or unwilling to look at the question from a different point of view. In your mind, Christianity is best and atheism is lesser. And so nothing I say makes sense. You have to step out of yourself and look at the question from my point of view. Until you do that, nothing me or Aggrad will make any sense and you'll continue to radically misrepresent our positions.

I understand why you wishing for me to find God is well intentioned. You are not able to understand why my wishing for you to find secular philosophy is equally well intentioned from my point of view. Until you are willing to look from my point of view, this discussion is simply going nowhere.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

AGC said:

---

I think that leads in well to the second part. It's not about believing the best, but wish the best for others. The Christian wishes the best for others which comes only through knowing God. The person who wishes atheism for others doesn't wish the best but merely something else. It's not the same as, 'I want the best for you in life.' There is no equivalent value exchange.

---

Trying once more -

Your paragraph is written from the perspective of a person that believes in God and that the best is achieved through knowing God. To wish for them anything else is to not wish for the best.

From the perspective of a person who does not believe in God, wishing for them to find God is not equivalent to wishing for them the best. Wishing for them to be free of a religion might be equivalent to wishing them the best.

I believe that through this discussion you have been completely incapable or unwilling to look at the question from a different point of view. In your mind, Christianity is best and atheism is lesser. And so nothing I say makes sense. You have to step out of yourself and look at the question from my point of view. Until you do that, nothing me or Aggrad will make any sense and you'll continue to radically misrepresent our positions.

I understand why you wishing for me to find God is well intentioned. You are not able to understand why my wishing for you to find secular philosophy is equally well intentioned from my point of view. Until you are willing to look from my point of view, this discussion is simply going nowhere.

---

The bottom line is one of us is wrong.

I understand completely how you came to your view. I tried it myself. I disagree with it.

I'll come back to this.

We can both be wrong.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

We can both be wrong.

---

Actually we can not my friend. That is what is wrong in my opinion with moral relativism. Either Jesus Christ is who he said he is or he is a lunatic.

Maybe the Jews are right

Aggrad08 said:

---

Maybe the Jews are right

---

They will all be saved according to Paul. Which is great. Love my Jewish friends.

dermdoc said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

We can both be wrong.

---

Actually we can not my friend. That is what is wrong in my opinion with moral relativism. Either Jesus Christ is who he said he is or he is a lunatic.

---

In the scenario where Jesus is not who he says he is, I don't think that makes me right.