Thus the absence of moral accountability from the philosophy of naturalism makes an ethic of compassion and self-sacrifice a hollow abstraction. The words remain, but their meaning is gone. Some action, say, incest, may not be biologically or socially advantageous and so in the course of human evolution has become taboo; but there is on the atheistic view nothing really wrong about committing incest.
Are the values we hold dear and guide our lives by mere social conventions akin to driving on the left versus right side of the road or mere expressions of personal preference akin to having a taste for certain foods or not. The objective worthlessness of human beings on a naturalistic world view is underscored by two implications of that world view: That means that an atrocity like the Holocaust was really morally indifferent.
The question is not: Joe Biden could have been President but he said no. If God does not exist, then it is plausible to think that there are no objective moral values, that we have no moral duties, and that there is no moral accountability for how we live and act.
The reasoning of Ruse is at worst a text-book example of the genetic fallacy and at best only proves that our subjective perception of objective moral values has evolved.
God's own holy and perfectly good nature supplies the absolute standard against which all actions and decisions are measured. Mankind has never seen such a hell. It was a good speech. The horror of such a morally neutral world is obvious. The picture I have painted for you is not a pleasant one.
It does not matter what values you choose--for there is no right and wrong; good and evil do not exist. Or are we in some way held accountable for our moral decisions and actions. Pure practical reason, even with a good knowledge of the facts, will not take you to morality. There is no personal agent who freely decides to do something.
This is borne out by comparisons of countries by the level of economic freedom and level of prosperity and development. The United States, self-billed as the greatest country in the world, is lead by Donald Trump, a man whose shown no interest in public service but instead largely used his time to-date for his own self-interest.
The idea behind socialist thinking is that the governing authorities and their elite advisers know what is best for the common good and can impose that vision on the populace. By contrast, naturalism fails in all three respects. I think it speaks to two fundamental problems with our system right now: Morality is a biological adaptation no less than are hands and feet and teeth.
Naturalists are typically materialists or physicalists, who regard man as a purely animal organism. First, if God exists, objective moral values exist.
But then what source is there for moral obligation. This view is that the rights of any individual are subordinate to the good of the many. Leave me a comment.
Her biggest individual claim to fame, politically speaking, seemed to be losing to Barack Obama in Far from being arbitrary, these commands flow necessarily from His moral nature.
God's moral nature is what Plato called the "Good. The Republicans offered up: Finally, take the problem of moral accountability.
For while those of us who are Christian theists undoubtedly find in God a source of moral strength and resolve which enables us to live lives that are better than those we should live without Him, nevertheless it would seem arrogant and ignorant to claim that those who do not share a belief in God do not often live good moral lives--indeed, embarrassingly, lives that sometimes put our own to shame.
We could have just as easily elected Pat Sajak. But something can be owed only to some person or persons. He feels the powerful pressure of instinct pushing him towards this self-destruction. The best answer to the question as to the source of moral obligation is that moral rightness or wrongness consists in agreement or disagreement with the will or commands of a holy, loving God.
Or again, the question is not:. May 27, · no good deed goes unpunished Beneficial actions often go unappreciated or are met with outright hostility. If they are appreciated, they often lead to. It does not matter what values you choose--for there is no right and wrong; good and evil do not exist.
That means that an atrocity like the Holocaust was really morally indifferent. You may think that it was wrong, but your opinion has no more validity than that of the Nazi war criminal who thought it was good.
2 Replies to “Why does no one good want to be President of the United States?” Albert Algera says: May 15, at am. Totally agree. Who wants to put themselves through so much abuse.
But I digress – the question is “Why does no one good want to be President of the United States?” And the answer is – “I have not a. 90% of the time, speakers of English use just 7, words in speech and writing.
These words appear in red, and are graded with stars.
One-star words are frequent, two-star words are more frequent, and three-star words are the most frequent. To not improve (something) or have no beneficial effect. You can get mad at me if you like, but it will do no good.
Unfortunately, it seems the. William Elliott Whitmore Does Me No Good Lyrics. Does Me No Good lyrics performed by William Elliott Whitmore: Can I forgive my past transgressions Can I .It does no good to be