[civil] Whose utility is divine morality trying to maximize?

[Dinner]

Judging by the old testimony God was extremely arbitrary, capricious, and vengeful so it basically he was just an insecure guy who enjoyed ****ing with lesser beings because he enjoyed it. His own enjoyment was what he was trying to maximize.

[Aeson]

Perhaps divine morality is trying to minimize the utility for goth teenagers and paranoid people.

[loinburger]

I was trying to think of a better example than the binding of Isaac for a conflict between secular morality and divine morality, because nowadays if somebody sacrificed their son to God then they'd be unlikely to meet with approval from most Christians (or Jews or Muslims or whoever). Same thing with the rest of the old testament stuff - the stuff on homosexuality being an abomination is an outlier, however that's not strictly a conflict between secular and divine morality given that plenty of secular regimes have also persecuted homosexuals. (I don't know what the deal is with people persecuting homosexuals, but it seems to be something like "I think that butt sex is gross, therefore butt sex is evil" leading to a justification after the fact using the Bible or The Communist Manifesto or whatever.) The rest of the old testament stuff either gets discarded as being no longer applicable (e.g. the proscription on mixed fabrics) or else it's taken to only apply to believers (e.g. nobody is protesting soldiers' funerals with "God hates the uncircumcised" placards, nobody is trying to pass laws for mandatory circumcision, etc). Pretty much everything else that I can think off offhand (e.g. teaching stupid **** in school like Creationism or abstinence only sex education, executing apostates, etc) makes sense from the perspective of maximizing the utility of mankind or else of God's chosen subset of mankind.

[giblets]

I think Stalin persecuted homosexuals because he was trying to increase the birth rate... same reason for banning abortion.

[loinburger]

That should have been a reason for Mao not to persecute homosexuals

[Bereta_Eder]

old communists weren't burgeuois.
they were very progressive in some aspects (gender equality for instance) but quite conservative in others.
Such as homosecuality. I think che had a gay rehabilitation cetner running or something (at least that was a criticism I heard)

I gues it goes with what a "free man" should be. and homosexuality was deemed corrupted or something.

[giblets]

That should have been a reason for Mao not to persecute homosexuals

China's population control policies started after Mao died. Mao thought reproducing should be encouraged.

[Lorizael]

[civil] Whose utility is divine morality trying to maximize?

Theologians. The more convoluted divine morality appears to be, the easier it is for theologians to convince us they're necessary.

[Jon Miller]

A relevant SMBC

http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2569

I really think that my point about relationships rather than happiness is important.

[loinburger]

Utility doesn't necessarily equate to happiness, for example a Libertarian would probably equate utility to freedom

[Lorizael]

Utility doesn't necessarily equate to happiness, for example a Libertarian would probably equate utility to freedom

This is an interesting point that is often lost on people who are especially committed to a particular ideology. A system of morality might be preferable because it is (a) correct or (b) effective. We often assume the two are linked when this might not the be case. With libertarians, for example, their morality is based on some inalienable rights regarding property and all that jazz. Making sure people are free to exercise their rights might be the correct course of action (if you believe that rights have some metaphysical significance), but it does not necessarily follow that upholding rights will make everyone/most people/the average person better off. Most libertarians, however, seem to believe that a maximally free society is both morally correct and better for people.

[Main_Brain]

The old Testament is a Survival Guide for a nomadic-turned-domestic Tribe.

[Bereta_Eder]

Did it work?

[giblets]

No, having God on your side isn't enough if your enemy has iron chariots.

[giblets]

Of course iron chariots would be heavy and horses wouldn't pull them very quickly. Imagine how fierce the enemies of the Israelites would be if they had wooden chariots.