Who do you think is the worse Christian?

[Kidlicious]

Three examples of double-mindedness here, which is stupidity. I'm not going to respond to all of them, but I will respond to one of them on my desktop when I get home.

[Aeson]

And the winner is ...

[Kidlicious]

You were talking about our beliefs and why we feel guilt. So you were talking about both of us. I'm sure one of us, and very likely both of us are chemically imbalanced. So your claim that you aren't talking about those who are chemically imbalanced is obviously false.



I haven't talked about self-pity. Self-pity is something different than guilt. I have talked about guilt. You are the one who has mentioned self-pity.



No you don't. You can feel guilt simply because of the wrong balance of chemicals in your brain. Guilt is a feeling. It's not an intellectual realization, though it can be sparked by such, or spark such.



Now you are conflating "moral standards" with "moral truths". A moral standard doesn't necessarily have to be a moral truth ... as well demonstrated by mutually opposed moral standards. They can't both be true ... but they are still both moral standards.

This is why your moral standards are what you believe to be moral truths, because you feel guilt for violating them. You can tell people that you don't believe they are truths, but the fact that you feel guilt indicates that you do believe they are truths. It's impossible to feel guilty if you don't believe that the moral standards that you have are truths. Feelings don't lie. Actions may sometimes lie, but feelings don't lie. That's like telling a woman that you don't love her, but she can clearly see that you do. Maybe you really believe that you don't love her, but you also love her.

Why is that important? Because if you're an atheist you believe that society functions better when people are reasonable. Yet double-mindedness is clearly not reason. So it's impossible for you to not believe in moral standards unless you think there is someway that people who aren't psychopaths can not have them.

Consider this a response to JR and loinburger.

[rah]

So if you believe in god you DON't believe that society functions better when people are reasonable?

[Aeson]

This is why your moral standards are what you believe to be moral truths, because you feel guilt for violating them. You can tell people that you don't believe they are truths, but the fact that you feel guilt indicates that you do believe they are truths.

Why would I say my moral standards aren't based on truth? I haven't done so. You're just confused.

Feelings don't lie. Actions may sometimes lie, but feelings don't lie.

Feelings do lie. They lie all the time.

Why is that important? Because if you're an atheist you believe that society functions better when people are reasonable. Yet double-mindedness is clearly not reason. So it's impossible for you to not believe in moral standards unless you think there is someway that people who aren't psychopaths can not have them.

You keep waving around your "moral standards" strawman. No one is saying people don't have moral standards. Or that people don't think their moral standards are worth having. They're just saying they don't necessarily have to have moral standards based on a deity.

[Kidlicious]

So if you believe in god you DON't believe that society functions better when people are reasonable?

I think the only response to this is to say that atheists are stupid.

[rah]

Well since any other response would show how worthless your argument was, I can see why you responded that way.

But aseon is correct that the real issue is

They're just saying they don't necessarily have to have moral standards based on a deity.

God is not necessary.

[Kidlicious]

Aeson, you said that a moral standard doesn't have to be something that you consider truth. I gave you a logical response to that which you haven't responded to logically.

Your feelings are a direct result of your beliefs. As I said it is impossible for you to have a feeling based on a belief that you do not have. So that if you do not believe that your moral standards are true than it is physically impossible for you to feel actual guilt.

If you are a thinking person then you will have a reason for your beliefs.

[loinburger]

Maybe you really believe that you don't love her, but you also love her.

You're insane

[Aeson]

Aeson, you said that a moral standard doesn't have to be something that you consider truth. I gave you a logical response to that which you haven't responded to logically.

You have moral standards. I presume you think they are based on truth. I don't think your moral standards (at least some of them) are based on truth. I have moral standards. I think they are based on truth. You don't think (at least some of) my moral standards are based on truth.

You're just confused about the obvious reality that not everyone's moral standards can be based on truth, and so coming to the absurd conclusion that I don't think my own moral standards are based on truth. Even though I have never said anything to that effect. (I do have beliefs that I intellectually understand are not based on truth, but I do not set my moral standards based on those beliefs.)

Your feelings are a direct result of your beliefs.

No, it's generally (and technically always if you extend "feelings" to all interpretation of stimulus) the other way around.

As I said it is impossible for you to have a feeling based on a belief that you do not have.

No, it is very possible. Drugs are an obvious way in which feelings can be felt which are not based on belief.

So that if you do not believe that your moral standards are true than it is physically impossible for you to feel actual guilt.

That is not true. You could doubt your moral standards and feel guilt for doubting them ... or for not ditching them entirely. As well as the completely detached from logic feelings that are obviously possible.

If you are a thinking person then you will have a reason for your beliefs.

There's a reason for everything. Not all reasons are equally valid though. I find your reasons ... lacking.

[Kidlicious]

You have moral standards. I presume you think they are based on truth. I don't think your moral standards (at least some of them) are based on truth. I have moral standards. I think they are based on truth. You don't think (at least some of) my moral standards are based on truth.

You're just confused about the obvious reality that not everyone's moral standards can be based on truth, and so coming to the absurd conclusion that I don't think my own moral standards are based on truth. Even though I have never said anything to that effect. (I do have beliefs that I intellectually understand are not based on truth, but I do not set my moral standards based on those beliefs.)

Where have I talked about your beliefs being actually true. I said you believe that they are true. Are you so stupid that you can not understand what I am saying.

You believe that your moral standards are true so you feel guilt. Why would you have guilt if you don't believe that you've done anything wrong? That's what I'm saying, and I've been very clear about that.

No, it's generally (and technically always if you extend "feelings" to all interpretation of stimulus) the other way around.



No, it is very possible. Drugs are an obvious way in which feelings can be felt which are not based on belief.

I'm talking about emotions here, specifically guilt. Again, by definition you can not feel guilty unless you believe that you have violated your moral standards. That's what guilt is. Why are you talking about something else again, getting high on drugs etc....?

That is not true. You could doubt your moral standards and feel guilt for doubting them ... or for not ditching them entirely. As well as the completely detached from logic feelings that are obviously possible.

Doubting your moral standards is not the same as not believing your moral standards are true. Your doubt is just going to cause you increase anxiety, but it is not going to prevent you from feeling guilty.

There's a reason for everything. Not all reasons are equally valid though. I find your reasons ... lacking.

And you haven't given a reason why you believe that your moral standards are true. You've only said that it's good for society for people to feel guilt because of these moral standards. That doesn't explain why you think they are true.

[-Jrabbit]

That doesn't explain why you think they are true.

You haven't explained why you think the Bible is true.

[Kidlicious]

You haven't explained why you think the Bible is true.

I think it's true because I believe it. I believe it because of the Holy Spirit.

[rah]

And I believe my morality is the true one because I believe it. *sigh*

If you read the Ancient philosophers and their definition of morality based on utility, while they may mention a soul, it's not the God given soul that we're used to.
Their definitions have nothing to do with God, but are equally valid.

Belief in God is not necessary to have morals.

I respect your desire to not put any thought into it and just accept what you've been told. It's just another method.

[Kidlicious]

And I believe my morality is the true one because I believe it. *sigh*

If you read the Ancient philosophers and their definition of morality based on utility, while they may mention a soul, it's not the God given soul that we're used to.
Their definitions have nothing to do with God, but are equally valid.

Belief in God is not necessary to have morals.

I respect your desire to not put any thought into it and just accept what you've been told. It's just another method.

When it comes down to it utilitarianism isn't something that normal people tend to believe. It's a philosophical argument. But when it comes to the real world only people who lack empathy think like that.