Random Posts

[Aaaron]

Well people refrain from evil for either reasons of morality or of selfishness.
Which goes to prove that all morality stems from religion (or it isn't actual morality, rather selfishness) that brings us back to the point discussed that atheists can't be moral (or they can't be atheists) how that be brings us back to cursing had yet to be answered.

Let me clarify.  I didn't mean communal organization as in an actual group of people enforcing it.  I meant community structure that was formed as people came to sense what needed to be done - or not done - to create a livable world.  Ideas such as possession, value of life, not paining others, actually helping others, and more.  Once they were established as beneficial and leading to a more stable living environment, they get passed down for eons and it becomes innately right or wrong within those communities. 

Most people would agree that they feel stealing is innately wrong.  Or murder.  Or rape.  It's only people that feel the need to incorporate religion into morality for some reason that disagree.

Or if it makes you happier, drop the word morality and refer to it as innate wrongness/rightness.

[aygart]

Let me clarify.  I didn't mean communal organization as in an actual group of people enforcing it.  I meant community structure that was formed as people came to sense what needed to be done - or not done - to create a livable world.  Ideas such as possession, value of life, not paining others, actually helping others, and more.  Once they were established as beneficial and leading to a more stable living environment, they get passed down for eons and it becomes innately right or wrong within those communities. 

Most people would agree that they feel stealing is innately wrong.  Or murder.  Or rape.  It's only people that feel the need to incorporate religion into morality for some reason that disagree.

Or if it makes you happier, drop the word morality and refer to it as innate wrongness/rightness.

The person who is starving may not feel it is benefiting him.

[Aaaron]

The person who is starving may not feel it is benefiting him.

That's why it's never on an individual level.  Morals aren't per-person; they're communal/societal/cultural.

[wayfe]

Let me clarify.  I didn't mean communal organization as in an actual group of people enforcing it.  I meant community structure that was formed as people came to sense what needed to be done - or not done - to create a livable world.  Ideas such as possession, value of life, not paining others, actually helping others, and more.  Once they were established as beneficial and leading to a more stable living environment, they get passed down for eons and it becomes innately right or wrong within those communities.

You've just disproven the "inateness" of right or wrong. Innate means inborn, or in this case good in and of itself. Not for any other reason, not because it benefits society or harms it.

[Aaaron]

You've just disproven the "inateness" of right or wrong. Innate means inborn, or in this case good in and of itself. Not for any other reason, not because it benefits society or harms it.

No I didn't.  I may have said it hasn't always been innate but I believe it's currently innate in most people.

[aygart]

That's why it's never on an individual level.  Morals aren't per-person; they're communal/societal/cultural.

So when a society feeels they should be genocidal that would be moral?

[wayfe]

No I didn't.  I may have said it hasn't always been innate but I believe it's currently innate in most people.

Things can't become innate. That's a contradictory statement. It's either inborn or acquired

[Aaaron]

So when a society feeels they should be genocidal that would be moral?

Quite possibly.  Did the Nazis think they were immoral? 


Also, I hope you're not suggesting that genocide is inherently immoral as Hashem prescribes for it. 

[Aaaron]

Things can't become innate. That's a contradictory statement. It's either inborn or acquired

Semantics.  The thing can't itself become innate.  But it can be innate in me. 

[wayfe]

So when a society feeels they should be genocidal that would be moral?

Case in point

History is sometimes called G‑d’s laboratory. We can’t replicate the experiments, but we can go back and see what happened. Democracy, it turns out, was an experiment that failed. We have that the admittance of the Hellenist historian, Polybus, who coined the term “ochlacratia” meaning mob rule. In more recent times, it was a democratic republic that was responsible for the horrors of the Reign of Terror in post-revolution France. It was the “will of the people” that produced the Salem Witch Trials in America. It was a democratic election that brought the Third Reich to power in Germany, as well as the terrorist Hamas regime in Gaza. I’m sorry to put a wet blanket on the world’s enthusiasm over the current wave of uprisings in the Middle East, but the facts remain: Democracy has often been a prelude to the worst forms of dictatorship.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1493834/jewish/Is-Democracy-Jewish.htm

[Aaaron]

So... to you folks, is genocide immoral?

[wayfe]

Semantics.  The thing can't itself become innate.  But it can be innate in me.

If it wasn't innate to society why would it be innate to you?

[aygart]

So... to you folks, is genocide immoral?

Unless explicitly called for by God then yes because God forbids it.

[wayfe]

So... to you folks, is genocide immoral?

Yes, because G-d forbids killing.

But when he commands us to eradicate Amalek, it absolutely moral

[Aaaron]

If it wasn't innate to society why would it be innate to you?

Fine.  The thing itself was not always innate, but it's currently innate to society at large. 

Unless explicitly called for by God then yes because God forbids it.

Cop out answer.  Genocide is one thing that most people should be able to say is either immoral or not.  "It depends?"  So sometimes it's moral and sometimes not?

Yes, because G-d forbids killing.

But when he commands us to eradicate Amalek, it absolutely moral

How does that work?  The immorality is lifted temporarily?  Was it never immoral?

[wayfe]

Fine.  The thing itself was not always innate, but it's currently innate to society at large. 

You mean accepted by society at large. That means absolutely nothing

Cop out answer.  Genocide is one thing that most people should be able to say is either immoral or not.  "It depends?"  So sometimes it's moral and sometimes not?

Exactly. That's the crux of it. Morality depends on G-d's commandments. Not on what seems nice or ethical or right in our flawed human mind

How does that work?  The immorality is lifted temporarily?  Was it never immoral?

Since it is not immoral in and of itself, the morality doesn't need to be "temporarily lifted". When G-d pronounces it immoral it is immoral.

But let me ask you this: If G-d would have created a Torah where it was a Mitzvah to kill innocent people- would you? Would you consider yourself immoral?

[aygart]

Cop out answer.  Genocide is one thing that most people should be able to say is either immoral or not.  "It depends?"  So sometimes it's moral and sometimes not?

How does that work?  The immorality is lifted temporarily?  Was it never immoral?

That the torah commands genocide in certain cases was not arbitrary

[Aaaron]

You mean accepted by society at large. That means absolutely nothing

You lost me.  Why doesn't the fact that society has developed an innate feeling of "murder is wrong" make it immoral?

Exactly. That's the crux of it. Morality depends on G-d's commandments. Not on what seems nice or ethical or right in our flawed human mind
Since it is not immoral in and of itself, the morality doesn't need to be "temporarily lifted". When G-d pronounces it immoral it is immoral.

But let me ask you this: If G-d would have created a Torah where it was a Mitzvah to kill innocent people- would you? Would you consider yourself immoral?

Back up one second.  So now murder isn't immoral?  Do you see the pretzel you're twisting yourself into to try to convince yourself that morality requires religion.

[David Smith]

I believe that philosophically, the concept of altruism and morals stems from belief in a higher purpose, but I'm not getting involved in that.

[hvaces42]

So are saying that Yeshu has nothing to do with Jesus?

Did Jesus exist? We dont know. Who the New Testament claims was Jesus is an amalgam of stories from Tanach and possibly the person described as Yeshu in the Gemara. The one from the Gemara cannot be the same one that they claim because, as stated here the dates dont match. And the New Testament was only compiled 150 years after Jesus, if he existed, lived.