Faith and Science - CAP Chaplain Video

[LSThiker]

Almost there...."positively...negatively" affects conscious beings.  You are trading "right and wrong" for "positive and negative" with out really defining anything.  Also why go out of your way to say "conscious beings".  It is the members of the society.  "others" don't fall into the society.   Having said that....we can and do expand our definition of society all the time.

Yes, without truly defining right/wrong/positive/negative.  However, I said conscious beings as some people have tried to argue that it also applies to dead people and/or pets.  So I have learned over time.

An objective standard...is moral or immoral in all circumstances and all societies.

No that is moral absolutism.

Then objectivism is a complete waste of time and has null value.   A man alone on an island is neither moral nor immoral.  With out society moral questions are null.  I guess then I am a Conventional Relativist.   By my definition of what morals are....they are the codes set up by society that improve their changes to survive.

Well how can a man alone on an island act in any moral or immoral manners?  Your example is rather an exception than anything else. 

Again, by your definition, that is moral objectivism.  Moral relativism would mean that the codes are what society thinks but does not necessarily improve chances of survival.  A society can say "murder is moral" but that would not improve chances of survival.  According to moral relativism, then murder is moral because society says it is.  Another society says, murder is okay only if X applies.  Another society says murder is immoral in all circumstances.  As a result, no one society is any more moral or immoral as the society thinks it is a moral decision.

[Eclipse]

A society can say "murder is moral" but that would not improve chances of survival.

Unless you're turning people into Soylent Green.

[LSThiker]

Yep.

Who lives?  Baby Adolf or Adult Mother Teresa?

Makes for a great coffee-house argument, does not belong at a unit meeting after the Safety brief and before PT.
It might not be the best way, but it's definitely in the top 5 of getting people to quit CAP, especially cadets when
their parents get wind of it.

Very true.  I would never allow this conversation as a formal discussion at a CAP meeting.  Coffee-house (CAPTalk) sure.

Unless you're turning people into Soylent Green.

Mental note, buy stock in Soylent Green

[lordmonar]

Almost there...."positively...negatively" affects conscious beings.  You are trading "right and wrong" for "positive and negative" with out really defining anything.  Also why go out of your way to say "conscious beings".  It is the members of the society.  "others" don't fall into the society.   Having said that....we can and do expand our definition of society all the time.

Yes, without truly defining right/wrong/positive/negative.  However, I said conscious beings as some people have tried to argue that it also applies to dead people and/or pets.  So I have learned over time.

Well that's why I brought it up...conscious beings does include pets...

An objective standard...is moral or immoral in all circumstances and all societies.

No that is moral absolutism.

Then objectivism is a complete waste of time and has null value.   A man alone on an island is neither moral nor immoral.  With out society moral questions are null.  I guess then I am a Conventional Relativist.   By my definition of what morals are....they are the codes set up by society that improve their changes to survive.

Well how can a man alone on an island act in any moral or immoral manners?  Your example is rather an exception than anything else.

It frames the context in which morals play.   With out society there are no morals.

Again, by your definition, that is moral objectivism.  Moral relativism would mean that the codes are what society thinks but does not necessarily improve chances of survival.  A society can say "murder is moral" but that would not improve chances of survival.

If by murder you mean killing another human being....sure it can...does it all the time.  In time of war we murder the enemy before they murder us.  We murder dangerous member of our society to protect the rest of society.  In the life boat dilemma...sometimes the weak and sick are sacrificed for the good of society.

According to moral relativism, then murder is moral because society says it is.  Another society says, murder is okay only if X applies.  Another society says murder is immoral in all circumstances.  As a result, no one society is any more moral or immoral as the society thinks it is a moral decision.

Exactly. 

[LSThiker]

Well that's why I brought it up...conscious beings does include pets...

That depends on what your definition of consciousness is and how you measure it for animals.  Needless to say, the opinions and beliefs are not settled. 

It frames the context in which morals play.   With out society there are no morals.

Not necessarily.  A person alone on an island would have little to no chance of performing an act that would be considered immoral or moral.  If he is not able to perform an act, that does not mean that morals do not exist.  For example, it would be extremely difficult to commit rape if he is alone.  But to say that because he is alone rape cannot be considered moral or immoral is a false conclusion. 

If by murder you mean killing another human being....sure it can...does it all the time.  In time of war we murder the enemy before they murder us.  We murder dangerous member of our society to protect the rest of society.  In the life boat dilemma...sometimes the weak and sick are sacrificed for the good of society.

No by murder I mean the premeditation of killing another human in an act of violence, malice, or rage.  This would not include self protection or the act of survival.

According to moral relativism, then murder is moral because society says it is.  Another society says, murder is okay only if X applies.  Another society says murder is immoral in all circumstances.  As a result, no one society is any more moral or immoral as the society thinks it is a moral decision.

Exactly.

Yes but that means moral relativism does not necessarily result in the betterment of society.  If your definition of morality is "the set of standard a society sets to improve the chances of survival of that society. ", then moral relativism is not correct because those standards set by society does not necessarily improve your chances of survival of that society.

[lordmonar]

Then you change them. 

[Al Sayre]

I put it here because the video talked about teaching AE to cadets...

Yes, but the discussion stopped being relevant to Cadet Programs after Reply #32.

Not really, but we could always discuss what kind of uniform to wear when having a philosophical discussion about uniforms...

[THRAWN]

A society can say "murder is moral" but that would not improve chances of survival.

Unless you're turning people into Soylent Green.

Wait, Soylent Green is people?!!? This whole discussion has been covered by the Simpsons in quite a few episodes. Remember Fat Tony and his question of "Say your family don't like bread...say they like...cigarettes...."? There is no right and wrong in this topic. Only adherence to societal norms and acceptable behavior.

When did it become non-Cadet Programmy to discuss morality in leadership?

[AirAux]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?  Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?  Is it all relative?  Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.  In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?  Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?  Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.  Is this a good thing?  Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?  Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.  Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?  Who is the most tolerant group in the World?  Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.  So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?  Is that faith any better than Christian faith?  Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?  Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain?? 

[LSThiker]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?

If it is for the betterment of the society and has a positive impact on the human race, then perhaps it is.  However, it is hard to judge that "scenario" against an objective stance as well it is lacking any real information.  To answer your bait question, I do not know in this context.

Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?

No.  Rather it was Greek philosophers that said the world was flat, initially.  The concept of a round Earth dates back to 6 century BC and was proposed by Greek philosophers. I think also around this time, scholars in Mesopotamia were also coming to the conclusion the Earth was round.  The round Earth idea did not become popular until the Hellenistic period when mathematics demonstrated a round Earth.  I would suggest you read up on the "Myth of the Flat Earth" because the truth is not what is taught in schools.  Even during the Middle Ages, no one though the Earth was flat.

In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?

Let us ask the ancient Greeks how permanent Zeus was?  Or the Vikings on Thor?  Or any number of other gods and goddesses. 

Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?

Not going to answer that question on this forum.  Regardless, I think you and I can find examples to support our opinions so it is rather pointless to even try.

Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.

Since I reject the concept of a god, I also reject the concept of a satan.  Therefore, no it is not possible.  However, to address this you would first need to define god and satan and demonstrate they exist.

Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?

I would rather have a good neighbor regardless of religion.  I would not want a radical Christian neighbor any more than a radical Muslim neighbor any more than a radical Jewish neighbor any more than a radical Communist neighbor any more than a radical Republican any more than a radical, well I think you get the point.

Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.

Everyone makes demands on others.  That is how society, and quite frankly humanity, works.  As far as tolerance, well that is a subjective point of view and an opinion.  I am sure the Muslims would disagree as would Jews as well just about any one else.

Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.

See my point about science and "proving".  However, using evidence we have a strong rationale, which has culminated into a strong theory, of the Big Bang event.

if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?

No because faith by definition is belief without proof or evidence.  The acceptance of the Big Bang Theory is based on evidence, which would be the exact opposite of faith.  This would like saying that the Germ Theory is accepted based on faith.  This just is not true. 

[Майор Хаткевич]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?  Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?  Is it all relative?  Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.  In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?  Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?  Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.  Is this a good thing?  Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?  Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.  Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?  Who is the most tolerant group in the World?  Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.  So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?  Is that faith any better than Christian faith?  Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?  Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain??

I was about to have a huge response...then I realized I can't take that seriously.

[Eclipse]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?  Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?  Is it all relative?  Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.  In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?  Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?  Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.  Is this a good thing?  Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?  Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.  Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?  Who is the most tolerant group in the World?  Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.  So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?  Is that faith any better than Christian faith?  Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?  Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain??

This paragraph is why CAP needs to get out of the conversation ALTOGETHER, on ANY LEVEL. 

Period.

[Майор Хаткевич]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?  Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?  Is it all relative?  Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.  In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?  Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?  Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.  Is this a good thing?  Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?  Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.  Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?  Who is the most tolerant group in the World?  Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.  So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?  Is that faith any better than Christian faith?  Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?  Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain??

This paragraph is why CAP needs to get out of the conversation ALTOGETHER, on ANY LEVEL. 

Period.

It seems to me to be a tongue in cheek type of response. I'm keeping faith, in the absense of evidence that I'm right.

[THRAWN]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?  Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?  Is it all relative?  Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.  In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?  Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?  Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.  Is this a good thing?  Would you rahter have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?  Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.  Even the atheists make demands on others.  Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?  Who is the most tolerant group in the World?  Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.  So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?  Is that faith any better than Christian faith?  Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?  Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain??

As a Pastafarian, I disagree with the above message.

[lordmonar]

So, is it moral to kill unborn infants?

Depends

Also, regarding science, didn't scientist once teach us that the world was flat?

Yes.  But when scientists test they're hypothisis and it no longer fits the facts...they change it.

Is it all relative?

yes.  Your frame of reference determines your place in the space-time continuem.

Perhaps that is why we search for a permanence to hold onto.

Humans are a curious animal.  We seek answers.

In this day and age, is anything more permanent than GOD?

Which one?  History is littered with the debris of forgotten gods.

Are we a better society since we have drifted away from God?

I would suggest we are a better society BECAUSE we have drifted away from god.

Have we drifted or is it possible that there is a Satan and his influence is stronger the weaker the influence of God is.

If there is a God and a Satan....then Satan is working with God's consent.

Is this a good thing?

Null statment

Would you rather have a good Christian neighbor than a radical Muslim neighbor?

False dicotomy.  I would rather have a good neighbor.

Who is the most tolerant in the world?  Is it the Christians?  Of course.

I would have to throw the BS flag on this one.

Even the atheists make demands on others.

Demands like "please stop making us pray in school" and "please stop telling us fairy tails in science class".

Are our morals stronger and better because we are Christians?

In my experience no.

Who is the most tolerant group in the World?

In my experience....I would say the Buddhists.

Oh, and by the way, using the Scientific Method, no one has ever proven the Big Bang Theory.

Absolutely false!

So, if one believes in the Big Bang Theory, are they not basing that belief on faith?

No we are basing our belief on science.

Is that faith any better than Christian faith?

Null Statement

Does Christian faith do more for the world than any other faith?

I don't know.  Compared to what?

Wait, what, did I just become a  Chaplain??

No....you need a degree first.

[Al Sayre]

The earth is flat:  lim(x,z→0); dy/dx, dz/dx=0   

[ReCAP]

The earth is flat:  lim(x,z→0); dy/dx, dz/dx=0   

Except for very large values of "0"

[Eclipse]

I just now read an article about a little girl who died of treatable diabetes, literally code blue in
front of the family, because her parents believed if they went for medical care it would be a sign of weakness of their faith.

Good luck reconciling that.

[Garibaldi]

Look, the world WAS flat...as far their comprehension went. Then, someone challenged the preconceived notions anand was branded a heretic for challenging the status quo.

The people who believe their kid will be healed without modern medicine will simply say that it was God's will the child died.

People want to seek the easiest solution, to absolve themselves from thinking or doing.

I have a hard time with herd mentality. I have an even harder time with ignorance, stupidity, and blaming or holding others responsible for their follies or hard times instead of accepting responsibility. And that is what religion does. It absolves you from having to take responsibility for your actions. "Oh, it's not my fault. Gods Will."

[ReCAP]

These anti-religion posts seem to be painting with a rather broad brush. 

Some small minority rejects modern medicine for religious reasons, so this proves  ALL religions are irrational and want little girls to die? 

I thought the complaint against religion was that it holds us responsible for our actions and restricts our freedom, not that it absolves us of responsibility?