The chicken or the egg?
-
Peace all,
I believe our natural instinct to know right from wrong is limited plus the moral standards are time bound. There are various socieites and cultures in the world and MANY HAVE A DIFFERENT SENSE OF MORAL JUSTICE. Just as an example consider the "death penalty" which is accepted in some parts pf the world, like California, and rejected in others like most European countries. Previous generations sought it alright to marry even sisters and brothers but now this is incorrect. So there goes the natural instinct. Moreover the human being is BIASED TO GET WHAT GOES IN HIS FAVOR. For this reason we need scriptural guidance from GOD telling us exactly what to do as He has calculated each and evrything and so He knows what is best for us. The 2nd thing is to find that Message from GOD. For this wed use the scientific method and apply it to all claimed Divine scriptures available today and then see which sticks out the most. This way we can be sure with technically speaking more than 99.999% of the word of GOD. And as we now have code-19 the probability further increases like say 99.999999%. Note theres a great diff btw 99.999% and 99.999999%, greater than that btw 50% and 90%. I hope i made myself clear. GOD Bless! -
For those who think moarlity is intrinsic, what about sociopaths and misanthropists?
Well, those guys are clearly nuts. ;D
In all honesty, I don't know about those who have mental problems. But my belief that morality is an intrinsic quality is something that I "feel". I believe in my instinct of what is right and wrong, however in addition to that I believe in the scriptures of God's message so that I may be guided to what is right and just.
-
Peace "stitch"
Well, those guys are clearly nuts. ;D
In all honesty, I don't know about those who have mental problems. But my belief that morality is an intrinsic quality is something that I "feel". I believe in my instinct of what is right and wrong, however in addition to that I believe in the scriptures of God's message so that I may be guided to what is right and just.
JK- Relying on feeligns without the scientific method is useless as explained in my above post. GOD Bless!
-
JK- Relying on feeligns without the scientific method is useless as explained in my above post. GOD Bless!
I wouldn't agree that it is "useless". I believe God created us with virtues intact, and that through the honesty to ourselves and submission to our Creator, that our moral radar becomes strong and clear within ourselves. It is only my point of view, God knows the truth of what is in my heart and I am content with that.
Peace,
Stitch
-
peace neo. For those people they have covered up/disregarded/forgotton their intrinsic morality and real function/purpose in life,(because of their free-will and deliberate ignorance.)..Which is to live as peacefully as possible.(islam.) This disregarding is equivelant to the term 'kufr'(covering up the natural truth.) in the quran. Doesnt the quran say we have a natural inclination(fitrah.) to do good?
peace all. -
Peace all,
I believe our natural instinct to know right from wrong is limited plus the moral standards are time bound. There are various socieites and cultures in the world and MANY HAVE A DIFFERENT SENSE OF MORAL JUSTICE. Just as an example consider the "death penalty" which is accepted in some parts pf the world, like California, and rejected in others like most European countries. Previous generations sought it alright to marry even sisters and brothers but now this is incorrect. So there goes the natural instinct. Moreover the human being is BIASED TO GET WHAT GOES IN HIS FAVOR. For this reason we need scriptural guidance from GOD telling us exactly what to do as He has calculated each and evrything and so He knows what is best for us. The 2nd thing is to find that Message from GOD. For this wed use the scientific method and apply it to all claimed Divine scriptures available today and then see which sticks out the most. This way we can be sure with technically speaking more than 99.999% of the word of GOD. And as we now have code-19 the probability further increases like say 99.999999%. Note theres a great diff btw 99.999% and 99.999999%, greater than that btw 50% and 90%. I hope i made myself clear. GOD Bless!-
Your criterea for discerning god's word is entirely subjective and arbitrary. The existence of god does not necessitate that it adheres to the humane doctrine of proof.
-
I agree with you that morality changes over the ages.
Is morality then absolute?
-
-
Peace "enquirer",
peace neo. For those people they have covered up/disregarded/forgotton their intrinsic morality and real function/purpose in life,(because of their free-will and deliberate ignorance.)..Which is to live as peacefully as possible.(islam.) This disregarding is equivelant to the term 'kufr'(covering up the natural truth.) in the quran. Doesnt the quran say we have a natural inclination(fitrah.) to do good?
peace all.JK- I ahvent read anywhere in he Quran that man has an iherited inclination towards good. This is what the sunnis teach. Infact its quite the opposite. Mankind is argumentative by nature, is arrogant and egotistical. Only by studying things carefully through unbiased observation can he become successful and this I believe is the method GOD wants us to use. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "enquirer",
peace neo. For those people they have covered up/disregarded/forgotton their intrinsic morality and real function/purpose in life,(because of their free-will and deliberate ignorance.)..Which is to live as peacefully as possible.(islam.) This disregarding is equivelant to the term 'kufr'(covering up the natural truth.) in the quran. Doesnt the quran say we have a natural inclination(fitrah.) to do good?
peace all.JK- I ahvent read anywhere in he Quran that man has an iherited inclination towards good. This is what the sunnis teach. Infact its quite the opposite. Mankind is argumentative by nature, is arrogant and egotistical. Only by studying things carefully through unbiased observation can he become successful and this I believe is the method GOD wants us to use. GOD Bless!
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
-
Peace "neo",
- Your criterea for discerning god's word is entirely subjective and arbitrary. The existence of god does not necessitate that it adheres to the humane doctrine of proof.
JK- As i said the scientific method is the only logical way. If GOD didnt want us to use the scientific method to find the Truth then i believe He didnt need to create all those complex atoms, no need for such a vast universe with similar heavenly bodies following similar laws allowing us to identify the substances by anaylising the em spectrum. On the contrary He could have just created us with empty bodies which had no heart, cells, brain or other organs. No i believe these things are there to ponder upon. Similar goes for the scriptures. GOD could have sent a scripture for our guidance and we need the scientific method to identify it. Also if we dont use the scientific method then everyone would just have equal probability of being right, be he christian jew hindu sunni shia etc.
- I agree with you that morality changes over the ages.
JK- Ok.
Is morality then absolute?
JK- No i believe its relative. But when a scripture from GOD comes telling us certain laws of which some refer to moraility then those become the standard for the time the scripture has been validated, which in case of the Quran would be till the end of the universe since it claims to be a completion of the Message. Yet the Qurn does NOT contain all laws pertaing to marality BUT, AS I BELIEVE, ONLY THE MOST IMPORTANT WHICH WOULD STAND OUT SIGNIFICANTLY TILL THE END OF THIS UNIVERSE. We can very well define our additional moral laws as long as they dont contradict GOD's Message which i believe to be the Quran. GOD Bless!
-
Johny K
If god is to exist with the attributes listed in the Qur'an it would have to exist outside the scientifically observable universe, so how would you apply the scientific method to something that's beyond the sciences? Also, the scientific method is not the only logical path available to us. In fact, the scientific method is purely inductive whereas a perfect logical method is deductive.
If morality is relative then am I right in killing someone if I believe him to be evil?
-
Peace "neo",
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
JK- First of all evolution or not, it has to be setup by an Intelligent Source prior to our creation. Evolution designing anything doesnt make sense. Things resuting out of evolution is how it should be phrased. I believe in an intelligent and calculated evolution which lead to the rise of the universe, its laws and all things, living or non-living, in it. Now back to the point. You believe we were designed to be sociatal creatures and i agree with that. But we disregarded and became arrogant. Even according to ape-men evos, with whom i disagree on this point, mankind used to be uncivilized and viiolent at a time on earth with which i agree(Quran mentions after Adam and his wife fell from heaven humanity became enemies of each other, disputing, quarelling etc). IT WAS ONLY THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD THAT OUR BECOMING SOCIATAL WAS ACHIEVED, once again. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
I disagree. I think evolution has designed us to be sociatal creatures.
JK- First of all evolution or not, it has to be setup by an Intelligent Source prior to our creation. Evolution designing anything doesnt make sense. Things resuting out of evolution is how it should be phrased. I believe in an intelligent and calculated evolution which lead to the rise of the universe, its laws and all things, living or non-living, in it. Now back to the point. You believe we were designed to be sociatal creatures and i agree with that. But we disregarded and became arrogant. Even according to ape-men evos, with whom i disagree on this point, mankind used to be uncivilized and viiolent at a time on earth with which i agree(Quran mentions after Adam and his wife fell from heaven humanity became enemies of each other, disputing, quarelling etc). IT WAS ONLY THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD THAT OUR BECOMING SOCIATAL WAS ACHIEVED, once again. GOD Bless!
The scientific method isn't really that old, maybe a few centuries? Civilisations existed for a long time prior to that (I think 10,000 BC is the favourite date at the moment.).
And of course I didn't mean evolution designed anything of will, I just didn't want to type all that out ^^. P
-
Peace "neo",
Johny K
If god is to exist with the attributes listed in the Qur'an it would have to exist outside the scientifically observable universe, so how would you apply the scientific method to something that's beyond the sciences?
JK- The important point is that the Quran Itself is testable within the scientific realm. Once t withdtood the test we have high probability in believing in whatever it states. This further justifies our belief in the attributes of GOD mentioned in It as well as particular things in it which are not yet understood or may appear to be absurd relative to us at a particular time period. An example of such a verse would be 2130 which would appear very absurd to people 1000 yrs ago but now has been proved. Infact that was one of the strongest proofs that led me to the conclusion that the Quran is the Word of GOD before the code-19 pattern.
Also, the scientific method is not the only logical path available to us. In fact, the scientific method is purely inductive whereas a perfect logical method is deductive.
JK- This is where mathematics comes in. That is perefectly logical except for the terminlogies which are arbitary and language based. But the essential numerical part and its operations are entirely logical. Hence Dr Rashad Khalifa came up with statistically signifcant mathematical proof of the Quran.
If morality is relative then am I right in killing someone if I believe him to be evil?
JK- According to some cultures this is very well the case. However the scientifc method has shown that this type of behavior leads to destruction of society and human welfare and hence id say its incorrect. Thats why i believe in having proper courts and judgement. In addition to the witnesses i even believe to use lie detectors to further narrow down the probability of false conviction. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
And wait how do you believe in evolution but not ape-man? /
JK- I believe in an intelligent evoltion where man probably first appeared in embryoic form forming from the molecules around in a particular area which met ideal conditions for that to happen, without having to go through inferior ape like creature stages over long periods of time. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "neo",
The scientific method isn't really that old, maybe a few centuries? Civilisations existed for a long time prior to that (I think 10,000 BC is the favourite date at the moment.).
JK- Science means studying things through observation. It doesnt mean one has to have micro & nano technology, cars and aeroplanes in general. And this scientific method was very well applied by thinkers of all time even in the past who separated themselves from the false dogmas which were mostly made by the elite to control the common folk.
And of course I didn't mean evolution designed anything of will, I just didn't want to type all that out ^^.
JK- The phrase "evolution designed..." by itself doesnt make any sense. It should be "as a result of evolution". So you dont believe that the things resulting out of evolution have any ppurpose. Ok i know that many hink like that. As an exmple people in the past didnt understood the function of many organs, declaring them as vestigial while later it was proven that they did have one. For example the pelvis on the whale was declared to be vestigial. Now it is known those are anchor points with little muscles attached to them which allow them to reproduce. This is just one eg. So i believe everything is created for a purpose and it serves its purpose for a particular time including us. GOD Bless!
-
Peace All,
I believe we are born with an empty potential, in perfect peace. I think right/wrong is taught, either from family, friends, or life experiences. A client's son kicked me today. I told him that wasn't nice. But what if I didn't tell him that? He would continue kicking people. And what if no one ever told him it was wrong? He would continue kicking people. Not until he was either told it was wrong, or saw with his own eyes and understanding that kicking people is wrong or harmful, would he stop.
Peace,
Tay -
Johny K
When I say "scientific method" I'm talking in the strictest most modern sense, the proper definition if you will. I don't mean 'sensible thinking' when I say 'scientific method'.
With that in mind, let's continue on
The Qur'an and Scientific Methods
The qur'an is not testable within the scientific realm because its premise cannot be tested - that of the existence of a deity. Therefore the scientific method is inapplicable to the Qur'an. As for 19 - numerical patterns exist in all sorts of works (including phone books!) so that by itself does not lend any credence to the works discussed. Rashid Khalida's 'statistically significant' proof was nothing more than numerology.
Using the scientific method to establish ethical laws is very dangerous. Evolution values the survival of a species over all else. Individualism has no place in evolution, however individualism is the basis of our ethics and morality. If we followd the evolutionary ways, we'd be killing people in the masses - to eliminate the so-called weaknesses in order to better our gene-pool. Obviously we don't do this because it's inhumane.
About Morality
Morality cannot be 'relative'. Morality is first and foremost based on rational thought and rational thought by definition is objective. Saying morality is subjective is like saying "truth is subjective", whereupon you will fall into the nihilist's contradiction. So how does one qualify the various cultures and their various moral standards? I don't know, but I do know this the basis of morality is a simple sentence "do unto others what you want others to do unto you". That I believe is the cogito-ergo-sum of morality and ethics. Starting with that principle it is possible to derive all other moral values.
Other Stuff
As for your ape-man theory what scientific grounds do you have for believing this?
If the scientific method implied studying things through observation then some monkies and apes use the scientific method too, and it's far more than 10,000 years old.
P.s. lie detectors are based on pseudo-scientific principles and cannot be used in a court of law as evidence.