| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kn1ghtjp Observer
Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
not based on reason but faith? ^_^
postmodernism influence again eh? Do you define "faith" as something unreasonable? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Celebrei Participant
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 Posts: 50
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Reason has no place in faith, only axioms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kn1ghtjp Observer
Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Sat Dec 23, 2006 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
You do not think it reasonable to believe in God, given that God exists?
Axioms are the foundation of logic. Without axioms, there can be no logic. All 'reasonable conclusions' are also based on axioms. Without axioms, there can be no conclusions. What makes 'faith' so different? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Celebrei Participant
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 Posts: 50
|
Posted: Sat Dec 23, 2006 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| In logic and mathematics, axioms are not considered self-evident, however epistemologically, it is self-evident, it Is taken for granted as valid,such is the case in faith. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ischaramoochie Praesidium Fora

Joined: 23 Jul 2006 Posts: 186 Location: The Empyrean
|
Posted: Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
actually, axioms are self-evident within the logical system they are used. _________________ "The grandeur of a philosophy does not certify its truth."
-M. Cooley
...Veritas? Quid est Veritas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kn1ghtjp Observer
Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Sun Dec 24, 2006 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| that's true even in the logical system of 'faith'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Celebrei Participant
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 Posts: 50
|
Posted: Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hmmm... I always thought that in Logic and Math axioms are not necessarily self-evident truth, but rather formal logical expressions used in deductions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kn1ghtjp Observer
Joined: 06 Dec 2006 Posts: 27
|
Posted: Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| you cannot even create a formal logical expression without taking certain axioms 'in faith' |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rickym Brute
Joined: 12 Aug 2006 Posts: 7
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hi guys, i'll try this place, kinda got sick of pinoyexchange. hay naku.
anyway answering the question if morality is subjective or objective.
i'm assuming that moral is good and immoral is bad. society usually defines morality. but i will assume the real question is if there really an absolute good and bad or is all good and bad subjective.
being an atheist. i believe that morality was propagated not because it is good in the sense that it will help someone and bad is it is bad for the general public.
i remember reading a belief system stating that sin is not about good and bad, sin is about ignorance. and you commit sin if you are ignorant of the 'law'.
i believe that there is this universal law which science will soon find out. it is the law of cause and effect, similar to karma. god didn't create it. it has been there from the beginning. it is hardwired into nature. it's just that science hasn't exactly discovered it since it exists in other dimensions.
the most basic law is 'what you do to others is what will happen to yourself.' as you will notice it seems quite self serving. because you are good since good will come back to you. and if you know the law you have good karma, if you don't tough luck. so sin is nothing but ignorance of the law.
now how does this happen. everyone is connected to each other. and when you wish something, anything for that matter the energy releases whether the thing has been done or not. and your thought will attract the consequence. if you wish something for someone else, since everyone is connected, that wish should also be applicable to you, that's why you get the same karma. you of course will resist it, putting stress on your energy field.
all of this will occur without a god. i believe the buddhists believe in something similarly.
this kind of karma to me is absolute.
other morality is actually relative depending on the evolution of the person. a person who can have multiple sexual partners without lying can be considered moral. while a person who has only 2 sexual partners or even masturbates but can't think of anything else but sex and is unproductive can be considered immoral.
so i feel this good and bad stuff is, just that, no god. if its good, it goes with nature, if its bad, it goes against the laws of nature.
if you look at it that way, there is really so much to do and still be considered good, things which these fundamentalists wouldn't even dream of doing. tough luck, only a few will enjoy life to the fullest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ischaramoochie Praesidium Fora

Joined: 23 Jul 2006 Posts: 186 Location: The Empyrean
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sick of PEx...
that's not too surprising. with the general quality of posts there these days, i don't even want to go beyond the RoT index. anyway, i'm far too busy to engage anyone in a discussion right now. please feel free to invite other regulars though, this place might liven up just yet. _________________ "The grandeur of a philosophy does not certify its truth."
-M. Cooley
...Veritas? Quid est Veritas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|