Yes, your definition of "logical consistency" is an impossible standard, and
one that your own beliefs cannot meet. Indeed, it's one that *no* logical
argument can ever meet.
Let me provide a quick rundown. I'll make it simple:
1) You claim that humanist morality is "inconsistent" because it is founded
on a subjective assumption (that empathy for others is a good thing).
2) Following from this, you claim that *your* morality is therefore superior,
because it is logically consistent -- provided, of course, that one accepts
God's will.
3) I ask why it is logical to accept God's will.
4) You respond "because God makes the rules and he can send you to Hell if you
don't".
Is that what you call a logical argument?
>Every member of the
>discussion, with the inexplicable exception of Pim, has shown you otherwise.
No, others on the group have repeated your assertions, showing that you have
a good chearleeder squad, but that's about it.
>>From the start it has been explained to you that your system of morality
>cannot condemn other people's behavior.
And I've shown how it can, at least as well as yours can.
>Now, out of your own fingertips, you
>have admitted as much.
No, I have not. That is a distortion of my words.
>You appear to believe that atheism is of equal status with theism in the
>"subjectivity" departement. Is that your belief?
Of course it is. I have only pointed that out several dozen times.
>If so, you have not made a positive case.
Yes I have, and I have made it again in this letter. And it is your time
that has come. Provide a logically consistent (by your own standards)
foundation for your morality system, or I'll consider this discussion closed.
>Now your time has come. What
>evidence do you have to give us to support the proposition "God does not
>exist"?
What? Since when does the burden of proof rest on the one who *doesn't*
believe in God?
>Remember, now, it's not a response to say "I don't think there is any
>evidence FOR his existence."
It most certainly is. If you want to prove his existence, you must provide
evidence.
However, it's not even important if God exists. If God exists and thinks
that I should listen to His will over my own empathy for other people, then
it's just not going to happen. Fortunately, however, I don't think that any
God
would make such an unreasonable demand.
>You want to be consistent about applying standards, then go ahead. Make your
>case.
My case has stood for several weeks now. I'm still waiting for yours,
however.
_____________________________________________________________
| Russell Stewart |
| http://www.rt66.com/diamond/ |
|_____________________________________________________________|
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | diamond@rt66.com |
|_____________________________|_______________________________|
2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2.