God moves in malicious ways

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

Establishing fundamental clear moral standards, is the morality.
To then merely excuse the very same moral standards, and only because of arbitrary religious contradictions as Ricter suggests, where an imaginary God concept is allowed to trivially ignore them to present a narrative in the style of a terrorist's threat, is not a description of "greater" morality.
Adhering to moral standards IS morality. Not adhering to them is NOT "greater" morality, it is the very definition of immorality.

I thank you.

Sounds like so much obfuscation to me.

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

Sounds like so much obfuscation to me.

Good, in that case it will be clear to any one with half a wit.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from stu:

Good, in that case it will be clear to any one with half a wit.

Well that rules you out.

 

[Ricter]

On the problem of cooperation without kinship and the limits of scientism:

http://www.tnr.com/article/books-an...hteous-mind-haidt-morality-politics-scientism

 

[stu]

Quote from Ricter:
On the problem of cooperation without kinship and the limits of scientism:

http://www.tnr.com/article/books-an...hteous-mind-haidt-morality-politics-scientism

Changing the subject makes no difference.
Established morality contradicted by the sort of threats a terrorist would come up with is not morality, nor is it a "greater" morality just because the contradiction is a religious narrative.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from stu:

Changing the subject makes no difference.
Established morality contradicted by the sort of threats a terrorist would come up with is not morality, nor is it a "greater" morality just because the contradiction is a religious narrative.

You didn't read the article, it's related.

 

[stu]

Quote from Ricter:

You didn't read the article, it's related.

How do you mean related....in that it uses words? The article doesn't directly address the point made.