Moral Nihilism and what it truly means.

[Mike]

totopic

That goes for PTSD as well as crying.

:D

I'm glad you did that. Thank you, Free!

But But But you not answer my last question......

I just figured this was your thread you started, and if you wanted to follow Jason down that PTSD rabbit hole, I'd let you do that. But Jason frightens me, so I'd stay up where the sun is shining. ;)

I don't believe that "slavery" in the general sense is an absolute morality, for the reasons I gave. This broad brush includes slavery in biblical times which was very structured and wouldn't be inherently wrong. It also includes slavery in recent history that would and would be an absolute morality. In this sense, I do believe we have an Absolute Morality dictating that modern slavery is wrong.

MN, you said this was an example where moralities changed, and people came to accept slavery. I submit that the "morality" of it didn't change; the "values" changed when groups began following the lead of others. Slavery which includes imprisonment, forced unpaid labor and not human rights, has always been morally wrong, and it took the offenders seeing the Light to wake up from their slumber and realize it had been wrong all the time.

 

[jasoncran]

so we christians shouldnt show the we do struggle with the same things and the only hope that we have is him when no pastor nor commentator can answer the question.

for someone who has a lost a child i find that sad, surely you can appreciate the fact that we do and have suffered and our only consolation is in christ.

god told me that he carried me through combat and well that he did indeed do. often our healings arent so instantaneously but gradual and often my grace is sufficient for thee.

two years ago i wouldnt have even admitted that fact openly. i couldnt and wouldnt let myself feel. its a reality for us soldiers.

im went on the this trail to see how he ticked. and also to learn as i HAVE SOLDIERS THAT are athiests in my unit and have been to war. so when they feel like they want to end it i can at least level with them and keep them from ending it.

when you talk to a 28 yr old man who says he wants to do this or that and then puts a bullet through his head . you are left with why did he do that or also could i have saved him.

forgive me for trying to understand how a lost man will deal with the effects of war. and it is revalant as the moral nilihist must answer with suffering as well.

 

[Mike]

That's why I bowed out and let you two continue, but Free had a point. You two should start a new thread or share this thru PM's. It's definitely an important topic for both of you, so it deserves its own place.

 

[jasoncran]

if moralnihilist wishes too i will do it.

 

[modernnihilst]

so we christians shouldnt show the we do struggle with the same things and the only hope that we have is him when no pastor nor commentator can answer the question.

for someone who has a lost a child i find that sad, surely you can appreciate the fact that we do and have suffered and our only consolation is in christ.

god told me that he carried me through combat and well that he did indeed do. often our healings arent so instantaneously but gradual and often my grace is sufficient for thee.

two years ago i wouldnt have even admitted that fact openly. i couldnt and wouldnt let myself feel. its a reality for us soldiers.

im went on the this trail to see how he ticked. and also to learn as i HAVE SOLDIERS THAT are athiests in my unit and have been to war. so when they feel like they want to end it i can at least level with them and keep them from ending it.

when you talk to a 28 yr old man who says he wants to do this or that and then puts a bullet through his head . you are left with why did he do that or also could i have saved him.

forgive me for trying to understand how a lost man will deal with the effects of war. and it is revalant as the moral nilihist must answer with suffering as well.

I can answer this with a quote from the other member of my team, call sign Priest(no I wont use his real name) " Sometimes (explitive deleted) happens and there are 2 things that you can do, 1 get up dust yourself off and get back to it, or 2 give up. Now you call me priest, not God(oddly enough he is now a priest) so I cant pick for you but I'd suggest the first one, we seen too many dead as is."

 

[modernnihilst]

Objective as in, life absolutely is sacred. There is nothing subjective that "determines" it's value.



Human beings are not mere objects, such as sentimental jewelry.

You still haven't answered my question: How can you objectively say that anything the Nazi's did was "good" or "bad", if morality is subjective.

answer to point one: That is your own point of view.

answer to point two: I am aware of that. However it is a fair example(in a general sence) of differing viewpoints on what construes value.

answer to point three: Morality refers to right and wrong not good and bad. Therefore good and bad are fair game. For example: choclate ice cream is good, pistachio ice cream is bad. nothing to do with right and wrong, I like choclate and dislike pistachio.

 

[Drummer4Christ]

answer to point one: That is your own point of view.

Yes, and it is your POV that the value of human life is not inherent. i.e. It's value is not objective but, subjective.

answer to point two: I am aware of that. However it is a fair example(in a general sence) of differing viewpoints on what construes value.

You're missing the point. Even by subjective standards inanimate objects cannot "do something" with itself that determines it's value. i.e. leech off society or contribute to the greater good of society.

answer to point three: Morality refers to right and wrong not good and bad. Therefore good and bad are fair game. For example: choclate ice cream is good, pistachio ice cream is bad. nothing to do with right and wrong, I like choclate and dislike pistachio.

I hope you're not trying to diminish the atrocities committed by the Nazi's by comparing the Holocaust to flavors of ice cream. Also, I hope you're not being deliberately obtuse with semantics. You previously stated that the Nazi's scientific contributions were "good" for humanity; How can you make such an objective judgement when, by your own estimation, human life is analogous to inanimate objects?

In other words, if human life has no inherent value, than any positive contribution to it's well being is futile because humanity is inherently unworthy of such improvement to begin with.

 

[jasoncran]

I can answer this with a quote from the other member of my team, call sign Priest(no I wont use his real name) " Sometimes (explitive deleted) happens and there are 2 things that you can do, 1 get up dust yourself off and get back to it, or 2 give up. Now you call me priest, not God(oddly enough he is now a priest) so I cant pick for you but I'd suggest the first one, we seen too many dead as is."

i want to adress this. so if they have a psychosis and cant be healed what then? are they too weak?

you must know that even shrinks will say that even talking or assisting the suicidal person wont guarentee that they wont end it. this is a lesson i learned with that soldier. he did the opposite of what one would expect. no signs or selling of things. just got drunk as he hung with buddies and took his life after that in the parking lot.

i say god was mericiful to both you and i.we like to think we can pull ourselves out of hell but in reality i have learned that oftens its gods mercy that keeps from being undone and destroyed. sinners and i at times am too proud to admit that.

 

[modernnihilst]

i want to adress this. so if they have a psychosis and cant be healed what then? are they too weak?

nope I took that as part of option one. sometimes it takes help to get up and back to it.

 

[modernnihilst]

Yes, and it is your POV that the value of human life is not inherent. i.e. It's value is not objective but, subjective.



You're missing the point. Even by subjective standards inanimate objects cannot "do something" with itself that determines it's value. i.e. leech off society or contribute to the greater good of society.



I hope you're not trying to diminish the atrocities committed by the Nazi's by comparing the Holocaust to flavors of ice cream. Also, I hope you're not being deliberately obtuse with semantics. You previously stated that the Nazi's scientific contributions were "good" for humanity; How can you make such an objective judgement when, by your own estimation, human life is analogous to inanimate objects?

In other words, if human life has no inherent value, than any positive contribution to it's well being is futile because humanity is inherently unworthy of such improvement to begin with.

Simply put the scientific contributations made by the Nazi's allows for the society that we live in today to be as advanced as it is. Both you(I assume) and I enjoy the fruits of thier labors.
And yet AGAIN life CAN have value based off what one(the individual or whoever is looking at it) perceives as a worthwhile life. That is a of course a subjective view as was the previous refrence to inanimate objects. VALUE of anything is subjective.

 

[modernnihilst]

For those who have been challenging my view of morality being subjective, I offer a small challenge. Explain to me why murder is INHERENTLY wrong, however since at every turn my arguments have been described as subjective, I would like for you to not use any language that is subjective.

Your Favorite Infidel
MN

 

[Drummer4Christ]

For those who have been challenging my view of morality being subjective, I offer a small challenge. Explain to me why murder is INHERENTLY wrong, however since at every turn my arguments have been described as subjective, I would like for you to not use any language that is subjective.

Your Favorite Infidel
MN

Because God explicitly forbids it.

You did not "murder" people overseas. You killed the enemy. You protected the God given freedoms of your nation. You acted in the defense of objectively innocent lives. You sacrificed your life for the lives of others. Had you been killed overseas, we would mourn your loss & express gratitude for your service.

Why?

Because Jesus, who is God, said that no greater love exists than laying down ones life for the sake of his brothers.

So I thank you for your service & I pray that you may be healed of your suffering.

 

[jasoncran]

hmm i should do a thread on whats its like for christian to serve in combat.

and moralnihilist. i prefer not warn you please remove that your favorite infidel from your post.

i dont think that is appropriate

 

[modernnihilst]

Because God explicitly forbids it.

You did not "murder" people overseas. You killed the enemy. You protected the God given freedoms of your nation. You acted in the defense of objectively innocent lives. You sacrificed your life for the lives of others. Had you been killed overseas, we would mourn your loss & express gratitude for your service.

Why?

Because Jesus, who is God, said that no greater love exists than laying down ones life for the sake of his brothers.

While I will not dispute that those are your beliefs. Objective? Not really. In regards to my actions overseas, correct me if im wrong(I dont think I am since I got this from The Vatican http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/command.htm)

Thou shal not kill.

I did. And I did alot. Regardless of the reason according to the commandment listed above that was moraly wrong. But by your argument that is not always wrong? Would that not void the validity of morals being absolute/inherent?

 

[jasoncran]

its thou shall not murder.

theres a difference between killing and murder. god if he gave that command that way then he would also would have just told his own peeps to sin. he told them to kill.

http://concordances.org/hebrew/tretzach_7523.htm

http://interlinearbible.org/exodus/20.htm

note vs 14 as that is the word used for murder.

 

[modernnihilst]

hmm i should do a thread on whats its like for christian to serve in combat.

and moralnihilist. i prefer not warn you please remove that your favorite infidel from your post.

i dont think that is appropriate

I'm not your favorite one? :bigcry

Na I'm just kidding I wont use it again.

 

[jasoncran]

thanks.

i dont think you meant but its sadly all too often where non-christians mock us here and elsewhere online that is why i said that.

 

[modernnihilst]

its thou shall not murder.

theres a difference between killing and murder. god if he gave that command that way then he would also would have just told his own peeps to sin. he told them to kill.

http://concordances.org/hebrew/tretzach_7523.htm

http://interlinearbible.org/exodus/20.htm

note vs 14 as that is the word used for murder.

Weird I got kill from the vatican. What one is the right version?

 

[jasoncran]

the translators have a bias and common sense will tell you that in context it must be murder as god would have to tell the isrealites to sin.

sometime translations are bad.

 

[modernnihilst]

I checked my copy of the bible(writen in 1704, old but hey its what I got). It uses the word necare, Latin for to kill. So according to that it means thou shalt not kill. So on the advice of another person I checked the web. Some sites say murder others say kill, For someone not versed(he he he) in the Bible this is a bit confusing.