Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".

In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ethical Philosophy Quiz
Topic Started: Nov 4 2009, 12:38 PM (1,005 Views)
East Anarx
Member Avatar
Anarchitect

Lulz.

Sed, you're so ridiculous.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
New Harumf
Member Avatar
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
Tristan da Cunha
Nov 5 2009, 05:58 PM
Hmm is there an advantage to changing one's ethical philosophy as opposed to not changing it, or vice versa?
In my case, the only gain I could have from changing my ethical philosophy is of a worldly nature.

In a worldly person's case, there is everything to be gained from changing their ethical philosophy.

You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
Upon our mutual deaths, I will find you, and inquire what truths I have missed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Porcu
Member Avatar
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."

Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
The first sign of an intelligent person is when they freely admit how little they know. I am perfectly at peace with my vast ignorance of the universe; however, it is you who claims to already have all the answers.
Edited by Porcu, Nov 7 2009, 01:20 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 26%
Geographical Distance Your score of 18% is significantly lower than the average score of 71% in this category.
Family Relatedness Your score of 18% is a lot lower than the average score of 52% in this category.
Acts and Omissions Your score of 18% is much lower than the average score of 60% in this category.
Scale Your score of 51% is significantly lower than the average score of 72% in this category.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
Tristan da Cunha
Nov 5 2009, 05:58 PM
Hmm is there an advantage to changing one's ethical philosophy as opposed to not changing it, or vice versa?
In my case, the only gain I could have from changing my ethical philosophy is of a worldly nature.

In a worldly person's case, there is everything to be gained from changing their ethical philosophy.

You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
:huh:

:|

:o

:unsure:

:dry:

:rolleyes:

I will turn the other cheek for this one
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 79%
Geo: 67%
Family: 67%
A+O: 83%
Scale: 100%
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Al Araam
Member Avatar
Demigod of Death & Inactivity

Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
Tristan da Cunha
Nov 5 2009, 05:58 PM
Hmm is there an advantage to changing one's ethical philosophy as opposed to not changing it, or vice versa?
In my case, the only gain I could have from changing my ethical philosophy is of a worldly nature.

In a worldly person's case, there is everything to be gained from changing their ethical philosophy.

You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
If we cannot comprehend the truth, then neither can you. We are all human. If "the truth" doesn't touch my life in any way, I don't see much reason that comprehending it should be necessary, desirable, or will improve anyone's life at all. As has already been pointed out, that particular argument isn't logical because it applies to both theists and atheists equally. My mind is open, by the way. You'll notice that I'm not trying to lord my personal beliefs over anyone. Neither I nor anyone who holds my beliefs have threatened others with eternal suffering because they do not agree with me. So yes, I suppose we do laugh, but not for the reasons you seem to think we do.
Edited by Al Araam, Nov 8 2009, 01:24 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Abnar
Member Avatar
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the lurkiest of them all?
Al Araam
Nov 8 2009, 01:23 AM
Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
Tristan da Cunha
Nov 5 2009, 05:58 PM
Hmm is there an advantage to changing one's ethical philosophy as opposed to not changing it, or vice versa?
In my case, the only gain I could have from changing my ethical philosophy is of a worldly nature.

In a worldly person's case, there is everything to be gained from changing their ethical philosophy.

You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
If we cannot comprehend the truth, then neither can you. We are all human. If "the truth" doesn't touch my life in any way, I don't see much reason that comprehending it should be necessary, desirable, or will improve anyone's life at all. As has already been pointed out, that particular argument isn't logical because it applies to both theists and atheists equally. My mind is open, by the way. You'll notice that I'm not trying to lord my personal beliefs over anyone. Neither I nor anyone who holds my beliefs have threatened others with eternal suffering because they do not agree with me. So yes, I suppose we do laugh, but not for the reasons you seem to think we do.
We did this thread already.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Al Araam
Member Avatar
Demigod of Death & Inactivity

Didn't stop him from bringing it up. And of course we've done it before. This is the hundredth thread where it's been 'discussed', but people seemed determined to call each other foolish. Religion and spirituality are deeply personal things. Everybody, whether they're Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or Atheist, has reasons for believing their beliefs are the only ones that make sense. None of these reasons will sway anybody who actually believes anything else. Furthermore, these differences and this surety leads people to believe that they are better or somehow of greater worth that people who hold differing beliefs, and this is exceedingly dangerous. An innumerable amount of crimes against humanity have been committed for this reason. Personally, I don't give a damn what you believe. But if you start spewing inflammatory rhetoric aimed at placing you above another human being because of what you believe, you're going to start another argument which will get you nowhere. In the end, what do you really gain? This applies equally to all theists and atheists alike. Please stop trying to start arguments which get us nowhere. It's just annoying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sedulius
Member Avatar
Field Marshal
Porcu
Nov 7 2009, 01:17 AM
Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
The first sign of an intelligent person is when they freely admit how little they know. I am perfectly at peace with my vast ignorance of the universe; however, it is you who claims to already have all the answers.
I made no claim to having any of the answers. I grouped myself along with you in ignorance. But there are perhaps some that are less ignorant than others, though I am certainly not one of the least ignorant.

If you truly do recognize your ignorance, then why deny the existence of a deity? It would make more logical sense to recognize simply that there is a possibility one exists, as there is also a possibility one does not exist. Of course, then we might get into Pascal's Wager...

On another note, I can prove that Islam is the truth, but I also know how to disprove it. :gnarkgnark:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Porcu
Member Avatar
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."

Sedulius
Nov 9 2009, 02:06 PM
Porcu
Nov 7 2009, 01:17 AM
Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
The first sign of an intelligent person is when they freely admit how little they know. I am perfectly at peace with my vast ignorance of the universe; however, it is you who claims to already have all the answers.
I made no claim to having any of the answers. I grouped myself along with you in ignorance. But there are perhaps some that are less ignorant than others, though I am certainly not one of the least ignorant.

If you truly do recognize your ignorance, then why deny the existence of a deity? It would make more logical sense to recognize simply that there is a possibility one exists, as there is also a possibility one does not exist. Of course, then we might get into Pascal's Wager...

On another note, I can prove that Islam is the truth, but I also know how to disprove it. :gnarkgnark:
I never said in any of our discussions (at least I believe so) that some sort of deity is not possible. That would be arrogant of me. I simply do not believe in sort of deity. This especially applies to the gods of the great monotheistic traditions. I also do not deny this god's existence, for that would assume that this god does indeed exist, a position which I cannot start from.

Are you saying that you believe there is a possibility that there is no god?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
I once had a discussion with a student of philosophy who argued that, from an epistemological perspective, most atheists and theists were Agnostic; i.e., they accepted that one cannot prove their position one way or the other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Some theists are agnostic but I wouldn't estimate that most theists are agnostic, especially Muslims.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
East Anarx
Member Avatar
Anarchitect

I'm a 6 on the Dawkins Scale. Except for on Fridays, when I'm sometimes a 7, sometimes a 1, sometimes a 4, and usually a 5.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rhadamanthus
Member Avatar
Legitimist

Esternarx
Nov 9 2009, 09:19 PM
I'm a 6 on the Dawkins Scale. Except for on Fridays, when I'm sometimes a 7, sometimes a 1, sometimes a 4, and usually a 5.
Awesome.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sedulius
Member Avatar
Field Marshal
Porcu
Nov 9 2009, 05:17 PM
Sedulius
Nov 9 2009, 02:06 PM
Porcu
Nov 7 2009, 01:17 AM
Sedulius
Nov 6 2009, 06:51 PM
You atheists laugh, but you have no idea just how ignorant all of us are. All I'm going to say is that you should keep an open mind. None of us can even comprehend the truth of this universe, and none of us ever will, till perhaps our deaths.
The first sign of an intelligent person is when they freely admit how little they know. I am perfectly at peace with my vast ignorance of the universe; however, it is you who claims to already have all the answers.
I made no claim to having any of the answers. I grouped myself along with you in ignorance. But there are perhaps some that are less ignorant than others, though I am certainly not one of the least ignorant.

If you truly do recognize your ignorance, then why deny the existence of a deity? It would make more logical sense to recognize simply that there is a possibility one exists, as there is also a possibility one does not exist. Of course, then we might get into Pascal's Wager...

On another note, I can prove that Islam is the truth, but I also know how to disprove it. :gnarkgnark:
I never said in any of our discussions (at least I believe so) that some sort of deity is not possible. That would be arrogant of me. I simply do not believe in sort of deity. This especially applies to the gods of the great monotheistic traditions. I also do not deny this god's existence, for that would assume that this god does indeed exist, a position which I cannot start from.

Are you saying that you believe there is a possibility that there is no god?
Ah, but you have said you are atheist, haven't you? Which means you believe no deity exists. If you recognize the possibility that a deity exists, then you are not atheist.

When you say I simply do not believe in sort of deity, it is a confusing use of words. I recognize you are using the word believe in a different manner, but to believe there is a deity is not the same as worshipping it. I would say that if said deity exists, then it is a matter of that you don't worship the deity. You could believe it exists. Though, I may be mistaken by your use of words.

Myself, as a Christian, I absolutely believe God exists. Hence it is impossible for me to believe it is possible that He does not exist. I was saying, however, that if I were to look at it from an entirely logical, worldly point-of-view, I would recognize both possibilities.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Quote:
 
Ah, but you have said you are atheist, haven't you? Which means you believe no deity exists. If you recognize the possibility that a deity exists, then you are not atheist.
This is simply false. If you recognize the possibility of God existing but for all practical purposes do not believe in one then you are a weak atheist (as opposed to strong atheism, which explicitly denies the possibility of the divine) which is epistemological agnosticism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sedulius
Member Avatar
Field Marshal
Quaon
Nov 9 2009, 10:27 PM
Quote:
 
Ah, but you have said you are atheist, haven't you? Which means you believe no deity exists. If you recognize the possibility that a deity exists, then you are not atheist.
This is simply false. If you recognize the possibility of God existing but for all practical purposes do not believe in one then you are a weak atheist (as opposed to strong atheism, which explicitly denies the possibility of the divine) which is epistemological agnosticism.
So they have specific terms degrees of atheism now, do they?

Then I must respectfully disagree with society's system on this one.

Oh, how the world is silly...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Porcu
Member Avatar
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes."

Sedulius
Nov 9 2009, 10:42 PM
Quaon
Nov 9 2009, 10:27 PM
Quote:
 
Ah, but you have said you are atheist, haven't you? Which means you believe no deity exists. If you recognize the possibility that a deity exists, then you are not atheist.
This is simply false. If you recognize the possibility of God existing but for all practical purposes do not believe in one then you are a weak atheist (as opposed to strong atheism, which explicitly denies the possibility of the divine) which is epistemological agnosticism.
So they have specific terms degrees of atheism now, do they?

Then I must respectfully disagree with society's system on this one.

Oh, how the world is silly...
There have been subtle distinctions for years. It isn't anything new. It's like the distinction between "creationist" and "young earth creationist", the former simply affirming that God (the Christian deity) created the universe and everything in it, while the latter affirming that God literally created the universe, the earth, man, etc. in 6, 24 hour days approximately 6000 years ago.

E pointed out Dawkins Scale, on which I am also a 6. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
New Harumf
Member Avatar
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
Depending on my audience, I outwardly project a 1 on the scale, while, in fact, like Augustine, I am a 2.

One always has doubts.

There ared times, however, where I wish I was a 6, like when the door whores come a knocking and want to "talk to me about their faith!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nag Ehgoeg
Member Avatar
The Devil's Advocate

Your Moral Parsimony Score is 55%

Hmm... probably would have scored lower if I didn't believe in killing so damned much.

Geographical Distance 51%
Family Relatedness 18% (this one is highly scewed as it pits relatives against strangers - I believe that you have a higher moral responsibility towards your family but if you tell me to kill one person I care about (family or no) or a million people I don't know then you'd best start digging the mass graves)
Acts and Omissions 51% (not doing something is different from doing something - how I wish I scored lower)
Scale 100% (if killing one person is bad then killing a million people is bad, if saving one person is good then saving a million people is good - how can people think differently?)

****

My Dawkins' formulation is 1. Why? Cognito ergo sum.

Otherwise, I'm pretty much a 7. I know god does not exist just like I know there aren't fairies at the bottom of my garden. I reject the possibility of the existance of an unlimited being because the unlimited cannot (by definition) exist.

If we want to start putting human limitations on god then I probably spring upto a 4 (maybe as high as a 2). But once god stops being literally all powerful and all knowing it kinda stops being god doesn't it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Union
Member Avatar
Pyrenees Republic
Your Moral Parsimony Score is 37%

Geographical Distance: 51%
Family: 2%
Acts/Omissions: 34%
Scale: 100%
Edited by Union, Nov 10 2009, 02:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aelius
Member Avatar
Norman Warlord
I think I'm probably a 5 on the Dawkins scale.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quaon
Member Avatar
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Practically (i.e., publicly) speaking, I am a 2-3. Privately speaking, I am very close to a 1.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Union
Member Avatar
Pyrenees Republic
My Dawkins score is a 6.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic »
Add Reply