Banno

Well chosen words. Believers do not experience a different world. We have, therefore, some basis for discussion. I submit that we are in a position to...

That was it. Thanks for your contribution. The idiots have set the zeitgeist, since at least the time of Thatcher and Raygun. Perhaps, one hopes, thei...

Mostly because such propositional attitudes are so mercurial. My belief that the door is closed is manifest in so many different ways - I would have t...

Yep. I find it odd that so many who profess not to be christian are so quick to jump to the barricades when they perceive an attack. Did you notice th...

special pleading The standard reply, repeated multiple times by various folk, is that the observation that hell is unjust does not apply to this or th...

Your response is becoming quite disjointed. What part, what whole? And as for What? Does hell come up often in the sports programs you watch? I suspec...

From a distance it might seem so; you need to get closer, examine the detail. Deontology will claim that something like the golden rule has the prime ...

, "Tis a busy day, and you both deserve longer replies. But in the interim, it strikes me that you share in the view that christianity ought be judged...

In the first the emphasis is on becoming a virtuous person. In the second, on following moral rules. In the third, on the results of one's actions. Al...

Virtue Ethics: Deontology: Consequentialism:

Me, by articulating these views. Take: Doesn't this imply that there is an ethical aspect to self-improvement, undermining my basic account? More broa...

I wasn't taking a particular ethical stand, just pointing out that sensations are not a suitable basis for ethics. But since you ask... there's virtue...

Both would appear to be nonsense. I see no need to reconcile them, and will leave that to the subservient - er, faithful. It's not my problem.

Well, I wear a mask routinely, for my protection and that of those I hold dear. SO here's another account on which I might happily receive @"Merkwurdi...

No, you're right. Each is an ethical consideration only in so far a it involves others. Just so: any behaviour that involves others invokes ethical co...

Cheers. Enjoy the Saturnalia in whatever way you choose. But take others into account as you choose.

Oh, sure - why not? But that's not an ethical position. It's just doing what you want.

The last section of the article is titled "Can we admire the believers?" The Fritz analogy shows that the worship of the perpetrator of an injustice i...

But why ought one seek a happy/fulfilled life? Note that this is not the same as "why does one seek a happy/fulfilled life?"

I want to talk about the ethics of those who would worship a torturer. You pretend there are not very many folk who worship tortures. Your point is ir...

I was somewhat disappointed that no one replied to this: Does no one wish to defend incompatiblist freedom?

Why?

You protest too much, Methinks.

Ethics concerns the implications for others of what one does. One is an agent in so far as one brings about a consequence. One is a moral agent in so ...

I'm not sure what this means. As in, your point here eludes me.

This discussion is tedious. Yes, there may be folk who call themselves christian who do not hold that god torments souls for eternity. But there are f...

You sidestepped the point: Ethics is fundamentally about how one relates to others. That fathoming this relation might sometimes be difficult does not...

Neat sidestep. Same as with people: from the noises they make.

You are right the the thread has diverged markedly from the article, and when time permits I intend to head back to the argument in the final section....

Rubbish. The interests of the animal count. That you wish to be arse-fucked does not excuse your arse-fucking a pig.

Go back to my reply: Animals can be included in the others to which one may relate. So, have you something to say?

As noted above, it's apparently a characteristic of monotheism. But yes, the criticism applies to islam, and to any religion that worships a god who i...

And the answer is the same: The topic of conversation is the definition of god. Specifically, that a god who instigates hell is not worthy of worship.

I'm sure the poor wee beastie would object.

That'd be up to you. Go ahead, if you think it might be interesting.

What do you want, Frank? This is a discussion of an article by a prominent philosopher. It's what we do.

Frankly, it's not a popularity contest.

Well, in so far as the article's intent was to show that god is not a nice fellow, it was perhaps not worth addressing that possibility.

So do you deny that there are christians who believe in hell? Of course not. It is these folk that the article concerns. And of course you may change ...

So if the question is "Does something exist?" then the answer is "yes; at least one question".

Glad you said that - I had the same thought.

Necessity is dealt with in modal logic, the usual version fo which makes use of possible worlds. On that account you might be taken to be asking "is t...

But - and this is obviously of great urgency considering lunch time tomorrow in Australia - what about eating prawns?

:up:

Well, yes, there are doubtless different, creative ways of reading the scriptures that excuse god from being a bit of a bastard. The need to engage in...

Truth without coherence or consistency? Lewis is pointing out the consequences of certain christian dogma. Your response to what he says - growth or s...

Indeed. Apparently if we only understood, we too would join in the choir eternal.

Indeed, there might be replies that rely on eternity outside of time in the place of sempiternity. It is difficult to see how this ameliorates the use...

Doubtless. You don't have to be here. But there might be more courage in staying than walking away.

So one supposes. But that is to not address the discussion.