View Single Post
Old 06-26-2010, 06:03 PM   #535
TGS
Country Member
TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.TGS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
TGS's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,058
Karma: 7676767
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Denmark
Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nguirado View Post
I didn't mean that you're free to say that the White House is made of cheese. That's a physical, verifiable reality.

I'm saying that you can make up what you consider right and wrong. So, you can be like Nietzsche, thinking that the best men are those who dominate or you can think the opposite. Who cares? As an atheist, you're free to think whatever you want on ethics and morality. That's why they call it "free-thinking."
Don't you think that reason plays a part - even in ethics? For example, one might hold to a principle that all life should be protected and that doing intentional harm to a living creature is wrong, (most people don't hold this principle, it's just an example). Now if a person who claimed that causing deliberate harm to a living creature was wrong unless the English name of that creature began with W, and therefore causing harm to worms, wombats, wolves and whales (and probably lots of other things that I can't think of), was morally justified, we would consider them irrational. There simply seems to be no a priori reason to ascribe a different moral status to creatures on the basis of what their English name is. Similarly if someone argues that all humans have equal rights - unless they have ginger hair, that's equally irrational.

So, in this sense I'm not sure that non-theists are "free" to adopt whatever beliefs they want in relation to morality.
TGS is offline   Reply With Quote