Premise: Objective morals do not exist

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
If this is the case then a universal good and bad do not exist
and any gods which may or may not exist cannot be viewed
as "good" in any universal way. (Individuals may agree with
the god's morals but it would not necessarily be universal agreement)

We would also like to know where and how this "god" obtained his
personal set of morals.

The deeper we think, the more we decide for ourselves what is right or wrong. This is true even of christians.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If that is the case torturing a baby for fun cannot always be wrong, but we all know it is.

Sure. What if the other option was that everything everywhere dies forever. Which would you choose.

Originally posted by @fmf
I think you'll find that what I said was more akin to this:

I strive not to damage people, not to deceive them, not to coerce them. These are the broad moral principles that guide me as I try to navigate the complexities of life and my interactions with other people (there are some other standards and habits that I strive for too).

These moral principles ...[text shortened]... ividuals. And the obvious and inevitable variations are an integral part of the human condition.

So which principle would take precedence over not damaging people, not deceiving them or not coercing them? Or would you agree that these 3 principles (among others) aught never be violated? Or is it simply a matter of you applying these principles when you so prefer and not applying them when you don't?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So which principle would take precedence over not damaging people, not deceiving them or not coercing them?

Give me a scenario.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Or would you agree that these 3 principles (among others) aught never be violated?

This question leads me to believe you don't understand what I posted or didn't read it. If you want to ask me personally what I would never do, then just give me a scenario and I will describe how my moral compass would enable me to deal with it.

Originally posted by @apathist
Sure. What if the other option was that everything everywhere dies forever. Which would you choose.

Why would I have to choose between only those two options? 🙄

Originally posted by @dj2becker
... is it simply a matter of you applying these principles when you so prefer and not applying them when you don't?

The source, nature, purpose and application of my moral principles is, for all intents and purposes, the same as yours. We both try to live our lives according to principles we internalized as we were growing up and turning into adult moral agents.

Originally posted by @fmf
This question leads me to believe you don't understand what I posted or didn't read it. If you want to ask me personally what I would never do, then just give me a scenario and I will describe how my moral compass would enable me to deal with it.

I am simply asking you whether or not you would ever violate the 3 principles you listed (which apparently guide your morals) and if so when?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I am simply asking you whether or not you would ever violate the 3 principles you listed (which apparently guide your morals) and if so when?

Give me a scenario. And I will give you my moral analysis. Don't repeat any of the scenarios you gave before where you then just blanked out my responses and analysis. For those scenarios, you can just go back and find them and read what I said. Give me some new scenarios.

Originally posted by @fmf
Give me a scenario. And I will give you my moral analysis. Don't repeat any of the scenarios you gave before where you then just blanked out my responses and analysis. For those scenarios, you can just go back and find them and read what I said. Give me some new scenarios.

So you yourself cannot imagine a scenario whereby you would not uphold the 3 principles you listed, is that correct?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So you yourself cannot imagine a scenario whereby you would not uphold the 3 principles you listed, is that correct?

Well, I responded to some scenarios you proposed before with regard to when killing someone or lying are morally sound. So I refer you to that analysis. You pretty much just blanked it out at the time but it's still there if you want to go and look for it. Run some different scenarios past me and I'll give you my moral analysis.

Originally posted by @fmf
Well, I responded to some scenarios you proposed before with regard to when killing someone or lying are morally sound. So I refer you to that analysis. You pretty much just blanked it out at the time but it's still there if you want to go and look for it. Run some different scenarios past me and I'll give you my moral analysis.

I'm not talking about scenarios I gave you. I am asking you whether you can imagine a scenario where you would not uphold the 3 principles you mentioned. It's simply a yes or no answer.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I'm not talking about scenarios I gave you. I am asking you whether you can imagine a scenario where you would not uphold the 3 principles you mentioned. It's simply a yes or no answer.

Give me some scenarios and I will examine them through my moral prism. I've told you what my three broad principles are. If you want to test them or scrutinize them, then go ahead. I gave you crystal clear answers about certain situations before (which you simply ignored) and I undertake to be clear and unflinching again now.

Originally posted by @fmf
Give me some scenarios and I will examine them through my moral prism. I've told you what my three broad principles are. If you want to test them or scrutinize them, then go ahead. I gave you crystal clear answers about certain situations before (which you simply ignored) and I undertake to be clear and unflinching again now.

Your dodge is noted.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Your dodge is noted.

It's not a dodge. If you don't have any moral dilemmas to pose in your effort to scrutinize my application or moral principles, then it is you who is dodging. Do you disagree with the three broad principles I laid out, or do you agree with them? Is there something missing from them?