What is it to be human?

@philokalia said
Please stick to the complex topic at hand and stop trying to make it into some petty pissing match you have with me.

Then read what I am posting.

@philokalia said
Sure, there wouldn't be a specific moral compass that is for every single Turk, and that would never have been the case.

Of course, it is the case. It is the key to our human condition and our individuality and personhood. Every moral compass is as unique as every human being is.

@fmf said
Any discussion about moral compasses between you and me is inevitably going to be an argument about your moral compass and my moral compass. I am not going to discuss imposing either of our moral compasses on others.

Come on, now, who is saying "All the Christians in Greece have to follow Philokalia's concept of Greek Orthodoxy..."

Who is saying that I want to make every human being an exact reflection of my interpretation of Christianity.

This is a strawman.

I am explaining how collectively accepting divien truths in a society or community establishes social norms that are positive, and refusing to acknowledge God in a society creates a negative environment.

You are OFF TOPIC by strawmaning this into some stupid debate where I am allegedly trying to impose something on you.

Not every argument is

[B]"ME WIN, YOU BE CHRISTIAN AND I FORCE YOU! YOU WIN, I BE ATHEIST AND YOU FORCE ME!"[/b]

We are discussign how reality works.

@philokalia said
What is important is that these norms exist and even that minorities within this society follow these norms.

Norms help shape an individual's moral compass. A nation makes "society" follow these norms by turning them into laws. A nation or a culture does not have a moral compass. A moral compass is a personal subjective thing with which a human absorbs and interacts with norms and laws.

@fmf said
Of course, it is the case. It is the key to our human condition and our individuality and personhood. Every moral compass is as unique as every human being is.

No, that's not true at all.

Are there billions of different ideas about whether or not it is right to murder...?

Are there billions of different ideas about whether or not it is right to steal..?

Indeed, the moral positions of the average Christian and Muslim on the most basic questions will line up very well.

... I guess if you are still dwelling on the semantics of a moral compass is, this could be somehow be relevant, but even still, whatever "uniqueness" that exists between me and other conservative Christians in terms of the moral compass largely has to do with flavor.

The only way this makes sense is if it becomes some silly game where it's like

"Wow, so Kelly Jay believes that a divorce in this hyperspecific situation is merited, but Sonship disagrees; this means the two of them are completely unique moral compasses.[/i]"

It's irrelevant to the discussion.

@philokalia said
You are wriggling like a worm.

I disagree. I don't think you are actually addressing what I have been saying for 31 pages. I am not trying to impose my moral compass on "the Turks".

@philokalia said
ME WIN, YOU BE CHRISTIAN AND I FORCE YOU! YOU WIN, I BE ATHEIST AND YOU FORCE ME!

What are you on about?

@philokalia said
Are there billions of different ideas about whether or not it is right to murder...?

Are there billions of different ideas about whether or not it is right to steal..?

There's more to a moral compass than guiding an individual to not murder and not steal. As I said, no two moral compasses on Earth can possibly be identical because no two people can possibly have the same synthesis of nature and nurture and narrative.

@fmf said
What are you on about?

You said

Any discussion about moral compasses between you and me is inevitably going to be an argument about your moral compass and my moral compass. I am not going to discuss imposing either of our moral compasses on others.

And that isn't what this debate is about.

Follow some of your own advice and read my posts.

See?

This is why you should handle debates holistically and not embrace this piecemeal micropost strategy that distorts every discussion and pushes it towards the ledge of semantics.

@fmf said
There's more to a moral compass than guiding an individual to not murder and not steal. As I said, no two moral compasses on Earth can possibly be identical because no two people can possibly have the same synthesis of nature and nurture and narrative.

No two people see things exactly the same, sure.

But is there truly some "Philokalia morality" and "Person Y morality" if we disagree slightly on minor issues here and there, and otherwise both are in concordance with the very typical eastern Christian perspective..?

You are trying to "win" this argument by suggesting that there is basically no such thing as a non-individual morality.

But that is absurd.

People flock to the catholic, orthodox, and anglican churches, the Sunni umma, etc. and all affirm near identical moral systems and values.

@philokalia said
I guess if you are still dwelling on the semantics of a moral compass is, this could be somehow be relevant, but even still, whatever "uniqueness" that exists between me and other conservative Christians in terms of the moral compass largely has to do with flavor.

The only way this makes sense is if it becomes some silly game where it's like

"Wow, so Kelly Jay ...[text shortened]... ns the two of them are completely unique moral compasses.[/i]"

It's irrelevant to the discussion.

You seem to think that a moral compass is somehow external to a person, when in fact it is absolutely and only internal to each person. Norms, doctrines, laws, traditions and groups promoting certain moral codes, these are external.

@philokalia said
But is there truly some "Philokalia morality" and "Person Y morality" if we disagree slightly on minor issues here and there, and otherwise both are in concordance with the very typical eastern Christian perspective..?

They are still two separate moral compasses, yes. Just as you are two separate people with separate identities.

@philokalia said
People flock to the catholic, orthodox, and anglican churches, the Sunni umma, etc. and all affirm near identical moral systems and values.

They flock there as individuals with individual narratives and individual moral compasses which reflect their own personal synthesis of external moral information and pressures and assumptions etc.

@philokalia said
Indeed, Turkish atheists can follow these norms well enough... but if everyone was an atheist, and these norms ceased to be relevant, it would cause a sort of moral anarchy that I was referring to above.

What do you propose that Turkey should do to prevent Turks from being atheists or preventing any or all Turks from modifying or getting rid of certain norms?

@philokalia said
You are trying to "win" this argument by suggesting that there is basically no such thing as a non-individual morality.

I am doing no such thing. "Non-individual morality" is simply a term we can use for all the stuff external to humans that pertains to morality, like laws and traditions, religious articles of faith, descriptions of events, speeches and sermons etc. By contrast, a "moral compass" is something unique that each human possesses and that is affected to varying degrees by that "Non-individual morality".