>>>I believe morals are the innate sense of right and wrong,
>>>not the product of society.
>
>>But of course you have no proof of this.
>
>How about the Holocaust? Could it not have been a
>possibility that this was universally wrong and that those
>involved in this atrocious act KNEW it was wrong, but lied
>to themselves in order to commit it, for power's sake?
I don't think they all knew it was wrong. I think some of them actually believed in it, and even liked it.
>
>>>It is my belief that the innate sense of right and wrong is
>>>God's Law.
>>That's tremendous. We've come this far into the post, for
>>that.
>
>Well, you can find this stated repeatedly throughout our
>discussion... basically, it took this long for you to
>understand it.
I understood what you were saying from the start. I just got sidetracked by the Catholicism thing.
>
>>>Well, of course morality existed before the oral tradition
>>>of the torah was written... God's Law has existed since man
>>>has existed. It took thouseands of years before oral
>>>tradition was written.
>>Does morality exist in the animal kingdom too? In the "don't
>>wantonly kill, don't steal, don't harm your parents" sense?
>
>No. That's the difference.
Disagree. Look at chimpanzees. They too have a hierarchical society, they don't wantonly kill or steal from each other, and the mother-child bond is very strong with chimpanzees too.
>
>>>I never said I had anything other than faith to counter your
>>>theory... faith gives morals an ultimate purpose... if I
>>>don't have faith, it really doesn't matter, morally, what I
>>>choose to do, and any "morality" I choose to pratice
>>>thereafter is a result of fear.
>>That's just what religious faith is based on, as far as I'm
>>concerned. Fear of damnation. I've got no faith(in the
>>religious sense), and it's not "fear of being caught" that
>>stops me from killing, or raping, or stealing money from my
>>parents.
>
>what is it then? that was the whole point of my post. what
>is it that compels you to love others?
Well I'd say it's cause I'm fairly well-adjusted and I grew up in a loving home. Some people don't, and their "moral sense" may be skewed as a consequence. I've contended with Inverse before that if you grew up and you were taught that stealing wasn't wrong, you wouldn't feel any guilt over it, you'd only be annoyed if you got caught.
>
>>>lol. If you ever read a piece of Buddhist doctrine, you
>>>would see that any notion of "faith" is meaningless to a
>>>Buddhist. It is written in Buddhist doctrine that
>>>contemplation of the metaphysical is pointless, and that
>>>everything can be attained through knowledge.
>>>
>>>Please, please study some religious doctine before you waste
>>>my time with this stuff... I'm a classics scholar with a
>>>religious studies emphasis. I really don't think you're
>>>going to prove me wrong on religious fundamentals... I'm
>>>pretty horrible at math though. Peace,
>
>>Good. I'll take Buddhism over Christianity then, in a
>>heartbeat.
>
>If that were possible, I'd wish you the best of luck, but
>since one is a philosophy, you probably shouldn't attempt
>this because the two can virtually coexist. Peace,
I'm saying, I'd rather have people live by a non-violent philosophy than religion, which can so easily be twisted to suit violent aims.