Theris Carencia wrote:Neutraligon wrote:
Actually no that is not what I was pointing to at all. The definition of objective is "not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts." A god dictating morals is thus not objective because the god's opinions and feeling are what determine what those morals are and thus by definition it is subjective.
I have no idea how you got to the Euthyphro dilemma from my original comment.
When I've run into the "if God makes up morality, doesn't that make it subjective?" line of argument, I've always seen it called the Euthyphro dilemma.Next time try not to act as smug when responding.
Given that the Dialogue (which is traditionally cited when arguments of the variety you presented are brought up) has a much more cutting challenge to the notion of religion than the mere dancing around with "what the gods love" at the beginning, I felt it justified to give you a bit of a hard time about it.
My hope was that, with a little bit of poking from myself, you would consult the original, notice the (rather obvious) fundamental challenge to religion which I was referring, and come back armed for a serious debate with a raised standard of discourse. That presumed that you'd a) take my flippant comment as good natured ribbing rather than flame baiting, and b) be interested in taking up the more fundamental question of whether piety even makes sense as a virtue.
Obviously I was mistaken about a, and so I apologize for any offense I have caused.
How do you feel about b?Oh also funny thing, this was my opinion even when I was a theist.
I'm still a theist, and it's my opinion as well. You'll note that most of my arguments regarding the nature of morality take a "natural law" approach rather than a "divine command" approach.
Sorry for mistaking your writing as smug. I should not have done that.My comment was not about where morality originates (ie gods is moral because it is the moral, or whether is is moral because it is loved by the god), but rather with the definitions involved. I have defined morality as the opinion of how people should interact with each other and the world around them, and as such it is by definition subjective. Nothing more and nothing less then that. Since I have defined morality as opinion on how people should interact with each other and the world around them, even if a god states their morality it is still subjective. It has nothing to do with the dilemma itself. If you use a different definition of morality, then it is very possible that morality is objective, but then you are talking about something different then what I am talking about. For instance if you define morality as the dictates of a god, then morality is objective should the god actually dictate something since those dictates exist whether or not a mind is there to perceive them.
As to piety being a virtue...oddly enough I am having an issue finding a good definition of piety. Hmm I believe devotion to religious observances is pretty close to what is meant. Using this, I do not view piety in and of itself as a virtue,rather there are things that are considered pious (feeding the hungry caring for the sick etc) that I consider virtues but the part that involved devotion to god, no I don't see that as necessarily a virtue.
