Jon Kaus vs Dan Barker Debate "Can We Be Good Without God?"

No description available.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Can
• We
• Be
• Good
• Without
• God
• www
• keepvid
• com

[kunzx037]

flourishing means "Grow/develop in a healthy/vigorous way" So you just said "flourishing is good bc it causes flourishing" This is a circular argument But you still have to explain why the perpetuation of the human species is morally good. The nihilist would say it's amoral. What makes you right?

Our nature means our thoughts/actions. to say they're good/evil is only a projection of your imagination

God revealed Himself thru the scriptures; otherwise how can you justify laws of logic?

[omgopet]

@kunzx037 flourishing is good because it perpetuates the species. if a social species develops good moral values, it becomes exponentially more powerful as it grows in numbers. if it doesn't, it looses the fight for survival against the species that flourish. the source of good is our nature.

even if god exists and is the ultimate moral authority, it doesn't affect us in any way. we still have no way of knowing anything about god or his nature so we are still left with the same problem.

[kunzx037]

@ipeklofijs Do you have any evidence or rational reasons for thinking that? If the likes were for Dan then maybe you can explain how Dan showed good exists other than the thinking-so-makes-it-so fallacy? How do you account for the existence of metaphysical properties such as moral goodness other than it just being a delusion that has absolutely no evidence for it?

[ipeklofijs]

I guess the dislikes for this video are for Jon, Likes - for Dan.

Sound sucks, though.

[kunzx037]

@healthsawyer Ha, I've heard a couple people say that now, but neither has any evidence for their claim... it seems to be based on blind faith. Can you give an actual source for moral good or evil other than you're answer boiling down to a delusion that nearly all humans would have if there was no God?

[heathsawyer]

this poor christian did a poor job,even as an atheist I feel bad for the guy!

[kunzx037]

"Some out there may say flourishings bad. But u cant give a reason for y ur right & WHY it's good, other than beging the question and saying "flourishing's good bc it's good," which is being arbitrary"

you spread the arbitrariness to "we," which is a fallacy, bc it's only an argument from majority.U dodged my question, and hav assumed theres such a thing as good, without expl how its not just a delusion.We can observe a (un)healthy org, but not good. if good exists in a nat univ, wats the source

[redchango]

@kunzx037 Sure we can, when we speak about "morality" we are speaking about actions that influence the well-being of conscious creatures. Likewise, when we speak about "health", we are speaking about actions that influence physical well-being. You wouldn't argue that I need a reason to suggest smallpox is unhealthy, right? B/c that's what it sounds like you're about to do. "You can't give a reason why smallpox is unhealthy, other then saying "smallpox is unhealthy because it's unhealthy."

[kunzx037]

@redchango We can scientifically test/show that an animal flourishes or not, but we cant scientifically show its flourishing to be morally good. Some out there may say flourishings bad. But u can't give a reason for y ur right & WHY it's good, other than begging the question and saying "flourishing's good bc it's good," which is being arbitrary. If good exists in a naturalistic universe, it must be material and needs a source. What is the source for good in a universe where there is no God?

[redchango]

@kunzx037 It's a bit more than just that. I think Sam Harris summed it up just as well as any other secular philosopher - morality has something to do with the well-being of conscious creatures. That's why we don't have moral obligations to rocks. "Good" is any step that moves away from the worst possible misery for everyone.