tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post7319669206029507550..comments2024-03-28T08:57:53.180+00:00Comments on Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart: Nietzsche's Critique of Jordan Peterson's Nietzschean ReligionLarry Arnharthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-92081567526729311552019-05-01T20:44:32.191+01:002019-05-01T20:44:32.191+01:00Interesting article... Even though Peterson refere...Interesting article... Even though Peterson references Nietzsche all the time, I think an astute reader will eventually realize that Peterson is fiercely ANTI-Nietzschean, in his conclusions. http://rontimus.mozello.com/blog/params/post/1557085/Jayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10965430922452269411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-35930672418011857532018-05-09T19:39:23.287+01:002018-05-09T19:39:23.287+01:00CJColucci, I'm sure that's all you would d...CJColucci, I'm sure that's all you would do after you first found the Ring. But after a while, seeing how well things have gone so far, would you want to do more? Maybe convince yourself that you're kind of a superhero doing good: I'll kill Trump, or Kim Jong Un, or Richard Spencer? And after all the good I've done humanity, I'm entitled to some good things for myself ...Roger Sweenyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12734128265493099062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-46594588042699592842018-05-06T01:08:53.018+01:002018-05-06T01:08:53.018+01:00It seems to me that the conclusion that " wha...It seems to me that the conclusion that " what is right or wrong for humans is dependent on God's will"is an inescapable conclusion of Theism. <br /> So if God wills it, it is right and good,whether it's slavery or genocide, and regardless of how we feel about it. <br /> For Theist, it seems to me, must accept ,humans can be wrong about morality but God can't, for he is the source of morality. <br /> I've read of Kierkegaard, but never read him. <br />However if the phrase "suspension of the ethical" implies, as it seems to, a distinction between ethical behavior and behavior in accordance with God's will, then I believe it's a false distinction.<br />I don't see how, assuming Theism is true, there can be no difference between God's Will/ Command and ethical actions. <br /> I believe values exist only in/for minds. Nothing is good/ evil, right/ wrong except to a mind. <br />Theism maintains God is the Supreme Mind.<br /> The Supreme Mind must be the source of the Supreme values. <br /> This belief can lead to behaviors that don't seem to advance human flourishing. <br /> It's possible of course that we're wrong about what advances human flourishing while God isn't, or that human flourishing<br />isn't the Supreme value. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-48727681426833225072018-05-05T21:42:01.519+01:002018-05-05T21:42:01.519+01:00Doesn't the theist say that what is right or w...Doesn't the theist say that what is right or wrong depends on God's command? So, for example, murder and slavery are right when God commands this in the Bible? Isn't that what Kierkegaard meant by the "suspension of the ethical" required by faithful obedience to God?Larry Arnharthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-29045104228170070272018-05-05T21:29:18.064+01:002018-05-05T21:29:18.064+01:00I suspect the answer to both questions is "No... I suspect the answer to both questions is "No."<br /> Most people internalize the beliefs of their society and one's metaphysics doesn't seem to affect that ability,nor, always ,<br />one's behavior. <br /> I don't know the statistics to definitively answer your last question. <br /> As far the first question, that is even harder to answer. <br /> It depends on how we define an immoral act, which requires a definition of morality to serve as a guiding principle when evaluating actions.<br /> If abortion is murder, then the U.S.and other Western societies are among the most immoral in history,dwarfing, in evil, Nazis and Communist alike. <br /> If Atheist/Materialist are correct. If there is no transcendent consciousness ,then we can't even say murder is wrong.<br /> Only that we feel it is. <br />The proposition, "Murder is wrong. ",tells us more about the speaker than the act of murder. <br /> For a Theist an action is wrong because it violates our true nature, the purpose for which we're created. <br /> The template for our behavior is in the mind of God.So it exist independently of us and in that sense is objective. <br /> Just as only the creator of a machine can determine whether or not it's "acting" according to it's design and the machine would have no say so in the matter, so it is with us.<br /> For the Atheist there is no "true" human nature ,only temporarily evolved tendencies,subject to natural selection which could ,in time make us Elois or Morlocks.<br />Consequently there is no template by which to evaluate human actions,except as "means" to some "end" .<br /> Unfortunately there is no "objective" preferred end. <br /><br /> <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-83125071143873029102018-05-05T13:41:12.922+01:002018-05-05T13:41:12.922+01:00Is there any empirical evidence that those who bel...Is there any empirical evidence that those who believe in a transcendent morality are more moral than those who believe in a secular morality? Are homicide rates lower in religious societies than in more secular societies?Larry Arnharthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14619785331100785170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-3979100347978203192018-05-05T10:18:18.975+01:002018-05-05T10:18:18.975+01:00Only a morality grounded in a transcendent reality... Only a morality grounded in a transcendent reality is an objective morality. <br />That is, it exist independently of what humans think, believe or feel. <br /> If there is no transcendent consciousness, then there aren't any moral facts. <br /> The moral sentiments we possess, are just that, sentiments, feelings, resulting from our accidentally,randomly evolved brains. <br /> They're not eternal truths about right and wrong good and evil, just products of our evolution.<br /> No more meaningful than the fact that most of us have five digits on each hand. <br /> An accident of evolution. <br />Our brains could have been hardwired differently and we might have evolved a different moral code,or none at all. <br /> The one thing a Theist can consistently do that an Atheist can't is claim some act is morally wrong. <br /> If Atheist were consistent they could only claim the act is felt to be wrong by most people, or that the act is not normal behavior for humans.<br /> By the way I'm agnostic. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-35173202658834469792018-05-03T19:50:23.725+01:002018-05-03T19:50:23.725+01:00I've never found the Ring of Gyges argument al... I've never found the Ring of Gyges argument all that convincing. I'm as much a sinner as the next fellow, but I don't think I would come close to exploiting the ring's potential for mischief or outright evil if I had one. Maybe I'd occasionally skulk around the women's locker room or sneak into the movie theater or the museum or the ballpark without paying, but that's about it.CJColuccihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03691840821795365920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16355954.post-53063779599424465412018-05-03T15:01:34.749+01:002018-05-03T15:01:34.749+01:00I have never read Peterson, but I share what you d...I have never read Peterson, but I share what you describe as being his point. Pinker shows violence as going down and says its due to "enlightened" reasoning. But several alternative reasons also exist- 1) post WWII economic growth that lifts all boats and papers over simmering, below the surface tensions. In other words the potential remains present but is merely latent. Second, isnt Peterson's point that people who say they are atheists not really living as atheists. In other words, is there really such a contradiction? Finally, nuclear weapons have frightened leaders into keeping a lid on great power wars and the epic bloodshed those unleash. <br /><br />Maybe we really are still living in the shadow of Faith, but that will eventually fade away. Then we will see if Pinker is right. Also, for a moral society transcending Faith and coming out om as a result, it is worth pointing out that America alone has aborted around 60 million babies since Roe v. Wade. If you believe those are lives, then we are talking about mass murder on a very large scale. That does not exactly seem to make for a "less violent" society, just one that puts on less of a show about it than in past eras with public executions or nomadic raiders laying waste to agricultural pastoralists.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15284927435688489451noreply@blogger.com