Internet Goosing the Antithesis

Saturday, June 03, 2006

One-shot refutation of moral dogmatism

Here is the one-shot refutation of any moral dogmatism, be it based on "religion", "the commandments", "the law", or any other doctrine that people claim is necessary for morality.

When they tell you : "If people didn't have X, they would just go around raping and killing people. How could you stop anyone from coming in your home, killing you, and stealing all your possessions?"

Ask this : "If YOU didn't have X any more, WOULD you go around raping and killing people? Would you come in my home, kill me, and steal all my possessions? YES OR NO?"

By tearing down their pretense of "people are like this or that", you reduce them to an unsavory choice : either they are the only moral person on the planet, which is impossible, or they were dead wrong.

Post a Comment


At 6/03/2006 1:27 PM, Blogger Zachary Moore declaimed...

Such a lovely dilemma.

At 6/03/2006 8:55 PM, Blogger olly declaimed...

What really cracks me up is the dogmatists response to this of "more people would". Do we really need crazy appeals to fictional authority to help us to be 'moral people'?

I am an atheist, and yet I'm not killing, I'm not raping, I'm not stealing etc. Besides the fact that it's against my nature to hurt another unless in self-defense, at the VERY least I'm aware that it's in my best self-interests to not kill someone else, if from a legal standpoint if for no other reason.

Appealing to an FSM is not necessary for moral activity.

And don't forget, just as many people who claim a belief in the FSM-style dogma DO act immorally.


At 6/09/2006 8:57 PM, Blogger 888 declaimed...

X is conscience. If you didn't have you would do anything you could get away with. Example: Darwin and the cannabals.

At 11/27/2010 12:56 PM, Blogger Michael declaimed...






Create a Link

<< Home