On establishing secular morality

[bankside]

The Enlightenment, which established modern Western ideas of morality, is often thought of as a religion, because it assumed several objective truths, namely natural and inalienable rights.

I think the relevant effect of the Enlightenment was to undermine the idea that rights were actually divine gifts bestowed through a priestly brokerage here on earth.

 

[kallipolis]

I really don't see how the Enlightenment was founded on a document that predates Homer.

I have never said that The Enlightenment is based upon Holy Scripture...that's your invention.

 

[kallipolis]

I think the relevant effect of the Enlightenment was to undermine the idea that rights were actually divine gifts bestowed through a priestly brokerage here on earth.

Despite his many clashes with the Catholic hierarchy, Rene Descartes remained a dedicated Catholic until his death.

There is nothing incompatible between theistic belief, and rational thought as Descartes would prove.

You may wish to consider reading Descartes' Discourse on the Method

http://www.literature.org/authors/descartes-rene/reason-discourse/

 

[Alnitak]

I have never said that The Enlightenment is based upon Holy Scripture...that's your invention.

Okay, but you said...

Most of Western Civilisation's principles of morality are founded upon the Judaeo-Christian ethos - try The Ten Commandments.

Our sense of right and wrong in the West are the fruits of 17th-18th century philosophy. The Ten Commandments is not a philosophy on morality, it is a list of proscriptions, most of which are in fact universal.

 

[kallipolis]

Okay, but you said...



Our sense of right and wrong in the West are the fruits of 17th-18th century philosophy. The Ten Commandments is not a philosophy on morality, it is a list of proscriptions, most of which are in fact universal.

Are you suggesting that man's understandings of right, and wrong were a product of The Enlightenment?

I wonder what the human race was doing before The Enlightenment to distinguish between right, and wrong behaviour.

 

[Kulindahr]

In the United States it would be reasonable to suggest that natural and inalienable rights were reserved for those persons with white skins otherwise, native Americans and black skinned Americans were denied such rights for some considerable time......Dr. Martin Luther King's famous speech "I have a dream" was delivered some fifty years ago this very week.

Words that speak of liberty are always interesting to hear.....whereas, actions speak much louder.

Jefferson, who penned those words, certainly meant to include everyone -- they almost had the Civil War right there over the matter. Unfortunately for him and those who agreed with him, in order to keep the South they had to compromise with the bigots.

 

[Kulindahr]

The Enlightenment, which established modern Western ideas of morality, is often thought of as a religion, because it assumed several objective truths, namely natural and inalienable rights.

Except it didn't have to assume them. Descartes took the first step, when he recognized the truth cogito, ergo sum.

 

[Kulindahr]

Our sense of right and wrong in the West are the fruits of 17th-18th century philosophy. The Ten Commandments is not a philosophy on morality, it is a list of proscriptions, most of which are in fact universal.

That does not negate what Kallipolis said, which has to do with what that "17th-18th century philosophy" was the fruit of. From (if I understand it) his perspective, it seems reasonable to suggest that said philosophy, as regards morals, was the fruition of the Biblical principle that while morality can be prescribed in a collection of proscriptions, true morality goes beyond the prescriptions to their intent -- to use the Apostle Paul's phrase words, it rests on the spirit of the law, not the letter.

Or, in later philosophical terms, it was the realization that morality cannot be contained in proscriptions, or even for that matter in dicta of any kind, but rests totally on principles. Dicta may set out certain axioms which define morality at a given point, but they cannot encompass the whole, and to try to encompass the whole by use of dicta is to engage in a not merely impossible task, but in one doomed to strangle in self-contradiction.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you suggesting that man's understandings of right, and wrong were a product of The Enlightenment?

I wonder what the human race was doing before The Enlightenment to distinguish between right, and wrong behaviour.

Current understandings of right and wrong.

 

[kallipolis]

Jefferson, who penned those words, certainly meant to include everyone -- they almost had the Civil War right there over the matter. Unfortunately for him and those who agreed with him, in order to keep the South they had to compromise with the bigots.

Even those couple of hundred black slaves that Jefferson owned?

 

[Alnitak]

Are you suggesting that man's understandings of right, and wrong were a product of The Enlightenment?

I wonder what the human race was doing before The Enlightenment to distinguish between right, and wrong behaviour.

Autocracy, oligarchy, privilege, inequality, injustice, just to name a few of the unrecognized immoralities that the Bible tolerates.

 

[kallipolis]

Autocracy, oligarchy, privilege, inequality, injustice, just to name a few of the unrecognized immoralities that the Bible tolerates.

Holy Scripture's fountain of wisdom describes in great detail the worst, and the best in human behaviour drawn from the stories of very early tribal communities....for the benefit of those of us who seek self improvement through learning from the experiences of earlier generations....that none is perfect especially those who spend their life identifying fault in others while neglecting to recognise their own failings....

.

 

[bort138]

Holy Scripture's fountain of wisdom describes in great detail the worst, and the best in human behaviour drawn from the stories of very early tribal communities....for the benefit of those of us who seek self improvement through learning from the experiences of earlier generations....that none is perfect especially those who spend their life identifying fault in others while neglecting to recognise their own failings....

.

So the god you believe in not only permitted slavery but gave specific instructions on how slaves should be treated so that future generations would understand how wrong slavery is? Maybe Hitler was just trying to teach future generations how wrong ethnic cleansing was by killing all of those Jews. Or maybe your god allowed it to happen because it would be a good teaching moment.

Seems like it would have been much less cruel to simply have a commandment saying "Thou shalt not own other people".

 

[bankside]

Holy Scripture's fountain of wisdom describes in great detail the worst, and the best in human behaviour drawn from the stories of very early tribal communities....for the benefit of those of us who seek self improvement through learning from the experiences of earlier generations....that none is perfect especially those who spend their life identifying fault in others while neglecting to recognise their own failings....

.

It's clear that that's what it is. But that makes it difficult to take seriously as "holy scripture." It makes a lot more sense as "bumbling mythology" or "predictably human effort to ease the enforcement of a bunch of mundane, well-meaning, locally invented tribal codes by instilling fear of invented supernatural repercussions."

And, I'll add, what we might sensibly take from it amounts to more of a "rising damp of wisdom" that occasionally delivers us something clever to think about, than the geyser-like fountain that you make it out to be.

 

[kallipolis]

It's clear that that's what it is. But that makes it difficult to take seriously as "holy scripture." It makes a lot more sense as "bumbling mythology" or "predictably human effort to ease the enforcement of a bunch of mundane, well-meaning, locally invented tribal codes by instilling fear of invented supernatural repercussions."

And, I'll add, what we might sensibly take from it amounts to more of a "rising damp of wisdom" that occasionally delivers us something clever to think about, than the geyser-like fountain that you make it out to be.

You would say that, wouldn't you...... I enjoy your humour....for it prepares my day ahead.

 

[kallipolis]

So the god you believe in not only permitted slavery but gave specific instructions on how slaves should be treated so that future generations would understand how wrong slavery is? Maybe Hitler was just trying to teach future generations how wrong ethnic cleansing was by killing all of those Jews. Or maybe your god allowed it to happen because it would be a good teaching moment.

Seems like it would have been much less cruel to simply have a commandment saying "Thou shalt not own other people".

Your anti religious icons on Hot topics are well noted.....even if over obsessive.

Free will guarantees that human life makes its own choices.