View Single Post
Old 01-05-2010, 11:26 AM   #110
Dapper Chimp
Achilles's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,227
Current Game: Pillars of Eternity
10 year veteran!  Helpful!  Veteran Modder  Forum Veteran 
Originally Posted by purifier View Post
It's always been a simple statement, as a moral guideline for all. One good reason as to why this rule is worded the way it is, is so that the words it conveys can even be understood by the uneducated mind; not just the educated mind only. Creating a better version would just be overkill IMO.
It's already been done

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
I mean why mess with something so simple and to the direct point in it's meaning for those who have a hard time in understanding other complicated statements, that really mean the same thing.
It doesn't mean the same thing. In a majority of situations it gets you to the same point, but that isn't the same.

The "golden rule" has problems that the categorical imperative does not. That someone needs to make a modicum of effort to wrap their head around the categorical imperative doesn't strike me as being a very good excuse to reject it.

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
You'll get no argument from me on this point, I've always believe the rule could stand on it's own without religion.
And it does, via the categorical imperative

...which, I believe, brings us right back to where we started

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear with my statement and I think I mislead you. Actually, I don't believe that any religion is totally right or that one is above the other, just because any of them say so. And I really should have mentioned that, from my point view, all religions have become corrupt over time. Anyway, my bad.
It's no problem. I'm glad you clarified though, as it makes it much easier for me to understand where you are coming from.

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
Funny you should mention that, actually I do and have been studying philosophy off and on for quite awhile.

May I offer some suggested reading? I found these books to be very illuminating.

The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason
Why I Am Not A Christian And Other Essays On Religion And Related Subjects

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
Hmmm. To be honest with you, and for some reason, I got that impression from this:
scroll down too "Tenets" and under that look at "Reason, evidence, scientific method", that's where I derived my conclusion about "Secular Humanists" and the "Scientific Method" from. If this is incorrect, and if you could, I would like for you to enlighten me on the this. I would hate to make the wrong assumptions about all this.
I see where you're come from now. Secular humanism does indeed promote reason and critical thinking, however I was not aware that they were so blantant in their committment to science. Thank you for pointing that out.

Originally Posted by purifier View Post
When you say "I'm not sure how making stuff up becomes a superior methodology for uncovering truth in that void", do you mean drawing a conclusion from one's own thinking to make sense of the unexplained?
The glib answer is "yes"

The slightly more detailed response might sound like this:

Drawing a conclusion without the rigorous application of reason and doubt is the exact same things a choosing an "answer" arbitrarily (i.e. because it sounds pretty, makes you feel good about the world, etc).

If something is "unexplained", then why not simply acknowledge that it's "unexplained"? If I encounter something that I don't know, I don't feel compelled to fabricate an answer or accept someone else's supernatural "explanation". I try to find the actual answer, and if I find one, great. If I don't, then I try my best to get over it.
Achilles is offline   you may: