3 ms·
I do see how one can say it's arbitrary. There is a set of rules that we didn't make, that a god imposes on us. We may know why for some rules. We might not kno
by virmundi 11y ago
I do see how one can say it's arbitrary. There is a set of rules that we didn't make, that a god imposes on us. We may know why for some rules. We might not know others. The system could be called arbitrary.
My reason is entirely based on experience. I have not felt the spirit of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, nor his noodlely appendage. I have felt the Spirit. This makes it not arbitrary. It's rooted in God. It's rooted in the absolute.
That's why if I ever stopped believing in the Trinity, I would be a nihilist. It's a good starting point. It admits that everything is arbitrary. As such, I think we could build on it to a Utilitarian system. We all agree that core set of values is arbitrary, but that it's build on avoiding pain. Avoiding pain is an arbitrary metric, but well, the majority doesn't want to be kicked, so let's agree that we shouldn't do that to each other.
- lovemenot 11y agoThis is a cordial conversation and I have no desire to be the first turn it mean. So please read the following in the most charitable light. You seem to apply two standards. To yourself, your personal experience is sufficient. Yet from others, a more rigorous justification is expected. By analogy: if I were Japanese, I would definitely prefer Buddhism over Shinto. Yet, I am not Japanese, which rather undermines my argument. Under such hypothetical circumstances my perspective would surely be other than it actually is now. The reason I pursue this point is that, historically, people with faith have argued unreasonably that the only viable alternative to their unique faith is [name_a_specific_extreme_and_scary_philosophical_position_here]. To be fair, if you are doing this at all, you are doing so only subtly.