Ftk
Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007
|
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Jan. 03 2008,08:30) | Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 03 2008,08:22) | I'm saying that, within an evolving world, there are no moral absolutes. Morality is relative. The acts that Skatje condones can become morally acceptable because there is no reason for them not to unless someone else is hurt in the act. Do what you want as long as you don't think it's hurting someone else. Even that moral rule evolved through evolution.
That does not mean that all atheists would become involved in those actions or even approve of them. Everyone has their own reasons for why they would or would not participate in such behavior. There is no particular base for morality, but rather our morality is based on present social situations, and it is relative, evolving, and certainly not absolute. |
My emphasis added. Note the switch in words from "evolving" to "atheist" without skipping a beat between these two paragraphs.
If you ever needed proof that FtK believes that evolution, a scientific theory, is identical to atheism, a perspective about deities or lack thereof, you've got it right here. If you ever needed proof that she doesn't understand the difference between philosophical and methodological naturalism, you've got it right here. If you want to understand why these conversations go in circles, you've got it right here. |
Dave, atheism is not equivalent to evolution. Obviously, many people of a variety of religious beliefs believe that evolution was instigated by a designer.
The point is that, for the atheist, morals are the direct result of evolution. Do you see the difference?
Yes, for the atheist, eveything is the result of the process of an evolving world. But, the ToE itself is not atheistic. It depends on your interpretation and your beliefs.
-------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths" -forastero
|