A look at categorical imperative as a method of determining morality of actions

Preface[ edit ] In the preface to the Groundwork Kant motivates the need for pure moral philosophy and makes some preliminary remarks to situate his project and explain his method of investigation. Kant opens the preface with an affirmation of the ancient Greek idea of a threefold division of philosophy into logic, physics, and ethics. Logic is purely formal—it deals only with the form of thought itself, not with any particular objects.

A look at categorical imperative as a method of determining morality of actions

Tony Hoffman August 16, at That being said, I would laugh out loud if I was in the audience and a Christian theist said that the God in the Bible is not relevant to the existence of God or objective moral values.

Table of Contents

But I agree that if this was a philosopher arguing with an atheist then my reply 2 would be irrelevant — I am just presuming Christian theist as the other side in this kind of debate.

Martin August 16, at I think this type of discussion is a discussion about Biblical literalism, not God. Only fundie literalists are vulnerable to this type of criticism.

A look at categorical imperative as a method of determining morality of actions

Do you think that if Craig were the theist in the debate he would be able to brush aside my number 2 as easily as you believe Morriston would? But at the very least you have introduced the first branch that would come off something like retort number 2.

Divine command theory is just subjectvism writ large, so it does not get us objective values. IF God instantiates objective goodness, that is fine, but there is no necessity that this objective goodness be found in God, it could be simply a property found in the world why does it have to be in God?

BW August 16, at Although there may have been some validity to some of the points, it was written in an apples to oranges way. Specifically, it generalizes all atheists while using a single example for theists. This is simply incorrect. The atheist loses the chess match because he prepared for the debate by reading Wikipedia rather than Plantinga, Rowe, Alston, Oppy, and so on.

A theist like Craig, on the other hand, has read all these thinkers many times over. Craig argument really is oversimplified and pretty much incoherent nonsensical. Specifically, it implies three things that are demonstrably false: Comparing the composite average to the best of the best?

Does that really say anything? However, in general, Spanish basketball players beat American players because Pau Gasol plays for the L.

The Fallacies of Egoism and Altruism, and the Fundamental Principle of Morality

He just says that that is a debate over Biblical literalism, which is not the topic today. He says that if God commanded genocide against the Canaanites, that perhaps the human writers were simply mistaken. Listen to the Wes Morriston interview and think about how he would frame it.

In fact, he has a paper on this very thing: The human authors write down that God told them to kill all the Canaanites, and God does a mega-facepalm. Lo and behold, here comes Jesus, telling everyone how nice it would be to be nice to people for a change.Below are samples of my writing, preceded by a list.

Most of the pieces are taken from a philosophy club's now-defunct website, where members posted comments and arguments on various topics. Atheists often lose public debates with theists, especially when going up against heavyweights like William Lane Craig..

I don’t know of an atheist losing a debate to someone who denies evolution. The Fallacies of Egoism and Altruism, and the Fundamental Principle of Morality (after Kant and Nelson) I have not done wrong.

The "Negative Confession" or Protestation of Ani, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, The Book of Going Forth by Day, The Complete Papyrus of Ani, Featuring Integrated Text and Full-Color Images, translated by Dr.

Raymond O. Faulkner [, , Chronicle Books, San. Beneficent actions and motives have traditionally occupied a central place in morality. Common examples today are found in social welfare programs, scholarships for needy and meritorious students, communal support of health-related research, policies to improve the welfare of animals, philanthropy, disaster relief, programs to benefit children and the incompetent, and preferential hiring and.

Atheists often lose public debates with theists, especially when going up against heavyweights like William Lane Craig.

I don’t know of an atheist losing a debate to someone who denies evolution. That’s safe ground because the atheist can stick to. IOANNES PAULUS PP. II VERITATIS SPLENDOR. Blessing. Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate, Health and the Apostolic Blessing!

Shayara Bano Vs. Union of India | Latest Supreme Court Judgments | Law Library | AdvocateKhoj

The splendour of truth shines forth in all the works of the Creator and, in a special way, in man, created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen ). Truth enlightens man's intelligence and shapes his freedom, leading him to know and love the Lord.

Shayara Bano Vs. Union of India | Latest Supreme Court Judgments | Law Library | AdvocateKhoj