Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
I completely respect you for saying so, but I do think this exposes the real danger of moral relativism. It's not a very great leap from here to start questioning what right the rest of society has to impose its 'opinion' that rape is wrong on a person who fancies going out and committing a rape. You have at the very least to accept that morals if not universal are at least 'collective truth'. The people, embodied in the State, decide what is right and are then entitled to require it of everyone, whether they agree with it personally or not.
|
Can`t argue against you there, although I would still claim that a "collective truth" is still just an opinion, but, to get to your next point...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
The Christian position, just to bring this right back to the original question, is of course that there is universal truth, <snip>
|
This, of course, is something that we will never agree on. As an aetheist there simply isn`t an external "force" (for want of a better word) that defines right and wrong, for me at least. My model of the universe does not allow for the concept of absolute truths.
A serious question, but one of those ones that has the potential to sound flippant. As a Christian, you believe that God is the ultimate arbiter or right and wrong. I`ll need to question some of my presumptions about Christianity which may render the rest of this somewhat moot. It has always been my assumption that God is the ultimate authority in the universe for a Christian. It has always been my assumption that Christians see God as a sentient being rather than some nebulous "force". If God is the ultimate authority, there can be no higher being to which he can turn, so while God may define universal truths for humans, who defines universal truths for God? Or is this simply one of those questions that doesn`t get looked at due to the risk of making anyone's brain fall out?
