cutz22 wrote on 01/26/11 at 20:27:35:Join me next time if I have the time and motivation, as I discuss: Theistic and Secular morality! :
I already wrote this post up on another forum so I'll give it the old copy paste. I called the topic: The Is Ought Problem, Theistic Morality, and If Ought Moral Rationality.
"If I want this post to be as coherent as possible, then i ought begin with the Is Ought Problem. And indeed I do, so then it follows that the rational way to begin is like this:
The Is Ought Problem was first posed by David Hume in 1739. It essentially states that it is impossible to derive a prescriptive statement about what ought be the case, or what one ought do, from a descriptive, factual statement about what is the case. Morality is the study of what one ought to do, but if we cannot derive an Ought from an Is, that is a prescription from a fact, then that means that moral prescriptions cannot be based on objective facts, but rather subjective values, or as Hume put it "passions". Let me give an example of someone's first reaction to hearing this: "There is a wall in front of me, therefore I ought not walk forward." But no, I pointed out, it's not the fact that there is a wall in front of you that causes you to not walk forward, but the subjective desire to not smack into the wall. If you wanted to smack into the wall, then you ought walk forward. Even given multiple factual Is statements that would seem to lead towards an ought, it always takes a subjective desire to conclude what one ought do. One more example. "There is a report due tomorrow, he is going to need to stay up late to finish the report, drinking coffee is going to keep him awake." Now from these three objective, factual Is statements, could one conclude that he Ought drink coffee? No, it would take his subjective desire of wanting to finish the report in order to reach that conclusion. And in this way, the facts can only objectively tell us how to fulfill our subjective desires, Hume put it as "The reason is the slave of the passions." For a more detailed description watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bsbw4FqjuQ(For the sake of the scope of this thread I will not go into secular attempts to solve the problem, as I have seen them all fail. However please bring them up if you think one can offer a solution.)
Theists will often use this to proclaim that only god provides an objective source of morality, but even with his omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence, and transcendence, does god solve the Is Ought Problem? Well it would appear the answer is no, for if morality is truly only the realm of subjective feelings, how does a commandment by god change that? It's akin to saying that if god said that blueberry pie was the best type of pie, then it would objectively be true for all persons, regardless of their preferences. Digging deeper, we have the Euthyphro Dilemma. That is, are god's commandments moral by sheer virtue of the fact that he commands them, or does he command them because they are already moral? By the first it would seem morality becomes completely arbitrary; it is no particular quality of an action that makes it moral but simply the fact that god commanded it. There would be no reason for god making a commandment, because the commandment would only become moral after he commanded it. God's moral authority itself would only be circular; he would only be a moral authority after he had made commandments that he adhered to, and additionally, anything he could command would be moral. The second option, that is he commands them because they are already moral, gives no account of morality. God is ultimately a divine mailman, morals are outside and beyond his own power. He is completely irrelevant as to whether or not things are moral, and thus it presupposes morality at the onset. Now even if all of these objections were met, all the theist would establish is that god's commands are moral, but would it mean that the Is Ought Gap is solved? By the mere fact that God has commanded something and that something is moral, could we conclude that you ought follow that commandment? That has not been established. Why ought we follow god's commandments? Why ought we be moral? The theist has not yet shown why. Perhaps the theist would turn to hell, we ought be moral and we ought follow god's commandments because we will go to hell if we don't. But this would require the subjective desire of wanting to avoid hell. It appears god cannot solve the Is Ought Problem. Some of this video is good:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWNW-NXEudk#t=8m16s
Pages: 
