That isn't a conclusion. That's a premise. And the only "conclusions" you've offered are just restatements of this premise. Your premise has been challenged in many ways, and logical counterarguments have been offered against them, but you haven't addressed any of them.
Just for argument purposes what if we assume Option 2...Natural occurrence/accident of nature could be the source of ethical consciousness. What if from matter consciousness formed just as language and thought formed. How could this happen in a dead material universe? Or to state it another way, "How can the personal emerge from the non-personal?" That had been my position for many years--consciousness cannot come from non-conscious matter. Then I heard an interesting lecture from an economist named Jim Rickards. He has applied Alfred Kuhn's paradigm model to economic markets and has some interesting insights into econo-meterics, and business cycles. Only theologians and a few economists get it. Anyway, in the link Rickards explained the concept of emerging properties. You will have to temporarily lock up your Platonist tendencies however. And I will temporarily lock up my Keynesian tendencies. Episode 2 Jim Rickards | Complexity Science, Bayesian Inference Theory, and the Next Financial Crisis
Faith is the defense. It is the proof. You simply don't recognize this. The faithful do. It's a choice.
Faith isn't proof. And, at least in terms of logic and reason, it isn't a defense. A choice, yes, but not proof. If faith were proof every religion in the world would be the right one, even the contradictory ones. Hell, I could just say I have faith you are wrong and that would be proof you are wrong.
No, “objective morality” could only exist in premise #1. Subjective morality has absolutely no problem existing in the reality all around you.
Well, that particular lecture Rickards mentions paradigms. There is another lecture in which he refers to Kuhn by name. A better summary would be wiki at Emergence. Rickards explained that a single human cell cannot read, see, think, listen, or speak. However, with billions of interconnected cells the human intellect can do all of these things--these are emerging properties out of complexity. Therefore, the old dead matter paradigm should be replaced with one that takes into account this complexity/dynamism from which human consciousness emerges. This will require minimizing Platonism that minimizes, or underestimates material existence as just a shadow of the objective ideal realm of the Forms. Applying the paradigm model to economics is devastating for NeoLiberal Free Market Ideology. Economist Steven Keen has applied paradigm modeling to banking and credit in the form of computer models using Marxist Hyman Minsky paradigm ( Keen actually runs the computer models on YouTube). The entire Neo-Classical economic paradigm is collapsing at this very moment.
It does, but if God based morality on any objective factor beyond his subjective thoughts, then there would be an objective basis for morality that didn't require God. God would just be the middle man.
Hm, an awareness and knowledge of all things would require some kind of subjective experience. Knowledge itself is experienced subjectively.
So, then we need rules to follow in order to reach the logical conclusion. I'm not aware of writings of other religions (not churches) on how to know if what you believe is true. The New Testament has the instructions. So, does the Book of Mormon. But, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism and others don't in their sacred writings. So, here are the instruction of the two sacred books that do: James Chapter 1:3 - 8 (New Testament), "3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. 4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing. 5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. 6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. 7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. 8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." Keys: Patience, ask God, ask in faith, don't waver in your faith, don't expect a response right away, do not be double minded or not being sincere in your desire for a testimony of faith in God. Moroni 10:3 - 5 (Book of Mormon), "3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts. 4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. 5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. Keys: Read, study, meditate with faith. Ponder what you read, study and meditate, Ask God the Father in the Name of Christ if these words are not true. Or that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost live, Do so with a sincere heart (not double minded), real intent, with faith in Christ, accept the Holy Ghost with patience with righteous desire to know the truth. In other versus in both the Bible and Book of Mormon, another key is that in order not to be a double minded man, there are actually three key concepts that must work together for you to come to the truth that God lives and Jesus Christ is Lord. Faith-Hope-Charity. Without Charity, there is not faith or hope. There is nothing. Charity's definition is "The Pure Love of Christ." So, you want to know the truth? Stop hating Christ and start loving your neighbor as thy self instead of condemning them because of their "FAITH."
I don't condemning faith. Have as much faith as you want. Just don't confuse it for proof in a debate. That's what logic and reason are for.
Knowledge is just collected data. Human knowledge requires subjective experience because humans don’t have universal knowledge of everything. The bigger point to bring up is that omniscience destroys free will and without free will, morality is totally meaningless. Objective morality could exist but that morality wouldn’t mean anything in practice because no one is making any choices.
Knowledge is a subjective awareness of that data. After all, an encyclopedia doesn't know anything. It is collected data, but the encyclopedia itself knows nothing. It's like the Chinese room thought experiment. If we went with a functionalist theory of mind though, then yeah, I think you are right. Although that would also mean that the universe is already omniscient, with or without God.
Good point on morality and free will. Paul Tillich noted that "Cognitive distance is the presupposition of cognitive union...The unity of distance and union is the ontological problem of knowledge" (Systematic Theology, Vol.1, p. 94). Cognitive union would be omniscience in which subject and object are one in principle. If acosmism were true, nothing would ever happen much less free choice. (Emile Mayerson 1859-1933). Thomas Kuhn cites Meyerson's work as influential while developing the ideas for his main work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
No. Sure, like there's some objective standard, other than God, by which God may be judged. Of course you do. We've been over that. Were that the case, He would hardly have provided every human with a conscience. Sure it can, even if it's true.
Conscience This is another related concept, in this discussion. What is it? Is it a Real Thing, or a human construct, imposed upon a pliable herd? Conscience is closely related to morality. It is the 'thing' within humans that reflects the inner, felt morality. It provides the 'sting' when it is violated. It could be correlated to pain, the negative feedback our body gives when we do something injurious to ourselves. In the same way, conscience provides negative feedback when we injure it by violating it's sensitivity. As usual, I'll give a dictionary definition, in the context of this thread. Conscience: the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a feeling of obligation to do right or be good All of the terms used in these definitions are steeped in moralizing undertones. 'Sense', 'moral goodness', 'do right', etc, ALL reflect the underlying assumption of common knowledge of these things. 'Good' carries a moral judgement, as well as 'bad'. Nobody is confused, or thinks that murder, theft, lying, etc are 'good!', and bravery, honesty, and altruistic acts are 'bad!' So there is a common base of communication, even crossing language, culture, race, and time. You can ask anyone, in any culture, era, or region, to list 'good & bad!' things, and they will very nearly correlate. There may be a few specifics, or arbitrary cultural mores that vary, but the core elements of morality are consistent and constant, throughout the human experience. An Indian might have, 'eaten by tiger' as bad, while a pacific islander might use shark. But the basics, murder, theft, assault, fraud, lying; are universally held in disdain by the human collective. I know of no culture or society where these things are esteemed as virtues. On the 'good' side, bravery, hard work, altruistic acts, kindness, honesty, helping in time of need, and personal responsibility are universally esteemed and held as virtuous, among human beings. I haven't had many quotes in this thread, but i will rectify that immediately. There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right. ~Martin Luther King Jr Through pride we are ever deceiving ourselves. But deep down below the surface of the average conscience a still, small voice says to us, something is out of tune. ~Carl Gustav Jung The only tyrant I accept in this world is the 'still small voice' within me. And even though I have to face the prospect of being a minority of one, I humbly believe I have the courage to be in such a hopeless minority. ~Mahatma Gandhi The torture of a bad conscience is the hell of a living soul. ~John Calvin It is neither right nor safe to go against my conscience. ~Martin Luther A clear conscience is the sure sign of a bad memory. ~Mark Twain ..more on conscience coming..
Good quotes.. these people seem to believe that 'conscience', is a Real Thing, and not just a delusion. Why should their opinion carry less weight than some kid in his mom's basement, pecking away on his keyboard? On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” And Vanity comes along and asks the question, “Is it popular?” But Conscience asks the question, “Is it right?”... The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of convenience, but where he stands in moments of challenge, moments of great crisis and controversy. ~Martin Luther King Jr. Nobody can turn you into a slave unless you allow them. Nobody can make you afraid of anything, unless you allow them. Nobody can tell you to do something wrong, unless you allow them. God never created you to be a slave, man did. God never created division or set up any borders between brothers, man did. God never told you hurt or kill another, man did. So why is man your god, and not the Creator? ~Suzy Kassem There is no witness so dreadful, no accuser so terrible as the conscience that dwells in the heart of every man. ~Polybius How pitiful is an intelligence used only to make excuses to quieten the conscience. ~Ignazio Silone
You just said you did. You make moral judgements, like anyone else. You reflect a 'sense' of morality, even while denying it.
