Objective/subjective morality work in progress analogy. Opinions welcomed.
A programmer creates a virtual world where NPC's have the freedom to roam their world and interact with one another. Per the rules of the game, stealing is considered good and, in fact, rewarded
@darwintojesus Correct, you can't believe God is all good, all powerful, all knowing, and creator of everything and believe God didn't create Bundy as evil and just carrying out god's will. That's the problem of evil you theists face.
@mdwfmom@Banasess@TSZarathustra@darwintojesus including from theists. Claiming god as moral standard doesn't solve the problem since there are so many interpretations anyway, including justifying slavery, for example.
@mdwfmom@Banasess@TSZarathustra@darwintojesus Not necessarily, but that's the practical starting point. Majority opinion, although fallible, limits any individual's misconception of right/wrong, and relies on collective reasoning/empathy, like how we moved past slavery despite majority support,
@mdwfmom@Banasess@TSZarathustra@darwintojesus Correct. Based on my moral opinions, it's wrong, and hence the need for collective agreement since the universe is entirely indifferent to it. Not sure what "but you don't like that" is referring to though. That the universe is indifferent?
@mdwfmom@Banasess@TSZarathustra@darwintojesus Ad hominem. They actually did say it was wrong. We collectively decide the rules we live by. We, including christians, accepted slavery as legal, now we collectively don't. And yes, our brains get things wrong all the time, e.g. no one agreeing on who god is.
@AgainstAtheismX I rose from the dead, never mind the lack of evidence proving it, so you should take my arguments seriously. I'm not even telling you to stop believing in god. Just stop posting logically flawed arguments and focus on verifiably proving it exists.
@ThomasTillerman@darwintojesus Sorry, did not. To respond to you, it's easier to do from a desktop, not a phone. I apologize for not being more timely.
@darwintojesus It's possible, but it still doesn't prove god. This would be more appropriate to pose to the theists that deny certain processes, such as evolution. It would be a nice analogy to show objective morality as just being the subjective view of the programmer though.
@SirAllisterGrey@DakariusAshby@AayushSapien@darwintojesus Evidence only gets us back so far and doesn't say what the state of the universe was prior to that point. Quantum eternal models Carroll has spoke of are compatible with known understanding of physics and quantum mechanics, leaving the possibility of an eternal universe open,