And the Lord spake unto the philosopher, "I am the Lord thy God, and I am the source of all that is good. Why does thy secular and moral philosophy ignore me?"

And the philosopher spake unto the Lord, "To answer I must first ask you some questions. You command us to do what is good. But is it good because you command it or do you command it because it is good?"

"Uh" said the Lord "It's good because I command it?"

"Wrong answer surely your mightiness! If the good is only good because you say it is so, then you could, if you wished, make it so that torturing infants was good. But that would be absurd wouldn't it?"

"Of course!" replieth the Lord. "I tested thee and thou has made me pleased. What was the other choice again?"

"You choose what is good because it is good. But that shows quite clearly that goodness does not depend on you at all. So we don't need to study God in order to study the good."

"Even so", spake the Lord, "You've got to admit, I've written some pretty good textbooks on the subject..."

Adapted from Euthyphro by Plato and extracted from "the pig that wants to be eaten" by Julian Baggini.

LOL...brilliant, just brilliant. Nice one

That's quite funny, but it isn't any reason for all people who believe in creationism to start questioning.

What would be said to a creator who doesn't work in static notions of good and evil? What would happen if that creator said that good and evil are two aspects of a singular existent thing? What happens if the creator quotes the law of opposites?

doesn't hold up for me but funny nonetheless.

That's quite funny, but it isn't any reason for all people who believe in creationism to start questioning.

That wasn't the point. Making creationists question is irrelevent. The purpose was to show that morality or belief in goodness does not requrie a deity. Not to convince or unconvince creationists of their religion. I'm past that lol

What would be said to a creator who doesn't work in static notions of good and evil? What would happen if that creator said that good and evil are two aspects of a singular existent thing? What happens if the creator quotes the law of opposites?

All good points philosophically but none of them require a God to define morality and thus none of which negate the purpose of the thread

My intention was not to negate the purpose of anything, just to say that it's purpose to me is only to get a laugh, beyond that, it's moot (due to the way in which I would answer those questions I posed, morality is directly linked to how I would answer those questions). It was only an opinion.

As for my first paragraph, Plato's intention was often to negate the beliefs of creationists (and the necessity of male female relationships) which is why I said what I said. Plus I can't stand anything the man wrote, I'm with Plato's teachers on this one, his is the philosophy of children.

Good luck with your thread, it'll be interesting to watch further responses.

Plato had Euthyphro arguing with Socrates and that discussion was as you said.

However this adapted version (changed and out of original context) is simply as the thread title suggests. To argue a case for morality which excludes God. The question normally put to atheists such as myself is "why have morality if you do not believe in a God". This is merely a small extract to serve the purpose outlined in the title and answer such a question in an admitedly amusing way.

Again (last time) my intent was not to cause creationists to question anything about their own beliefs, merely their assumptions surrounding mine.

PS am not that big a fan of the dude either, too verbose.

That wasn't the point. Making creationists question is irrelevent. The purpose was to show that morality or belief in goodness does not requrie a deity. Not to convince or unconvince creationists of their religion. I'm past that lol

I agree. I'm creationist....but also hold that reason comes first. I for one do not take only Intelligent Design and leave evolution/reason/philosophy. Both Intelligent Design and Evolution are both possible systems of creation......take my word, I have learnt this as a kid reading the Qur'aan....

[

I agree. I'm creationist....but also hold that reason comes first. I for one do not take only Intelligent Design and leave evolution/reason/philosophy. Both Intelligent Design and Evolution are both possible systems of creation......take my word, I have learnt this as a kid reading the Qur'aan.... [/quote]




your a creationist ? so you believe that dinosaurs existed the same time people did ...a bit like the flinstones ? yabba-dabba-dddduuudde you' crazy !!!!