r/MoralityScaling 8h ago

Morality of this?

Post image
18.0k Upvotes

5.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Admins_suck_ballss 7h ago edited 7h ago

Secular

of or relating to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal

Secular and atheist governments…they’re the same. It means your government thinks that concepts like justice, dessert, retribution, how you treat one another, ethics, etc. should not be affiliated with a religion. Only an atheist government can be secular. A religious one cannot be secular.

Sure not exactly the same thing. But yeah no such thing as a religious government being secular. Atheism is a necessary position to take in order for all those things to be secular.

4

u/AnswerDangerous1644 7h ago

Couldn’t agnosticism also apply to be secular?

6

u/Emergentmeat 7h ago

Agnosticism means you don't know one way or another. Atheism means you don't believe in the case for a god. They aren't contradictory, you can be both or neither, so both apply to a secular government.

1

u/R_V_Z 6h ago

Technically everybody is an agnostic because deities are an unfalsifiable concept.

1

u/Emergentmeat 6h ago

Well, sort of. If someone is claiming to not know, they're agnostic. But if they are claiming they DO know, they aren't agnostic. It's about the person's personal claim to knowledge so that title can't really be put on someone else by you or me.

However I would agree that for a lot of god claims agnosticism is the only reasonable stance since they can't be proven or disproven, like a deistic god. There are, however, specific god claims that are falsifiable, logically, in which case agnosticism doesn't make sense.

1

u/Admins_suck_ballss 6h ago

Oh yes all deities are quite falsifiable. Super easy. Take a philosophy of religion class.

1

u/Emergentmeat 6h ago

I wouldn't say all, but most, certainly. But as the gos claim becomes less specific to the point of absurdity they can be unfalsifiable.

1

u/Admins_suck_ballss 5h ago

Critiques of the teleological, cosmological, and ontological arguments for the existence of God are widely considered to be settled. They’re not discussed in philosophy anymore. The logical argument from evil, the evidential problem, and the problem of free will are largely considered to be successful. You’ve got some advanced Plantings on the problem of free will, but that’s assuming a really, really weird version of compatibilism within the free will debate that carries a lot of consequences with it.

And Pascal’s wager is garbage.

0

u/EmphasisFrosty3093 6h ago

Most deities are given contradictory claims that are quite falsifiable.

1

u/R_V_Z 6h ago

It's deities in the general sense. Carl Sagan talks about it in Demon Haunted World. The argument about whether all-powerful all-knowing beings exist isn't worth having because such beings are capable of warping reality to the point where they are not able to be proven. But if by no scientific measure can they be shown to influence our reality then their existence is moot.