Aug 23 2008
Video: “Life as the Origin and Basis of Morality – Part 1 of 2” by G. Stolyarov II | The Rational Argumentator
The Rational Argumentator
A Journal for Western Man
Principal Index *** Contributors *** Yahoo! Group
Life as the Origin and Basis of Morality – Part 1 of 2 – Video
G. Stolyarov II
Issue CLXXI - August 23, 2008
In this first installment in a two-part video series, Mr. Stolyarov discusses how one might rationally arrive at an ethical system. He shows why a system of ethics based on divine (or human) command is arbitrary and inadequate. Then he goes on to demonstrate that there are necessary prerequisites to an ethical system – namely, the life, volitional faculty, and rationality of those who espouse it. Just as no system can be used to disprove or deny the axioms on which it is founded, neither can an ethical system be used to deny or subvert the values of life, volition, and rationality. Rather, it ought to take the furtherance of these values as its starting point.
Please help promote this video by going to this page and giving it a rating of five stars, as well as embedding it on your websites and sharing it with others.
___________
G. Stolyarov II is a science fiction novelist, independent philosophical essayist, poet, amateur mathematician, composer, contributor to Enter Stage Right, Le Quebecois Libre, Rebirth of Reason, and the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Senior Writer for The Liberal Institute, and Editor-in-Chief of The Rational Argumentator, a magazine championing the principles of reason, rights, and progress. Mr. Stolyarov’s works have been published on GrasstopsUSA.com. He also posts his articles on Helium.com and Associated Content to assist the spread of rational ideas. His newest science fiction novel is Eden against the Colossus. His latest non-fiction treatise is A Rational Cosmology. His most recent play is Implied Consent. You can also view his YouTube Videos. Mr. Stolyarov can be contacted at gennadystolyarovii@yahoo.com.
This TRA feature has been edited in accordance with TRA’s Statement of Policy.
Click here to return to TRA’s Issue CLXXI Index.
These are Great points but the Saul or Abraham-Issac scenario for that matter must be contained within the rationality of an omnipotent being if one is to say that God is infinitely good by who he is thought to be in the Biblical traditon. The Person of faith’s thinking is that God MUST have a righteous method to what seems to be his madness.
For instance, if a group of aliens came to Earth with the intention of destroying you, you would likely kill them for the sole purpose of self- preservation. “Thou shalt not kill” is therefore not a without a clause of … “unless in self-defense of a preservation of the common good.” Furthermore, when taken into their larger context and functionality, the Ten Commandments themselves refer to the common, day-to-day interactions of humans, rather than their uncommon, sporadic exceptions.
Many rules can and logically should have exceptions. For instance, I eat if I’m hungry. Howvever, if I have an upset stomach, I fast in order that I don’t vomit again. Because I’ve done this does not mean the general rule is nullified.
Also, I’d get rid of the bowtie. It seems pretentious.
http://waxingpoetically.today.com
http://artfromtheoutskirts.today.com