Re: Conoscere lIslam
Inviato da Oscar Jager il 21/9/2014 14:47:02
Richard Dawkins e' teologia neocon ?
Domanda dal pubblico :
- "My question is, for Professor Dawkins ,considering that atheism cannot possibly have any sense of absolute morality, would it not then be an irrational leap of faith, which atheist themselves so harshily condemn, for an athiest to decide between right or wrong ? "
Prof. Dawkins risponde :
- "The absolute morality that a religious person might profess would include what ? Stoning people for adultery? Death for apostasy ? Punishmente for beaking the sabbath?
This are all thing which are religiously based absolute moralities.
I don't think I want an absolute morality.
I think I want a morality that is forth out, reasoned, argued, discuss ; based upon almost say "intelligent design" [..] If you actually look at the moralities is that are accepted among modern people, among 21 century prople : we don't believe in slavery anymore, we believe in equality of women , we believe in being gentle, we believe in being kind to animals.
This are all things which are entirely recent, they have very little basis in biblical or coranic scripture, they're things that they've developed over historical time through a consesus of reasoning, sober, discussion, argument, legal theory, political and moral philosophy.
They do not come from religion, to the extent that you can find the good bits in religious scripture, you have to cherry pic; you search your way through the bible por the quaran and you find the occasional verse that is an acceptable profession of morality, and you say: "Look at that that's religion" and you leave out the horrible bits, then you say : "We don't believe that anymore, we've grown out of it", well of course we grown out of it, because of secular moral philosophy and rational discussion."
Trascritto a braccio ma credo di aver capito bene tutto.
Basta metterlo nel translator si capisce il senso
Domanda dal pubblico :
- "My question is, for Professor Dawkins ,considering that atheism cannot possibly have any sense of absolute morality, would it not then be an irrational leap of faith, which atheist themselves so harshily condemn, for an athiest to decide between right or wrong ? "
Prof. Dawkins risponde :
- "The absolute morality that a religious person might profess would include what ? Stoning people for adultery? Death for apostasy ? Punishmente for beaking the sabbath?
This are all thing which are religiously based absolute moralities.
I don't think I want an absolute morality.
I think I want a morality that is forth out, reasoned, argued, discuss ; based upon almost say "intelligent design" [..] If you actually look at the moralities is that are accepted among modern people, among 21 century prople : we don't believe in slavery anymore, we believe in equality of women , we believe in being gentle, we believe in being kind to animals.
This are all things which are entirely recent, they have very little basis in biblical or coranic scripture, they're things that they've developed over historical time through a consesus of reasoning, sober, discussion, argument, legal theory, political and moral philosophy.
They do not come from religion, to the extent that you can find the good bits in religious scripture, you have to cherry pic; you search your way through the bible por the quaran and you find the occasional verse that is an acceptable profession of morality, and you say: "Look at that that's religion" and you leave out the horrible bits, then you say : "We don't believe that anymore, we've grown out of it", well of course we grown out of it, because of secular moral philosophy and rational discussion."
Trascritto a braccio ma credo di aver capito bene tutto.
Basta metterlo nel translator si capisce il senso
Messaggio orinale: https://old.luogocomune.net/site/newbb/viewtopic.php?forum=47&topic_id=7752&post_id=261304