Malum In Se

Awesome work Innerminds!

Malum Prohibitum

“Isn’t the empirical method objective?” – Justin

– “empirical method is *desriptive*. it does not say what is right or wrong, it only shows what *is*. it still opens itself up for human judgement, which is subjective and not objective.”

Brian what is your definition of objective? I’m using the defintion that it is impartial, accurate and precise. I’m confused what you are applying as “Objective”.

If a Scientist proves with empiricism that something will lead to : more abortions, more deception, more abuse of power isn’t that Objective? Why is it that you need Popular opinion?

Its interesting that despite scientific evidence of an action will prove bad for the future of people you would still consider facts and evidence not enough and arbitrary. But these facts and evidence can only come by the mental discipline and rigorous process of science (see scientific method).

Malum Prohibitum

If you read the study the quote was based on, you would find out that I was reiterating the disclaimer the paper made about the complexity of the factors that contribute to suicide.

General increase on number of people committing suicide is has very little value when you consider that it is needs to be bench-marked against something like population growth, economic situation, over-all happiness, and other factors of of a given country. The interpretation of statistics and data need benchmarks.

Also Connecting Morality with Suicide is a claim that needs to be quantified. Its not very objective or constructive if you argue Ad vericundum when comparing suicide to morality. Some cultures, suicide is an accepted “moral” life choice as a way to take responsibility to actions.

Malum Prohibitum

“first of all, i don’t agree that humanity has improved (or is improving) its morality. i don’t think that people today are ‘less evil’ than centuries ago. one can even argue that humanity has lost its moral bearings — blurring the lines between right and wrong.” – brian

@ brian by what reference do you base this opinion? My hobby is in Philippine and Medieval history and I can cite several sources for you to check regarding Moral Standards if you would want to have a more informed opinion.

The works of Zoe Oldenbourg, the most prolific and one of the best in her field, (i have a 2 pages of biblio i can send regarding Ancient to Medieval ways of life). As to moral standards that have changed in as much as 200 years: Crime, Society, and the State in the 19C century Philippines by Greg Bankoff, Writings of Nick Joaquin, An Anarchy of Families… etc.

Also reading up on emancipation, women’s sufferage movement, racism and racial equality are also topics to touch on when anlayzing if human behavior or morality has changed over time.

Pro-Choice, Be Safe (by Lenore Laluna)

If you gapminder, check comparative work hours you’ll see south korea WAY UP there.

You can’t expect larger families unless the government finds a way to make it easier to raise children and make them equipped to handle the more complicated problems of their generation.

God's Divine Plan

We respect Free speech and have no censorship over here. Evidence of someone’s irrationality or mistakes are best left for everyone to observe and interpret. It motivates us to see our own flaws, check ourselves, as well as plainly see the where a particular flaw or divergence originated.

Even the trolls are useful in emphasizing that there are those out there that are irrational and want to attack the confidence of your rational assertions.

I might sound harsh, but Alvin is welcome to exercise his rights, but free-speech is not without its consequences.

If people do not agree and find his arguments irrational, criticize them and point out the flaws let the record show. How else can we learn our own flaws if we don’t have a feedback mechanism or a way to see where our strategy failed.

If it results to name calling, then we can trace the origin of the thought and what caused the reaction.

A Stubborn and Deluded stance takes rational arguments off the table, and provoking is a way to double check if the person is actually READING and trying to comprehend the argument. Once you have his attention, repeat introduction of rational argument… but alas the same stubborn result.

Censorship if any should be left to preventing spam and other disruptive activities.

(beginning with an erroneous premise still counts as irrational despite how logical one will follow conclusions)

Pro-Choice, Be Safe (by Lenore Laluna)

Great post !

I wish more people would analyze what is the significants of the population declines of these countries before jumping to their ‘bias’ conclusions.

Decline in population is not a bad thing as a country moves towards being more developed and raises the average per capita income and quality of life of their citizens.

Can you prove there are no fairies?

great and useful article. I recommend it those who don’t know how to make constructive claims, that lead to non-constructive arguments.

The Greatest Love of All

Was he vague?

I’ve not read the bible but I was attentive in class to know that answer. That cause and effect is one of the few observable that requires no interpretation of theology to understand.

The reason why John did not elaborate was because there is a tendency for some people who don’t make “required” reading about the subject they comment quite confidently about.

The Greatest Love of All

“Understanding God would be easier if we had infinite IQ. You need to truly understand the message of the cross. The greatest blogger sin is to write something with limited thinking. I’m a pinoy freethinker but I have my own definition of who freethinker is.”

Interesting, It would be nice if you would explain your arbitrary definition of “free-thinking”.

A quick glance at Atienza's anti-RH Bill rhetoric

Allowing someone else to practice their belief does not conflict with your own belief. Providing condoms to other people doesn’t violate your belief in the same way you let a muslim maintain their religious duties even in your expense.

This “Violation of Belief” is a double standard and a very poor excuse. In the same way a Hotel Owner is not liable for the premarital sex going in his hotel nor is a quicky motel owner and the staff violating any laws allowing their rooms to be used for such affairs.

Simply put, what people do with contraceptives is none of anyone business. In the same way if you see someone sinning in public but not breaking the law you just come out as a prick trying to correct them.

God is just a big word

@IK
“I respect atheists like you (and Red, if he is), even when they criticize the concept of god. I hope I was respectful enough with my comment above.” – IK

I don’t believe this because if you really did then you would have been intellectually diligent and made constructive claims in your previous arguments instead of ones that are unverifiable and requires people to just take you word for it.

And when someone points out this pattern of reaction makes you not-fit to have a constructive discussion with you claim “ad hominems” and begin going round and round with non-constructive claims again.

Saying “nice” pleasant things or apparent “hostility” doesn’t make a facts and observation less-true or fallacious. It just makes you sound like a ****

Not to forget your guerrilla attacks, inserting off-topic matters like atheist morality in a middle of non-related argument.