according to what?
Dear Signal,
I don't criticize others. I was simply sharing. I have a sense of the other's worth. I have a sense of honor and esteem for all that involves the well-being of the others. I preciate the importance of this quality of respect the moment I feel myself being treated in a way that is in any way disrespectful -being laughed at, taken lightly, or in any way mistreated are painful experiences. However, I respect all reality and especially all human life as created by God the Father and redeemed by Christ.
Can you tell me how any broad principles are derived from the existence of a supreme being?
These days, most Americans don't realize...
According to a long and elaborate tradition that has a foundation in the written teachings of the Buddha.
Or an eternal material existence.
So that justifies an acknowledgment of a supreme being, but can it be any more specific about guiding our actions?
We still don't know if the god is good, evil, or just capricious.
It's effects on the world don't seem to provide any guidance, since good things and evil things happen.
i'm not a buddhist but let me guess, they center around introspection, transcendence from the material, communion, and the recognition of something greater than ourselves...the whole? don't they believe in reincarnation as well? which implies an eternal spiritual existence, doesn't it?
No.Are you hereby trying to tell me that you feel offended by what I said?
Did Huxley offer evidence that logically justifies the objective truth of this proposition? If not then it is a self refuting statement, a logical contradiction. A personal opinion about how Mr. Huxley would like the world to be. That's nice but its not logically meaningful. So that particular rendition of agnosticism is meaningless.Agnosticism
The definition offered here is taken directly from the words of Thomas Henry Huxley who is credited with inventing the term in the 1870s, and it is his intent and rationale that I believe should form the authoritative meaning of the term.
"Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle ...Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable. This principle may be stated in various ways, but they all amount to this: that it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty. That is what agnosticism asserts and, in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism."
If you wish to debate any of these terms then please create a specific thread for that purpose.
Source: http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=95294
Ultimately truth, freedom, virtue and happiness converge because they are all interdependent and aspects of Love. God is the Summum Bonum if goodness is understood as dynamic and creative.Since we understand God to be the Supreme Being, God is per definition the Summum Bonum.
All men are born equally naked & equally ignorant. Thus, no man can possess the right to determine the rights for any other man. This would seem to suggest that "relativism" is valid. However, relativism cannot support its own weight due to the fact that the relativist asserts the validity of relativism, in absolute terms.