G'day, fellow RationalWikians! Don't forget to visit the Campaign page of the 2016 Board of trustees election in order to make your voice heard. Suggested activities include:

  • Endorsing select candidates (lending a hand to your loyal henchmen and/or glorious overlords!)
  • Anti-endorsing select candidates (character-assassinating your hated opponents!)
  • Providing moar goat (please wipe afterwards)
  • Just asking questions to the candidates

Your participation might help other users better direct their votes. More importantly, it'll show the world that we've yet to go full Citizendium in terms of election hype!

from FuzzyCatPotato (Talk), group Site wide (urgent) at 00:24, 25 July 2016

Talk:Divine command theory

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This article seems to wander all over the map... it goes from talking about its subject to a clumsy walk into arguments (and refutations) about the existence of God. What the hell is "Divine command theory" anyway, and who subscribes to it? I'm almost thinking deletion would be the kindest solution here... ħumanUser talk:Human 07:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Then again, maybe I just don't understand it. Or then again, I might be right in that it is written lumpily. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Argument by assertion

I'm not sure if this is a valid line of reasoning. We are considering an axiom, here, for defining what is morally good and morally bad: What God declares good is good, what God declares bad is bad and what God does not chime in on is neither good nor bad.

If we assume God has the ability to declare something morally good, then we can assume God has the ability to declare that He, Himself, is morally good. It is just a direct derivation of our initial assumption. In order to make this an argument by assertion, we would have to show that given the assertions above, there is a contradiction.

Does anybody have a definition for defining something as morally good or morally bad that does not make an initial, axiomatic, assumption? --Bertrc (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

. . . Okay then. Removing. --Bertrc (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools