CARLSON: The bottom of this, on your web site, you have a statement: "We find that morality should not be derived from religious texts." What should morality be ... what should it be derived from?
JACKSON: Well, morality is not derived from religious texts. Religious texts actually contradict each other. If you read the Bible, it contradicts itself on nearly every page. And the fact that people can decide which one to go with shows that they are getting their morality from somewhere else.
Morality is actually based off of empathy, and failing empathy, it's based off of fear of reprisal from the law. That is where morality comes from.
CARLSON: Yes. But the law, it's a circular argument. You need to think through it a little bit more, Thomas, because the law itself is based on at least a notion of abstract right and wrong, and that is not rooted in empathy or any emotion, but ... you know, an abstract belief that this is right and this is wrong because someone larger, in control, says so.
For everything there is a need for a benchmark (or a standard). Without a benchmark there will be no opportunity for comparison; i.e. no way to tell good from bad. This applies also to the issue of morality.
Morality cannot only be based on empathy or the fear of law and order; because if that is so there will be chaos, as empathy and fear are things that vary and change! Therefore we need a constant; something that don't change like the speed of light. In the case of morality, we have God; who is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8).
I rest my case.
No comments:
Post a Comment