Wisdom and Cheese- Deadly Thigamajiggers (General)

by dhw, Monday, December 05, 2011, 23:11 (4737 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

I’m struggling to understand the purpose of replacing the traditional biblical concepts of good/evil with functional/dysfunctional. Tony has patiently listed various sins, as described in Proverbs and Galatians, but I’ll only quote one list for reference: sexual immorality, impurity, depravity, idolatry, sorcery, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish rivalries, dissensions, factions, envying, murder, drunkenness, carousing, and similar things.

TONY: Now, taking these things without any context of morality, but instead looking at them through the lens of mechanistic 'functional vs. dysfunctional', it is pretty obvious that this is a list of things that will cause dysfunction, either in the individual or in the group.

We need to agree on what we mean by morality. Whole books have been devoted to the subject, but I’ll opt for a dictionary definition, and we’ll see if you accept it: “Relating to human behaviour, esp. the distinction between good and bad or right and wrong behaviour.” (Collins) If you accept that, the next hurdle is our criteria for good/bad, right/wrong. I have already suggested that the basic criterion is whether behaviour is beneficial or harmful to the individual and/or to those who are affected by it. If it’s beneficial, it’s good, if it’s harmful, it’s bad. You say of the above “sins”: “All of these things are things that will hurt you, hurt someone else, or degrade the functionality of the group.” What, then, is the difference between our definitions? It stands to reason that if something is hurtful/harmful, it affects the functioning of individuals and/or the group (who else can be hurt/harmed?).

You say: “The vast majority of these things have scientifically proven negative consequences that have nothing to do with morality whatsoever. Some are less obvious, such as idolatry, but even here it is fairly safe to say that fixation on a person or thing can be unhealthy (dysfunctional) either individually or to society.” Harmful/ hurtful/ unhealthy all bring us back to your own definition of dysfunctional and my definition of immoral. The negative consequences of the majority of these activities (harm to individuals and to the group) have everything to do with morality, i.e. good/bad behaviour. And so I’m still struggling to understand why it’s so important to you to draw this distinction. I’m really sorry – more frustration for you! – but the bible does lay down moral codes, so what’s wrong with it doing so here? We may not agree with the codes, and we may keep changing them, but are you really suggesting that the above is a neutral list of items that have nothing to do with good/bad/right/wrong behaviour?

******

Tony, I’m a little concerned in case the now silent Dragonsheart (Casey) was offended by the mock trial of God and Cain. You and I are battle-hardened, but she has entered the arena only recently, and I’d hate to think that my posts might have upset her.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum