Let's say there is a poet and there is a master of that poet. That master would have had a master, and the master of that master would have had a master too, and so on down the line. Eventually, there would have been a starting point, like a first person who started the thing of poetry. So this kind of indicates and is conducive to the given insinuation of a creator.
Is morality something created by humans, or is there some divine or objective moral order to the universe? For example, killing a baby feels obviously wrong — but is it wrong because of an objective moral truth, or just because of the moral framework we happen to live in? To illustrate this, imagine a world full of serial killers — in that world, their shared moral framework would make killing normal and acceptable. So how do we determine which morality is objectively correct? Another example is homosexuality — someone with a traditional religious framework would say it's objectively wrong, and they'd be just as confident in that as they are about killing babies being wrong. Meanwhile, someone from a more progressive background would say homosexuality is completely fine. Both sides believe their morality is the correct one. So if everyone thinks their own moral framework is the right one, how can morality be objective? And some things do seem to shift over time — things that were considered wrong in the past are now accepted, and vice versa. So does that mean morality is fluid and culturally constructed, or are there some foundational moral truths that remain constant regardless of culture or time?
Is morality something created by humans, or is there some divine or objective moral order to the universe? For example, killing a baby feels obviously wrong — but is it wrong because of an objective moral truth, or just because of the moral framework we happen to live in? To illustrate this, imagine a world full of serial killers — in that world, their shared moral framework would make killing normal and acceptable. So how do we determine which morality is objectively correct? Another example is homosexuality — someone with a traditional religious framework would say it's objectively wrong, and they'd be just as confident in that as they are about killing babies being wrong. Meanwhile, someone from a more progressive background would say homosexuality is completely fine. Both sides believe their morality is the correct one. So if everyone thinks their own moral framework is the right one, how can morality be objective? And some things do seem to shift over time — things that were considered wrong in the past are now accepted, and vice versa. So does that mean morality is fluid and culturally constructed, or are there some foundational moral truths that remain constant regardless of culture or time?
Is morality something created by humans, or is there some divine or objective moral order to the universe? For example, killing a baby feels obviously wrong — but is it wrong because of an objective moral truth, or just because of the moral framework we happen to live in? To illustrate this, imagine a world full of serial killers — in that world, their shared moral framework would make killing normal and acceptable. So how do we determine which morality is objectively correct? Another example is homosexuality — someone with a traditional religious framework would say it's objectively wrong, and they'd be just as confident in that as they are about killing babies being wrong. Meanwhile, someone from a more progressive background would say homosexuality is completely fine. Both sides believe their morality is the correct one. So if everyone thinks their own moral framework is the right one, how can morality be objective? And some things do seem to shift over time — things that were considered wrong in the past are now accepted, and vice versa. So does that mean morality is fluid and culturally constructed, or are there some foundational moral truths that remain constant regardless of culture or time?