Jump to content


Tim Mata

Member Since 03 May 2005
Offline Last Active Nov 27 2005 10:25 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Meta-ethics

12 October 2005 - 07:43 PM

Quote

So morality is probably one of those illusions we need to survive.
What is meant by this? In what sense do you mean survive?

Quote

I think that (particularly in light of the remarks found in http://www.iidb.org/...43&postcount=43 ), Moser could just as well have touted his work as philosophy after justification or philosophy beyond justification, because objectiveness in statements might regard the process of abstracting out from multiple limited but correspondingly accurate perspectives.

Why is subjective philosophy necessarily bereft of justification? Or, do you mean objective justification?

In Topic: Making a book

18 September 2005 - 12:11 AM

That's why you go into the printing business as well ;)

In Topic: Christianity and capitalism

17 September 2005 - 12:46 AM

To state things more simply: I disagree with the legitimacy of the "concept of" the right of property, and consequently, property laws.

In Topic: Christianity and capitalism

17 September 2005 - 12:39 AM

Quote

Quote

Tim Mata wrote:
Although I'm referring to private property, what I mean to encompass is all concept of the right of property, private or otherwise. And, I'm not sure whether property is incompatible with Christianity or whether it is ungodly, but if the case were that property indeed is both of those things, I would assert that private property is moreso than other forms, if any continuum is allowed.
"Rights" are clearly a matter of law, and I maintain that Godliness is not a matter of law; however, it would, of course, not follow from this juxtaposition that law and, therefore, legal rights - even private property rights - are necessarily matters of unGodliness.

Based on your reference to a "concept of" rights, it may be that the point you are trying to make could regard the nature of the rights which you think might be problematic; so, maybe a further characterization of those rights would be helpful.

Michael

Rights have been made a matter of law, but they are not necessarily, nor were they always, so. There is the idea of a God-given right, there is the idea of property rights arising out of occupation, out of production, out of labor, and many other arguments in favor of the right to hold property, not as a law, but as a moral truth. It turned out that when these ideas became popular and/or advantageous for the right people, the will to implement them as axioms of society presented itself, and the right of property became law.

In my first post, the only assertion I make is that I, for the most part, do not agree with the legitimacy of the right of property. I am asking for others' opinions on how Christian doctrine, or any other interpretation of Christianity, might oppose my position, and on what grounds, for I sense that there may be something wrong with my position. That is all. I have made an argument, but I am not trying to proselytize, merely hoping someone will poke holes in my argument.

In Topic: Christianity and capitalism

14 September 2005 - 11:55 PM

Quote

Quote

Tim Mata wrote:
Do the Scriptures, or do they not, endorse the right of property as defined by John Locke and endorsed by a good many Christians today?
Do you think that private property is incompatible with Christianity? Or, to put it more broadly, do you think that private property is incompatible with Godliness?

Michael

Although I'm referring to private property, what I mean to encompass is all concept of the right of property, private or otherwise. And, I'm not sure whether property is incompatible with Christianity or whether it is ungodly, but if the case were that property indeed is both of those things, I would assert that private property is moreso than other forms, if any continuum is allowed.  
I apologize for not being clearer.