It's funny that we wouldn't be able to know it's valuelessness without first philosophizing about the other possibilities. Well, perhaps someone could know that from birth, but not most of us.

Doesn't the fact that your philosophizing conflicts with common sense raise some questions about the tortured reasoning that led to it? If a skeptical philosophy would lead me to conclude that the tree that I see outside my window might not be there, the reasonable thing to do is to reject skepticism, not to try and walk through the tree. Neo is only warranted in trying to walk through the tree because he's actually seen the outside.

MD, the principle that you're hitting upon is the classical virtue of temperance. That is to say, the virtue of enjoying things appropriately, in the right context, with discretion, and in appropriate moderation. I have no problem with alcohol in moderation: indeed, I very much enjoy an occasional glass of wine or port. As Christians we recognize that alcohol is created by God and is a good thing, but we also recognize that when used without moderation, it is harmful and inadvisable.

As G.K. Chesterton said, "We should thank God for beer and burgundy by not drinking too much of them."

TBG

Doesn't the fact that your philosophizing conflicts with common sense raise some questions about the tortured reasoning that led to it?

May I ask what common sense my philosophy conflicts with?

May I ask what common sense my philosophy conflicts with?

The intuition that 99.9% of the world has that there are such things as right and wrong that are not simply social construct: that things have value. Most people consistently make value-judgments and expect that others will agree. There is an assumption that there are standards of morality apart from the whims of you or I. Indeed, society is built upon this assumption---the assumption that we should be moral.

The burden of proof, therefore, is upon the amoralist to prove that, in fact, these assumptions are incorrect.

TBG

We know that the rules are there for a good purpose -- sometimes we know what that purpose is, sometimes we don't know what the purpose is, and sometimes we find out the purpose later. If you do not put the same trust/stock in God/Christ/The Bible, then you have to expect that you won't understand or agree with everything we believe, because we're coming from completely different perspectives on life. You can ask us questions (which you can feel free to do ), and we can explain what we believe and why we believe it (which is something we love to do ), but in the end, that won't make you agree with us.

I'm saying this so that this discussion doesn't go round and round in circles, because that can easily happen. It's easy to start thinking that the goal of a discussion/debate is to bring someone over to your point of view, or be brought to the other person's point of view. But that can't happen. No human can really change the heart of another human, or go into them and change their mind.

This is a good point. I would like to say that while I don't agree with everyone here I do enjoy hearing different perspectives. I know that a lot of people won't agree with my lifestyle and often times I find Christians to be rigid and close minded. I guess it is my experience that Christians tend to sit around having no fun and being bitter and resentful and judgmental of those who get out and have a good time. (Not all of them of course!) I've met lots who can have fun no matter what and I respect the decisions of people who don't want to do those things. I don't think it's necessary to party or smoke or do drugs. I just don't think its necessary for Christians to look down on people who do.

I'm the type of person who always has to try things for myself and I always learn things the hard way. I think it's a good thing though, because when people say "Why don't you do that?" I can say, I've tried it, and it wasn't that great, rather than just, "It's wrong." I guess I like to form my own opinions, probably because I'm lacking that faith and trust in God that you speak of.

However I do know some one who was dead set against drinking because the Bible said not to be drunk. However this person gave it a try one day, had fun, and loved it! So I'm just saying...hey, maybe not be so close minded and you could have a good time.

However I do know some one who was dead set against drinking because the Bible said not to be drunk. However this person gave it a try one day, had fun, and loved it! So I'm just saying...hey, maybe not be so close minded and you could have a good time.

I would totally agree with this - I know some people who think it is wrong to drink alcohol, so they never ever will taste it. They were drawing their own conclusions from something the bible said. And while I respect their decision since I know it was in the sincere search to do right, I don't agree with them. It's great when people realize that! If the bible says its wrong to eat excessively, does that mean you should never eat? Of course not! The same for drinking Wine/other alcoholic beverages.
But that's not excuse to go out and get drunk. And Life really shouldn't be all about "having a good time".

I guess it is my experience that Christians tend to sit around having no fun and being bitter and resentful and judgmental of those who get out and have a good time. (Not all of them of course!)

That's not really how Christians view it. It's more that they're disappointed that people go out and live what they believe is a sinful lifestyle. (You can go out and have a good time without getting wasted or stoned.)

I don't think it's necessary to party or smoke or do drugs. I just don't think its necessary for Christians to look down on people who do.

I agree. Jesus said we're supposed to "hate the sin, and love the sinner". Christianity doesn't necessarily condemn all the people who do engage in such activities, but rather the activities themselves.

I'm the type of person who always has to try things for myself and I always learn things the hard way. I think it's a good thing though, because when people say "Why don't you do that?" I can say, I've tried it, and it wasn't that great, rather than just, "It's wrong." I guess I like to form my own opinions, probably because I'm lacking that faith and trust in God that you speak of.

I suppose we're just two different types of people then. I'd rather learn things the easy way. I have sort of a philosophy about things that could potentially be "fun" but also addictive. As long as I don't know what I'm missing, it won't matter.

Alcohol could be good, but some of my uncles are alcoholics and I don't want to get addicted to alcohol. I figure that as long as I don't know what I'm missing, I won't miss it. Same with abstinence. I figure that as long as I wait and don't know what it feels like, I'll be able to wait until marriage and be completely devoted to my wife, and not have small emotional attachments to others.

However I do know some one who was dead set against drinking because the Bible said not to be drunk. However this person gave it a try one day, had fun, and loved it! So I'm just saying...hey, maybe not be so close minded and you could have a good time.

It's nice that that person had a good time and didn't get themselves into trouble or danger, but I can tell you many stories of people who had the opposite sort of experience. One of my classmates talked one week about how she was going to go get high on the weekend and she was so excited because she had never done it before. The next week she moaned about how she had horrible hallucinations while being high and she hadn't enjoyed the experience at all. She felt really let down because everybody had told her that it would be fun, and she was expecting to have a good time, but it didn't work out.

I don't think it's necessary to party or smoke or do drugs. I just don't think its necessary for Christians to look down on people who do.

First, I have little moral problem with smoking, though I think that becoming addicted to it is imprudent.

Second, I don't look down on those who party and do drugs: I just have compassion for them. Why? Because they are trying to fill the void in their soul with something that will not work. Partying and drugs are, I think, an attempt to escape from the reality that they do not want to face---a meaningless existence. Thus people fill their time with all kinds of things that do not satisfy.

Why don't I party or do drugs? Because I don't think I can glorify and enjoy God properly unless I have control of my God-given faculties. Again, the virtue of temperance is at play here. Part of how God works is through convicting His people of sin and by encouraging them to exercise virtue so that they become more like Him. It's not about doing good things, but about recognizing the need for grace in one's life and accepting that one must depend upon that grace day by day.

To wash away the crimson stain,
Grace, grace alone availeth,
Our works, alas, are all in vain,
In much the best life faileth,
No man can glory in thy sight,
All must alike confess thy might,
And live alone by mercy.
~Martin Luther

TBG

I know that a lot of people won't agree with my lifestyle and often times I find Christians to be rigid and close minded. I guess it is my experience that Christians tend to sit around having no fun and being bitter and resentful and judgmental of those who get out and have a good time. (Not all of them of course!)

I'm the type of person who always has to try things for myself and I always learn things the hard way.

Yeah, unfortunately I grew up around many people you would call 'rigid' and unhappy and 'religious', to the extreme, and yet they felt that they were right in being that way. I honestly cannot figure out how they came to that conclusion, it totally diverges attention away from what I consider to be important. I think religion is God's biggest enemy.

Haha and ditto to that last part, at least partly. I have stronger opinions about things I have personally tried/experienced.

Like Minotaur, I have family members who are alcoholics. Drinking something like wine is not a problem in the Bible. It's drunkenness that is. I will not touch the stuff because of alcoholism on both sides of my family. It means I am that much more likely to have an extremely low tolerance for it.

Drunkenness destroys self and through that it destroys families.

Family x has parents who both drink. The dad is an alcoholic. I don't think he can go a single day without drinking. His family is a mess. Their son has an anger problem. Their eldest daughter left home after a physical altercation with the mom. Their youngest daughter is struggling to maintain a good relationship with the parents because she doesn't want to go through what her siblings have. Because of the lack of leadership from the dad due to his drinking, the family is in disarray.

Family x is not in church.

Family member y is considerably younger. I had to overhear one night where three men had to physically restrain him to keep him from getting in a car and driving late one night.

Drunkenness causes nothing but self destruction and breaks the hearts of everyone around them. I don't have to try alcohol myself to find out the consequences. I can go out and have a fantastic time with my friends and never touch the stuff.

I don't look down on my family members or anyone else who is involved with drugs and alcohol, my heart breaks for them because I've seen what it does.

On the other hand, I do know people who can drink and do so responsibly. A close friend used to when she came of age. She made certain someone else drove and she had only one drink. She was involved in ministry at a church and one of the girls she was working with found out she occasionally drank. The girl started to pull away from her until my friend found out that the girl had alcoholic parents. She realized that her drinking had a negative influence on her testimony, so she quit. She never got drunk. She was always responsible, but we have to pay attention to what we want to present to the people around us and especially those younger who look up to us.

But like I said, I won't touch the stuff. My testimony is very important. I work with kids. I am a representative of what I believe to my family, friends, coworkers, and the world around me. If I were to take one drink and do something stupid, it would damage that testimony. I also have a genetic predisposition to having an alcohol problem. I won't touch alcohol for both reasons.

Starkat, that's a very wise decision.

MoonlightDancer, while I understand the importance of experiencing things for oneself, I'm a bit stumped that you can't also take other people's experiences on board and understand why something is good/harmful without having first experienced it yourself. People you trust I mean, not just any old stranger. Definitely we should explain why something is bad, rather than just use the excuse 'because it's wrong' or what-have-you but we can learn from other's experiences - whether from trusted friends/family, authors etc.

^^ That's a good point.

And, of course, you can't try everything for yourself (like murder or stealing) in order to see that it's wrong or just a bad idea. (As I'm sure you, MLD, already know). The question is where you draw the line between things that are definitely wrong in your eyes, and things that may or may not be wrong. Then the even bigger question is why you draw the line there, and whether you're right. (Because if you're wrong, it can lead to some bad consequences... )

~Riella

The intuition that 99.9% of the world has that there are such things as right and wrong that are not simply social construct: that things have value. Most people consistently make value-judgments and expect that others will agree. There is an assumption that there are standards of morality apart from the whims of you or I. Indeed, society is built upon this assumption---the assumption that we should be moral.

Ah, an easy answer. People do not coexist and flourish when they're following all of their very natural urges. We would always be putting ourselves first and not bat an eye at stealing, killing, and raping to get whatever we want. This is what it is until you add people wanting to flourish and take their survival to the next level. But people have figured out that they can't coexist and flourish without inventing rules for themselves. There are slight and large variations between cultures as to what these rules or morals will be, but there are a couple of universals. However universalism doesn't prove innateness, it proves the obvious fact that people can't flourish in mass numbers without them.

Now, heavily indoctrinated people, such as third-generation members of a culture and beyond, will have been taught to follow these rules. When they begin to deviate from them, less intelligent people* will feel guilt, while more intelligent people* will feel shame if they are caught and exposed for their deviance. Before anyone takes offense, please see the asterisk at the bottom of this post. If you were taught to believe that God exists, you will feel an emptiness when you realize that he doesn't. This isn't proof of his existence, it's proof of being lied to. If you were told you had a million dollars your whole life but really didn't, and someday found out the truth, you would feel as though you lost something. Really, you lost nothing but the lie, but you would still feel a great sense of loss.

By the way, your "99.9%" is empirically false. 2% of people are psychopaths or sociopaths. Psychopaths are born unable to empathize and usually do not feel these social inventions. Sociopaths feel the convictions, but do not regard them.

* - I use the term intelligent for lack of a better word. I do not mean that these people are more or less smart than others, merely that they do not question or think about the common standards of morality as much or think about them more than others. Not to say that this is a bad thing; everyone has different natural abilities (the Theory of Multiple Intelligences).

I figure that as long as I don't know what I'm missing, I won't miss it. Same with abstinence. I figure that as long as I wait and don't know what it feels like, I'll be able to wait until marriage and be completely devoted to my wife, and not have small emotional attachments to others.

This logic may extend further than you'd like. I mean, before electricity, they never had it so they didn't know what they were missing...

MoonlightDancer, while I understand the importance of experiencing things for oneself, I'm a bit stumped that you can't also take other people's experiences on board and understand why something is good/harmful without having first experienced it yourself. People you trust I mean

I weigh the risks into my decision. There are some things I will probably never do. But I guess I don't take people's word for things because everyone has different opinions. My friend may think cheesecake is disgusting but I'm still going to eat it because I think It's delicious.

Ah, an easy answer. People do not coexist and flourish when they're following all of their very natural urges. We would always be putting ourselves first and not bat an eye at stealing, killing, and raping to get whatever we want. This is what it is until you add people wanting to flourish and take their survival to the next level.

Yet this naturalistic story raises more questions:

Doesn't the fact that we have to have these social norms for society to work imply that we were somehow designed with a need for morality? If a model of physics works in practice, that is usually taken for evidence of its reality. Similarly, if morality works in practice, why shouldn't this be taken for evidence that moral statements can be true?

And who defines "flourishing."

TBG

This logic may extend further than you'd like. I mean, before electricity, they never had it so they didn't know what they were missing...

I originally said that this logic only applied to things that are addictive (and potentially dangerous). I'm not going to get drunk, like it so much that I have to get drunk again, and be stuck drinking for the rest of my life. It's not worth the risk, and I really don't find the idea of losing control of my body appealing either.

I weigh the risks into my decision. There are some things I will probably never do. But I guess I don't take people's word for things because everyone has different opinions. My friend may think cheesecake is disgusting but I'm still going to eat it because I think It's delicious.

That's a completely different matter. Some people find find cheesecake disgusting, others don't; that's entirely based on an opinion that varies from person to person. Getting drunk is dangerous, and that's a conclusion that has been reached through observance and data.

I hope you don't think, "Hmm, my friend said that getting drunk isn't a good idea. But she finds cheesecake disgusting, and I love cheesecake. So she could be wrong about everything else - I'll have to get drunk just to make sure."

And I hope it's clear by now that we are talking specifically about getting drunk, not about alcohol itself.