Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 11th October 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Questions of conscience



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 14 May 2008
In reply to Alistair McBay (Letters, 13 May), it's not that Christians think their consciences are better than anyone else's, but they do regard it as a God-given guide rather than an arbitrary evolutionary accident. Christians do not overemphasise the role of conscience. On the contrary, recognising its limits and subjectivity, they see it needs supplementing by God's revelation and applying with our God-given reason.
Encouraging everyone to make up their own self-interested minds on personal moral issues is the recipe for an "anything goes" society.

RICHARD LUCAS

Cowan Road

Edinburgh



The full article contains 97 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 13 May 2008 8:10 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Itchy,

Lochgelly 14/05/2008 07:26:06
Wrong Mr Lucas. Encouraging people not to reason but to follow their emotions and have faith is how 'anything goes' starts.
2

richard l,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 08:04:42
#1

Eh? Who said anything about following emotions and not reasoning?
3

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 14/05/2008 09:21:50
The main misconception that Richard Lucas provides is his characterisation of conscience being derived from an "an arbitrary evolutionary accident."

Evolution is neither arbitrary nor accidental: it is highly directed (by the environment, not by any higher intelligence). Similarly, the chaotic scatter of raindrops over a land mass results in coherent flows of water (we call them rivers). Did the raindrops require a higher intelligence to get themselves organised? Of course not, they were directed by the constraints of their environment. So too with the evolution of living things, and, in this case, our consciences.

It is the constant denial or misunderstanding of this simple truth that makes the writings of many of those who deny or downgrade evolution so incoherent.
4

jj veritas,

14/05/2008 10:59:11
Logic would suggest that there is a Creator.
5

richard l,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:19:45
#4
"Evolution is neither arbitrary nor accidental: it is highly directed (by the environment, not by any higher intelligence)."

This is an attempt to fudge the definition of "directed". You know what I mean by it. For example a car is directed by a driver, a rolling rock is not directed. Perhaps "intentionally directed" might clear up the confusion.

Why should conscience have any authority if it just the result of blind forces?


6

A McBay,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:52:02
Why should conscience have any authority if it just the result of one primitive tribe's ignorant superstitions, coupled with an emphasis on belief without evidence?

The trouble with god-given morality is well demonstrated here by Mr Lucas - which is that morality takes on a different meaning according to which god people believe in. Cardinal O'Brien sees immorality in animal-human embryology, yet Britain's Rabbis see no moral problem with it and disagree with the Catholics -and yet both sects essentially believe in the same god! I daresay there are also Allah-given and Brahma-given moralities. So which one is right? And why has the same Abrahamic god given one moral code to the Jews, another to the Christians and yet another to the Muslims?

Mr Lucas also says Christians see the limitations of conscience, yet they appeal to the Christian god to supplement it with revelation and "god-given reason." That all too cosy in-breeding is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Once you invent a god, and profess absolute belief in he she or it without being able to offer any evidence to back your claims, you are just using your own imagination to make morality, and indeed your god's features, be whatever you want them to be - there's randomness for you! And as Anne Lamott said, you can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that your God hates all the same people you do.

If Christians truly believe their consciences are not superior to any other, as Mr Lucas asserts, then they will have no trouble removing their lords spiritual from Westminster, disestablishing the Christian church from the state apparatus, or allowing schools to be secular in nature, devoted to teaching children about what people believe, but not what they must believe.
7

Itchy,

14/05/2008 20:26:02
#2 You did.

Religious are based on faith, not reason.
8

Itchy,

14/05/2008 20:31:24
#8 my mum, who is a Christian told me that the bible is full of sex and violence.

Hatred has no place in Christianity.
9

Maximus,

Roberton 14/05/2008 20:38:20
No7,

"So which one is right? And why has the same Abrahamic god given one moral code to the Jews, another to the Christians and yet another to the Muslims?"

Read the Bible and decide for yourself.

But for the record the Catechism of the Catholic Church defines conscience is a judgement of reason whereby the human person recognises the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right.

I recommend you read it sometime. May it open your eyes.
10

Maximus,

Roberton 14/05/2008 20:40:37
no10. Sadly hatred has occupied a huge 'place' in Christian history. But it does demonstrated, as you point out, that there is nothing we can do to make God love us less.

But let us love one another.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.