Individual Ought To Believe In an External Moral Force.

Forward: Greetings Comrades, Voters and Opposition I will be arguing the resolution in a very unique way. You all may have seen the numerous Theist V. Atheist debates on this site regarding Young Earth Creationism, Christian Apologism, Kalam Cosmological Argument, Etc. This is not one of those debates. I will be arguing my own personal favorite, the Mohist "Will Of Heaven" position, mixed with the similar style of contemporary muslim scholars. (I will argue in the same fashion of rhetorical questions and conclusions) if you have not heard of the Mohist position that makes sense as it died out some 2000 years ago, this is going to be fun, I hope you all enjoy this as much as I do and I wish Benny Good Luck~Alex I. Morality Is Beneficial To Mankind (This style of Rhetorical Questions is intentional, Con may however Answer them if Ben sees it fit.) I mean simply by this that it behooves society when individuals act out of morality. When one sees a fellow human in suffering and acts to assist him out of a sense of moral duty, surely this is a benefit. Imagine yourself a father in the military and war has broken out, would you put them under the protection of a man who lives by moral doctrine or one who act purely out of self-interest? Naturally you would invest the future of your family in that of the moral and just man. Now would you rather cast your ballot for a rigidly moral man who acts in government as a result of his doctrine or one who seeks office out of pure self interest and make state decisions off of self interest? If you would favour individuals who act of morality in both cases and approve of Altruism as a result of Morality then indeed you too agree that morality in beneficial to mankind. II. The Will Of Heaven Now before I get into this I want to point out that the "Heaven" i am referencing is not the Abrahamic paradise which you spend for eternity in for being such a good chap. This Heaven is the Classical Chinese concept which is as follows: "Now What does Heaven desire and what does it hate? Heaven desires righteousness and hates unrighteousness. Thus if I lead the people the people of the world to devote themselves to righteousness then I am doing the will of heaven. If I do what heaven desires then Heaven will do what I desire." Heaven is thus a pure moral force of good that watches over humanity and has the power to intervene. Now onto the argument. 1. Since it would be impossible for us to truly test in any empirical fashion a view of an external or transcendent spiritual force in the universe we must conclude rationally that all views are equally valid. For an example a Corrupt King dies suddenly in an accident, there is no way in which we can affirm if this way divine intervention and more importantly we cannot affirm that it was the intervention of God, Allah, “Heaven”, Eris, or not intervention at all. Therefore all of these beliefs are equally wrong therefore equally valid. This means that “Heaven” has equal validity as that of any other view on the workings of a spiritual force,I am simply using it as an example For the sake of Mozi. 2. Who Determines Morality? I may have a personal stance on right and wrong and Ben may have another. What is it that makes either of moral doctrine superior to the other? In a Democratic society this ethical clash would be determined by popular majority and then made into law. For Instance if a majority agree that it is malign or “wrong” to commit theft then we will create laws to deter theft. In an Authoritarian society our superior would judge that theft is wrong and he too would put laws into place. I ask you, do all people regard laws put in place as morally sound? Is Justice always served? If the premise that morality leads to human benefit is indeed affirmed then surely our goal should be to maximize adherence to moral doctrine. I propose the following to you, If majority rule determines what is morally sound and the majority elected Adolf Hitler in 1933 does it thus follow that the policies that reflected their convictions were just and beneficial? Say instead that you advocate the Authoritarian model, even if you ruler is benevolent and himself a moral man, I ask you to find me a single Authoritarian Regime free of corruption. Beyond that within a meritocracy in which your ruler appoints an intellectual elite to determine policy off the strictest moral tradition, this too is not a solution. I ask the voters and the opposition to look to Qing China what happened before. Sun Yat-Sen and the Kuomintang lead a revolution to give moral decision back to the individual. Beyond that, if one is so inclined to defend the model of an intellectual elite, how would you as a ruler determine who deserves to join this “class”? As an individual would you be willing to accept the decisions of Mandarins in the field of what is morally repugnant and what is just? But back to Ben and I’s disagreement, Since Majority Rule and Intellectual Elite cannot be trusted to determine a victor then we can not determine a moral doctrine that grounds itself only in society to judge. Now I shall Address the moral objectivity. I give credit to Mozi’s “The Will Of Heaven” and “The existence of ghosts and spirits”For the structure of that argument and Imam Hamza Tzortzis for the Reducto Ad Hitlerum. 3. Quasi-Moral Argument. Imam Hamza Tzortzis puts forward the following argument as do many Theists: 1. If God does not exist, then objective moral values do not exist; 2. The universe with objective moral values does exist; 3. Therefore, God exists.Explaining the key premise I posit an altered view of this: 1. If there is no universal Moral Force, then there can be no universal objective morality. Furthermore since subjective morality (which can exist without a universal moral force) is no more than partiality. 2. If an individual aims to affirms an objective morality and universal doctrine, he/she must put faith in the existence of an universal moral force. 3. If an individual has faith and piety in the existence and judgement of a universal force with the power of intervention then that individual will act in accordance with the moral code. 4. If individuals act in accordance with and believe in that force and what the force deems as just, right, and virtuous the supposed “Will Of Heaven” will be achieved. 5. Since Morality is beneficial to mankind and individuals who put faith in a universal force creates morality then believing in a universal force is beneficial to mankind. Therefore Individuals ought to believe in a universal moral force as it benefits mankind. Once more I cite Mozi and Imam Hamza Tzortzis which I give the sources of down at the bottom. I have a few more arguments and examples however I would like to turn it over to Con to give his opening argument and I will save them for later rounds. I will be In San Diego this weekend with Cousins so hopefully Heaven favors me and will provide a strong wifi signal ~Alex http://www.hamzatzortzis.com... Imam Hamza Tzortzis Mo, Di, and Burton Watson. Mozi: Basic Writings. New York: Columbia UP, 2003. Print. (check out Universal Love, Existence of Ghosts, and Will of Heaven