10-Naturalism cannot account for mind, morality, or human rights

This lecture considers how naturalism cannot account for anything, including the origin consciousness and mind, of morality, and human rights; one mark of naturalism's falseness is that no one, not even naturalists, is able to live in accordance with the precepts of naturalism.

[@tomfrombrunswick7571]

Naturalism can't account for morality? Have you ever read a history book? If we look at history the development of cities threw people together. For a city to work violence had to be controlled. If you are going to have a system of property you need laws around theft. Thus early cities developed moral and legal systems.
The moral and legal systems varied from city to city. However cities competed with each other. It is why they had city walls and the better off people were armed. For a city to survive it had to be able to generate a certain amount of wealth. it used this to do things like build walls. The citizens had to be able to buy weapons armor and horses. If a city was badly run it would be taken over.
The character of the cities varied. Rome had a culture built on military virtues. Bravery loyalty and fast decision making. Carthage it seems favored commercial development.
One can see the real time development of an ethical system in China. Confucius developed ideas of mutual duty as central to his ethics. This was adopted by the Chinese emperors as it meant that you did not need as coercive a legal system.
The idea that ethical systems are something of high mystery is nonsense

[@ecleavideos1593]

Of course, naturalistic, non-theistic individuals, cultures, and societies develop their own systems of ethics and morality. But the point is, all such systems are essentially arbitrary, since they do not have an adequate ground (the only adequate ground of which is God). As you imply in your review of ancient systems of ethics and morality, power is the ultimate basis; weaker societies and their systems of morality are supplanted by the stronger. That may be true historically and sociologically, but from a truly ethical, moral, philosophical, or theological point of view, might does not make right.

[@tomfrombrunswick7571]

@@ecleavideos1593 What does grounded in God mean? If you look at morality in Christian society it is not fixed. Slavery was seen as okay to the 18th Century. Now it is abhorrent. Torture was fine up to the 17th Century but then it became to be seen as abhorrent.
Persecuting Jews was seen as a positive through most of Christian history. They were only given citizenship rights in the 19th Century. Napoleon had abolished the Ghetto in the Papal states but the Pope after Napoleons fall set it up again.
Rape in marriage was fine up to the 1960s. Now it is seen as bad.
There is no fixed morality in Christian countries