Does science trump philosophy?

[Boss]

Criminals are notorious for LACKING said morals.

Couldn't we just ASK them if they are morally good people? The ones who told us they weren't, we could put them in old school prisons with bars but the ones who said they had morals... hey, they should be okay because their evolutionary instincts would kick in coupled with the ability to reason... you know? They don't NEED anything grounding said foundation... that's what you claimed... right?

 

[G.T.]

Hey Unkotare im exhausted from recording tonight and prepping my radio show for sunday.

Ill smack you back sometime in the near future.

Or if you wanna discuss this on the show, thats cool too we have callers/a switchboard and I have sole control of the content.

Its Sundays at 6pm east coast time.

Gnite sir

 

[Unkotare]

Your reasoning should tell you that since you dont want to die(instinct), that its wrong to unjustly kill others (murder)because if that is morally acceptable, you subject yourself to a much greater risk of fatality....

If that's the only motivation then it is not morality.

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

 

[G.T.]

Your reasoning should tell you that since you dont want to die(instinct), that its wrong to unjustly kill others (murder)because if that is morally acceptable, you subject yourself to a much greater risk of fatality....

If that's the only motivation then it is not morality.

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

I cpuldnt foresee losing my empathy, which is a piece of the pie that makes up my morality.

 

[Unkotare]

Murder is wrong because humans have reasoned that the best means to surviving is to cohabitate. ....

That statement contains two propositions you have not proven.

Thats a cut quote.

That's the part I wanted to address.

But you cut out commentary which supported it, and then called it unsupported.

You may take that as an indication that said commentary failed to prove the propositions in question.

 

[Unkotare]

Your reasoning should tell you that since you dont want to die(instinct), that its wrong to unjustly kill others (murder)because if that is morally acceptable, you subject yourself to a much greater risk of fatality....

If that's the only motivation then it is not morality.

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

I cpuldnt foresee losing my empathy, which is a piece of the pie that makes up my morality.

And from whence comes this empathy? All these digressions merely avoid the fundamental question.

 

[G.T.]

Murder is wrong because humans have reasoned that the best means to surviving is to cohabitate. ....

That statement contains two propositions you have not proven.

Thats a cut quote.

That's the part I wanted to address.

But you cut out commentary which supported it, and then called it unsupported.

You may take that as an indication that said commentary failed to prove the propositions in question.

Or failed to meet your standard I guess.

Im fine with it.

Nobody convinces anyone on the internet of anything. Its all an ego show to flex their debate acumen to some self satisfying end.

I try not to pay it any more mind than, say, whicj brand razors Im going to buy tomorrow...

In person its much easier to reach a consensus, and agreement to disagree or an enlightenment because people are more cordial, less flippant and are there to read body language and inflection.

This is why I offered you to instead flesh this out on the air.

 

[G.T.]

Your reasoning should tell you that since you dont want to die(instinct), that its wrong to unjustly kill others (murder)because if that is morally acceptable, you subject yourself to a much greater risk of fatality....

If that's the only motivation then it is not morality.

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

I cpuldnt foresee losing my empathy, which is a piece of the pie that makes up my morality.

And from whence comes this empathy? All these digressions merely avoid the fundamental question.

Empathy is likely an evolutionary tool to protect the reproduction of your family - by protecting THEM.

 

[Unkotare]

If that's the only motivation then it is not morality.

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

I cpuldnt foresee losing my empathy, which is a piece of the pie that makes up my morality.

And from whence comes this empathy? All these digressions merely avoid the fundamental question.

Empathy is likely an evolutionary tool to protect the reproduction of your family - by protecting THEM.

Seems you're not talking about morality.

 

[IsaacNewton]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

 

[G.T.]

Emotionalism also factors in. This is all common sense. People are sad when people die. Why? Because it reminds them of their own mortality and also we have empathy.

Our fear of death = our understanding of another's same fear of death = wrong to kill them based on all of the above.

If you could kill an innocent, vulnerable person with absolute certainty that there would be no physical or financial repercussions for yourself - and perhaps even a bit of a benefit - would you do it?

I cpuldnt foresee losing my empathy, which is a piece of the pie that makes up my morality.

And from whence comes this empathy? All these digressions merely avoid the fundamental question.

Empathy is likely an evolutionary tool to protect the reproduction of your family - by protecting THEM.

Seems you're not talking about morality.

Seems to you.

To me, im talking about right and wrong and how we determine those.

 

[Boss]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

I have read it and most of it is speculative clap trap. It does not explain "all the beliefs and rituals in the human race or where they came from" because it was written at the turn of the 20th century. Since then, we have discovered all kinds of ancient civilizations where spirituality thrived. And we've had many things discovered about more recent religious rituals. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946.

 

[IsaacNewton]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

I have read it and most of it is speculative clap trap. It does not explain "all the beliefs and rituals in the human race or where they came from" because it was written at the turn of the 20th century. Since then, we have discovered all kinds of ancient civilizations where spirituality thrived. And we've had many things discovered about more recent religious rituals. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946.

Nice try, you haven't read it. Amazing how the human mind can reject fact because reality is just too scary.

You need your mental crutch, knock yourself out. You believe in magic and an invisible father that will protect you like when you were a child. And if you don't believe in him he will torture you in horrible pain for all of time...but he loves you.

LOL wtf kind of nightmarish sadomasochistic master/slave relationship is that.

Now git off'n that 'puter and git on yer knees.

 

[Boss]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

I have read it and most of it is speculative clap trap. It does not explain "all the beliefs and rituals in the human race or where they came from" because it was written at the turn of the 20th century. Since then, we have discovered all kinds of ancient civilizations where spirituality thrived. And we've had many things discovered about more recent religious rituals. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946.

Nice try, you haven't read it. Amazing how the human mind can reject fact because reality is just too scary.

You need your mental crutch, knock yourself out. You believe in magic and an invisible father that will protect you like when you were a child. And if you don't believe in him he will torture you in horrible pain for all of time...but he loves you.

LOL wtf kind of nightmarish sadomasochistic master/slave relationship is that.

Now git off'n that 'puter and git on yer knees.

Well, I had to read it in college, I took Comparative Religious Studies. My roommate actually did his thesis on it. Like I said... it was written at the turn of the 20th century, it is outdated information and most of it was bunk anyway. As is most of the chitter-chatter from you godless nitwits.

I don't have a mental crutch, I don't believe in magic, don't know about invisible fathers or torture or love... Those are all things you are projecting onto me because you are an anti-Christian bigot. I am a Spiritualist who believes in a Spiritual God or Spiritual Nature.

 

[IsaacNewton]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

I have read it and most of it is speculative clap trap. It does not explain "all the beliefs and rituals in the human race or where they came from" because it was written at the turn of the 20th century. Since then, we have discovered all kinds of ancient civilizations where spirituality thrived. And we've had many things discovered about more recent religious rituals. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946.

Nice try, you haven't read it. Amazing how the human mind can reject fact because reality is just too scary.

You need your mental crutch, knock yourself out. You believe in magic and an invisible father that will protect you like when you were a child. And if you don't believe in him he will torture you in horrible pain for all of time...but he loves you.

LOL wtf kind of nightmarish sadomasochistic master/slave relationship is that.

Now git off'n that 'puter and git on yer knees.

Well, I had to read it in college, I took Comparative Religious Studies. My roommate actually did his thesis on it. Like I said... it was written at the turn of the 20th century, it is outdated information and most of it was bunk anyway. As is most of the chitter-chatter from you godless nitwits.

I don't have a mental crutch, I don't believe in magic, don't know about invisible fathers or torture or love... Those are all things you are projecting onto me because you are an anti-Christian bigot. I am a Spiritualist who believes in a Spiritual God or Spiritual Nature.

I know you haven't read it. Its easy to spot someone who is an 'internet' poster. Short, dismissive answers re very complex and lengthy subjects are a sure clue.

Einstein came up with the theory of relativity at the beginning of the 20th century, I'm guessing you dismiss that as well. Or maybe quantum physics.

Not interested in discussion with you, feel free to troll at your hearts content. There are plenty here who also think their half-sentence statements are manna from heaven. LOL

Carry on Copernicus.

 

[G.T.]

I suggest a reading of The Golden Bough. You'll know where all the 'beliefs' and rituals in the human race came from, including the current major religions.

Its a long read, not for the squeamish or lazy.

I have read it and most of it is speculative clap trap. It does not explain "all the beliefs and rituals in the human race or where they came from" because it was written at the turn of the 20th century. Since then, we have discovered all kinds of ancient civilizations where spirituality thrived. And we've had many things discovered about more recent religious rituals. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946.

Nice try, you haven't read it. Amazing how the human mind can reject fact because reality is just too scary.

You need your mental crutch, knock yourself out. You believe in magic and an invisible father that will protect you like when you were a child. And if you don't believe in him he will torture you in horrible pain for all of time...but he loves you.

LOL wtf kind of nightmarish sadomasochistic master/slave relationship is that.

Now git off'n that 'puter and git on yer knees.

Well, I had to read it in college, I took Comparative Religious Studies. My roommate actually did his thesis on it. Like I said... it was written at the turn of the 20th century, it is outdated information and most of it was bunk anyway. As is most of the chitter-chatter from you godless nitwits.

I don't have a mental crutch, I don't believe in magic, don't know about invisible fathers or torture or love... Those are all things you are projecting onto me because you are an anti-Christian bigot. I am a Spiritualist who believes in a Spiritual God or Spiritual Nature.

I know you haven't read it. Its easy to spot someone who is an 'internet' poster. Short, dismissive answers re very complex and lengthy subjects are a sure clue.

Einstein came up with the theory of relativity at the beginning of the 20th century, I'm guessing you dismiss that as well. Or maybe quantum physics.

Not interested in discussion with you, feel free to troll at your hearts content. There are plenty here who also think their half-sentence statements are manna from heaven. LOL

Carry on Copernicus.

Hes a troll man, pay him no mind hes just out to argue and be contrarian, not have engaging and cordial discussion but instead to promote his own goofy agenda.

 

[Boss]

Hes a troll man, pay him no mind...

I'm a troll? For contesting a LIE that a book from the early 20th century contains legitimate information on ALL BELIEFS in the "human race" when that is simply not true?

I think your butt is still hurt from the ass drilling I gave you.

 

[G.T.]

See?

 

[G.T.]

Boss, call my radio show sunday night it starts at 6pm and we will see how smawwwt you are. We can talk your corny spirituality theory and i wont jump at your lack of self confidence in speaking.

 

[Boss]

I know you haven't read it. Its easy to spot someone who is an 'internet' poster. Short, dismissive answers re very complex and lengthy subjects are a sure clue.

Wow... I usually get the complaint that I am "too wordy" or "verbose" in my replies. For the record, it's not a complex subject... I attended college, studied Comparative Religion, had to read the book... simple. Most everything in it is a denigration of religion which is precisely why it was written. It's a bunch of biased one-sided garbage from a 19th century atheist.

Aside from that, it's incomplete. There is absolutely NO mention of the Lake Mungo civilization, for example. They hadn't been discovered yet. No mention of the Dead Sea Scrolls... they hadn't been discovered either. Archaeologists and paleontologists have discovered literally thousands of ancient civilizations with tens of thousands of rituals and ceremonies not found in this book because they hadn't been discovered yet.