U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-10-2016, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Kansas
19,187 posts, read 14,950,488 times
Reputation: 18248

Advertisements

If you take it outside of religion, I just don't get it. I also don't believe that people are naturally beastly and evil but choose that. I am familiar with nature over nurture. Nature is there but with a strong will, nurture can work miracles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-10-2016, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,568,839 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Freddy View Post
"Humans are beastly and evil" is a subjective opinion.

"Humans are stupid, ugly, and smell bad" is an observed fact.
I did not say ]"Humans are beastly and evil" rather it is,
"Humans are POTENTIALLY beastly and evil" as objective knowledge.
The majority of humans [say 80%] do not expressed that potentially.
20% [conservatively] has strong evil tendencies due to lack of impulse controls.


The potential to be beastly and evil has been objectively studied and researched.
One of the critical emotion leading to evil is when anger and rage to taken to the extreme and the evil doer lack the necessary impulse control to inhibit and modulate the anger and rage.


Quote:
Electrical brain stimulation (EBS),
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr...in_stimulation
Emotional: Anxiety, mirth, feeling of unreality, fear, happiness, anger, sadness, transient acute depression, hypomania, etc.
EBS could elicit the ritualistic, motor responses of sham rage in cats by stimulation of the anterior hypothalamus, as well as more complex emotional and behavioral components of "true rage" in both experimental animals by stimulaton of the lateral hypothalamus, and in human subjects by stimulating various deep areas of the brain. EBS in human patients with epilepsy could trigger seizures in the surface of the brain and pathologic aggression and rage with stimulation of the amygdala.

These structures deep areas in the brain that manifest rage when trigger are inherent within the human DNA. It is of nature not nurture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2016, 10:56 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,568,839 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
If you take it outside of religion, I just don't get it. I also don't believe that people are naturally beastly and evil but choose that. I am familiar with nature over nurture. Nature is there but with a strong will, nurture can work miracles.
As with the above poster, you are reading too fast and missed the critical point.


Note:
I did not say ]"Humans are beastly and evil" rather it is,
"Humans are POTENTIALLY beastly and evil" as objective knowledge.


If you brush up on neuroscience and the neural basis of evil you will understand there is a 'nature' basis of evil as well as a 'nurture' basis which is secondary.


It is the inherent neural circuits that support the anger and rage circuits and the instincts to kill that compel the evil doers to commit evil due to lack of impulse controls.
There are so many reported cases where many claim they the evils the committed are beyond their control, e.g.
1. Kleptomaniacs
2. Crime of passion
3. The psychopaths


There are those who suffer from serious psychiatric illnesses that they don't even know they have committed evils. E.g. the schizophrenic killer and other mad cases.
Did these madman choose to commit murders and other evils?


Evils come in many degrees where some commit evils on a premeditated basis. Even then it is because their inherent potential is expressed due to lack of impulse controls and conscience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Florida
4,103 posts, read 4,252,463 times
Reputation: 10036
I think our morals are evolving faster than our nature. For instance our bodies still require meat but a good deal of people recognize that its awful that we should have to kill animals to eat. Interesting stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,189 posts, read 9,035,825 times
Reputation: 6077
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
If you take it outside of religion, I just don't get it. I also don't believe that people are naturally beastly and evil but choose that. I am familiar with nature over nurture. Nature is there but with a strong will, nurture can work miracles.
Nature can be overcome by will but nurture mostly just provides a base environment for the individual to develop their will. Despite what we wish were the case, all recent research points away from nurture as a big factor beyond the basic "do no harm" dictum. Many parents probably believe nurture is a big trump card in their hoped-for results in raising children, but it really isn't. And that fits my own experience. I've seen terrible children with wonderful parents, and wonderful children with terrible parents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 11:47 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,568,839 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatguydownsouth View Post
I think our morals are evolving faster than our nature. For instance our bodies still require meat but a good deal of people recognize that its awful that we should have to kill animals to eat. Interesting stuff.
The fact is this;


Our 'nature' elements are inherited from our ancient ancestors [from the Pleistocene period to one cell animals] and are 3++ billions years. Such ancient programs are embedded in our human DNA, .e.g. the pain & pleasure responses, the fight or flight response and other instincts. Since these instincts have already matured, they do not evolve significantly at present.
The neurons that support these 'nature' programs could be say 1,000,000 neuron thick.
The neurons that support the inhibitors and activators of our moral faculty [evolving from 100,000 years old] could be 50,000 thick and still evolving.


Thus it is not a question which is evolving faster but which is more dominant and stronger.
The recent moral faculty and its neurons are flimsy and that is why for many [not all] their basic instincts often overpower their moral inhibitors [conscience] and they end up with adultery, crimes, rapes, murder, etc.


Besides the atrophy of neurons is on a first in first out basis.
This is why recent memories are less strong than the older childhood memories.


When the more recent inhibiting neurons atrophized the old instincts reared their ugliness.
Note this;

Older People Hold Stronger Belief in God | Atheism & Most Religious Countries
But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase..


This happened because the newer [nurture] rational neurons atrophized, lose their strength and cannot keep the [nature] primal and limbic impulses of fears, anxieties, angst from welling up which drove them to seek god to soothe their primal fears.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 09:31 AM
 
40 posts, read 19,182 times
Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
The fact is this;


Our 'nature' elements are inherited from our ancient ancestors [from the Pleistocene period to one cell animals] and are 3++ billions years. Such ancient programs are embedded in our human DNA, .e.g. the pain & pleasure responses, the fight or flight response and other instincts. Since these instincts have already matured, they do not evolve significantly at present.
The neurons that support these 'nature' programs could be say 1,000,000 neuron thick.
The neurons that support the inhibitors and activators of our moral faculty [evolving from 100,000 years old] could be 50,000 thick and still evolving.


Thus it is not a question which is evolving faster but which is more dominant and stronger.
The recent moral faculty and its neurons are flimsy and that is why for many [not all] their basic instincts often overpower their moral inhibitors [conscience] and they end up with adultery, crimes, rapes, murder, etc.


Besides the atrophy of neurons is on a first in first out basis.
This is why recent memories are less strong than the older childhood memories.


When the more recent inhibiting neurons atrophized the old instincts reared their ugliness.
Note this;
Older People Hold Stronger Belief in God | Atheism & Most Religious Countries
But new research reveals one constant across parts of the globe: As people age, their belief in God seems to increase..


This happened because the newer [nurture] rational neurons atrophized, lose their strength and cannot keep the [nature] primal and limbic impulses of fears, anxieties, angst from welling up which drove them to seek god to soothe their primal fears.
Your use of the word "fact" to describe a mechanistic view of morality actually lands heavily in the realm of theory, where "facts" come and go like subway commuters. That neuronal activity has correlations with moral reason and all other cognitive abilities is not proof that thoughts and beliefs--remember the hard problem?--as content that shares no properties with spatiotemporal things are caused by those things.


Speaking as an older person with belief in God, the belief system I embrace maintains that minds at innate enmity with prescriptive truth naturally [assuming sufficient capacity] possess propensities to formulate systems like relativism, naturalism, etc.--and all manner of materialistic explanations of spiritual functions. These worldviews can be spotted by their tendencies to design twofold systems that hypothetically
1) remove moral rules from external sources [like God] and place them fully within persons (Isa 14:9-22), and,
2) provide within those same systems moral exculpation for individuals by the application of deterministic theories to human behavior. (Jn 3:19-20)


There's nothing new under the sun, as Solomon noted a lot of years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2016, 01:26 AM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,568,839 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anomaly75 View Post
Your use of the word "fact" to describe a mechanistic view of morality actually lands heavily in the realm of theory, where "facts" come and go like subway commuters. That neuronal activity has correlations with moral reason and all other cognitive abilities is not proof that thoughts and beliefs--remember the hard problem?--as content that shares no properties with spatiotemporal things are caused by those things.


Speaking as an older person with belief in God, the belief system I embrace maintains that minds at innate enmity with prescriptive truth naturally [assuming sufficient capacity] possess propensities to formulate systems like relativism, naturalism, etc.--and all manner of materialistic explanations of spiritual functions. These worldviews can be spotted by their tendencies to design twofold systems that hypothetically
1) remove moral rules from external sources [like God] and place them fully within persons (Isa 14:9-22), and,
2) provide within those same systems moral exculpation for individuals by the application of deterministic theories to human behavior. (Jn 3:19-20)


There's nothing new under the sun, as Solomon noted a lot of years ago.
My basis of moral and ethics is based on a Framework and System that comprise theory and the practical which are all activated from the brain, mind and the universe.
So I am not delving on merely moral theory.


Note this two post where I reconcile the practical with the necessary theory
http://www.city-data.com/forum/42664087-post165.html
http://www.city-data.com/forum/42688420-post180.html


Moral theory and systems based on God do have their usefulness but they are limited to a certain phase of human progress and not for the long run. The problem is theistic moral systems are based on immutable God laws and thus very rigid. In addition they have their negative side effects.


My proposals based on knowledge of neurons and circuits related to the moral faculty is dynamic and will facilitate continual improvements along with inevitable changes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2016, 11:38 AM
 
40 posts, read 19,182 times
Reputation: 34
Quote:
My basis of moral and ethics is based on aFramework and System that comprise theory and the practical which are allactivated from the brain, mind and the universe.
[quote]
Quote:
My proposals based on knowledge of neuronsand circuits related to the moral faculty is dynamic and will facilitatecontinual improvements along with inevitable changes.

Understood. You have passion for yourworldview and want to share your knowledge of it. But you post as though your findings are a ‘done deal’ and there are Christians/theists who may not understand that despite the connections and correlations you present, your findings are as speculative as the religionist’s. The thinking theist also draws conclusions from logical relationships to define his faith. Materialist conclusions derive largely from evolutionary inference. That’s fine, but evolutionary psychology is imposed as an a priori interpretive system which is speculative in nature and not factual. Also neural correlations in all forms ofconsciousness including moral contemplation are anticipated by theists as well. Material events are just facts to be interpreted. What’s more interesting is why we interpret the way we do, and it seems to me that the Christian worldview(or at least my worldview) fits the facts of human nature and existence to better explain this than those limited to the constricted arena of matter in time and space.

The materialist worldview runs into essentially the same dead endthe substance dualist does. For all thecertainty you convey in your posts, your explanations fare no better indetailing how material mechanisms morph into conscious experience any betterthan the dualist can explain how essence interacts with matter. I’m not claiming your methodology is not cogent or interesting, just that it has no more a path to certitude than the properly rational theist has in a metaphysical approach.


Quote:
The problem is theistic moral systems arebased on immutable God laws and thus very rigid.

But this is only aproblem when one forces a materialist view on a theological reality instead of trying to find the proper theological explanation for it imo. We strive toward rigid rules every day in sports, legal matters, workplace policies, etc. So what’s new under the sun?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2016, 11:52 AM
 
1,039 posts, read 654,029 times
Reputation: 1730
I don't seem to have a Mean gene - nor did my own father.


Neither does my son - "kind" was on every school report he ever had.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:01 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top