U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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 03-29-2010, 09:43 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,951,040 times
Reputation: 909

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk View Post
FAIL. I plan on being cremated, and hence, there will be nothing to urinate on. Yet, I would not urinate on someone's grave...why?
Cognitive dissonance, the cause of which is that you don't want people urinating on your bod when you're dead, and that you don't want people urinating on the body of your loved ones.


Quote:


"The heart" is a metaphor! That is the problem with scientific minded people and religion: they are way too literall in their thinking and cannot see a metaphor, analogy and a allegory for what they are.
The heart is a blood pump. What you really want to say is that emotions allow for good judgment, which isn't at all true. We don't kill people when we get angry at them, even though we want to, because to do so is unreasonable. Emotionally you want to see them perish, "logically" it doesn't make sense. Likewise, we can claim that our feelings of love allow for great judgment, but as any battered wife will tell you, she still loves her husband.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-29-2010, 09:45 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,951,040 times
Reputation: 909
Good video by the way, I enjoyed it. "Human well being" is about as transcendental you will get regarding anthropomorphic morality. Reminds me a lot of the monkey sphere.
What is the Monkeysphere? | Cracked.com

As for great videos, I'm a huge fan of this bit by Michael Shermer (president of Skeptics Society).
Michael Shermer on strange beliefs | Video on TED.com

The part where he goes over priming is absolutely great.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2010, 01:26 PM
 
6,343 posts, read 8,484,013 times
Reputation: 3440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Cognitive dissonance, the cause of which is that you don't want people urinating on your bod when you're dead, and that you don't want people urinating on the body of your loved ones.

No, no no. There is an old joke I heard in my first year of college from a professor I ran into at a bar (he is a completely different person outside of work, which the vomit stains in that old car of mine will attest to...)

A man was in jail and asked to see his priest. The priest walked in to see him and the man went into a screaming fit, barking at the top of his lungs and blaming the priest for his being in jail. "My son!" the priest said "what did I have to do with your being in jail for, for..." the priest looked at the charges on his clip board and his eyes grew wide "for spontaneously performing oral sex on strangers as they waited behind you on line in the grocery store!?" The man said,
"Father! it was your sermon last Sunday! do you remember what the sermon was?" The priest was about to protest, than stopped, sighed and shock his head.
"Well, next time I give a sermon on "doing to others what you would like them to do to you, I will try to be more specific..."

I would not care less what people do to my ashes once I am dead because, after all, I would be DEAD. But, I would still not do so to other people. I understand that different people want different things and respect those wishes, even if that respect is completely illogical.


Quote:
The heart is a blood pump. What you really want to say is that emotions allow for good judgment, which isn't at all true.

I never said that. "good" is a relative term. What might be "good" for one person might not be "good" for another. What Blaise Pascal is saying is that, in following their own individual needs that go beyond reason, people have their own reasons for doing things that need no basis in "logic".


Quote:
We don't kill people when we get angry at them, even though we want to, because to do so is unreasonable. Emotionally you want to see them perish, "logically" it doesn't make sense. Likewise, we can claim that our feelings of love allow for great judgment, but as any battered wife will tell you, she still loves her husband.
I like Nietzsche becuase, unlike the spineless Atheist philosophers of today, he understood that morality is completely unneccesary. We do not kill someone who makes us anger not because it is "unrationable", but because killing them will make a much bigger issue than dealing with the anger they cause us. I mean, you have to get rid of the body, it might make a big mess, they might stop you and kill you instead, and then there's the whole little getting caught and going to jail thing.

But, there is no logical reason why, if one knows he will not get caught, to not want to kill someone who annoys them. That is the one rule of nature as logic explains and evolution proves: THE STRONG TRIUMPH, THE WEAK DIE.

Simple as that. Remove emotion from the mix, and that is what we are left with. I agree that religion is not necessary for morality, but emotion is, and there is nothing Rational about human emotion. Once we make moral decisions based on logic and logic alone, and what we are left with is the morality of the jungle: Eat or be Eaten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2010, 01:37 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,951,040 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk View Post
No, no no. There is an old joke I heard in my first year of college from a professor I ran into at a bar (he is a completely different person outside of work, which the vomit stains in that old car of mine will attest to...)

I would not care less what people do to my ashes once I am dead because, after all, I would be DEAD. But, I would still not do so to other people. I understand that different people want different things and respect those wishes, even if that respect is completely illogical.
I can only explain physiological occurrences that result in why you choose not to do something you otherwise want to do. Why you don't pee on people's graves isn't my concern. Why don't you tell me why you don't?

Quote:
I never said that. "good" is a relative term. What might be "good" for one person might not be "good" for another. What Blaise Pascal is saying is that, in following their own individual needs that go beyond reason, people have their own reasons for doing things that need no basis in "logic".
And Pascal lived 400 years ago. Our emotions are primitive: they kept us alive. Reason is the advance part of our brains, which has advanced our society. When making a judgment, reasoning should triumph emotion.

Quote:
I like Nietzsche becuase, unlike the spineless Atheist philosophers of today,
ad hominem

Quote:
he understood that morality is completely unneccesary. We do not kill someone who makes us anger not because it is "unrationable", but because killing them will make a much bigger issue than dealing with the anger they cause us. I mean, you have to get rid of the body, it might make a big mess, they might stop you and kill you instead, and then there's the whole little getting caught and going to jail thing.
You'll notice the "logically" was in quotes. Killing someone is the emotional thing to do. Not killing someone because it's too much of a hassle is the reasonable part of your brain. We're agreeing to the same point, you just seem to miss the idea that reason makes better judgment calls than emotion.

Quote:
But, there is no logical reason why, if one knows he will not get caught, to not want to kill someone who annoys them. That is the one rule of nature as logic explains and evolution proves: THE STRONG TRIUMPH, THE WEAK DIE.
Strong is determined in many ways. "might makes right" doesn't always mean physical might.

Quote:
Simple as that. Remove emotion from the mix, and that is what we are left with. I agree that religion is not necessary for morality, but emotion is, and there is nothing Rational about human emotion. Once we make moral decisions based on logic and logic alone, and what we are left with is the morality of the jungle: Eat or be Eaten.
This is were we are disagreeing, that emotion supercedes reason. I don't think you have provided sufficient reason or evidence to suggest it aside from the suggestion that nature likes the physically strong. That isn't how evolution works, which I'm sure you know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2010, 04:57 PM
 
6,343 posts, read 8,484,013 times
Reputation: 3440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post

This is were we are disagreeing, that emotion supercedes reason. I don't think you have provided sufficient reason or evidence to suggest it aside from the suggestion that nature likes the physically strong. That isn't how evolution works, which I'm sure you know.

First of all, reason and emotion are two sides of the same human coin. Do away with one or the other, and the human could not survive. However, the two do not stem from the same urges: Rationally, I should not be afraid of a crime scene after it happened exactly one year ago...however, I would not want to live in a house were the murder happened.

As for evolution...hate to break it to you, but they don't call it "survival of the FITTEST" for nothing. We did not play nice with the Neandrathals, and many extinct animals will contest to what is and is not the law of nature. The weak die, the strong triumph. That is the only morality that can logically be decided from science and any morality other than that comes from emotion. Nietzsche understood this and as a result I respect the consistency of his arguments that people like Harris are completely lacking, even if I disagree with Nietzsche.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2010, 05:40 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,951,040 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk View Post
First of all, reason and emotion are two sides of the same human coin. Do away with one or the other, and the human could not survive.
What? We didn't have this giant frontal cortex in the past: we evolved the ability to reason. I would argue we don't really need emotion. It's great to have, sure, but as I've stated several times, it is unreliable for making good judgments.

Quote:
However, the two do not stem from the same urges: Rationally, I should not be afraid of a crime scene after it happened exactly one year ago...however, I would not want to live in a house were the murder happened.
There is no reason not to live in that house. There was a murder in it, so what. The property is fine, you're not going to be haunted, and the blood I'm sure was cleaned out. Not living there is a waste of a perfectly good house.

Quote:
As for evolution...hate to break it to you, but they don't call it "survival of the FITTEST" for nothing.
Survival of the fittest is not an evolutionary term. If anything, it's closer to "survival of the fit enough."

Quote:
We did not play nice with the Neandrathals, and many extinct animals will contest to what is and is not the law of nature. The weak die, the strong triumph.
There are a myriad of theories attempting to explain the Neanderthals, that we "didn't play nice" is but one.

Quote:
That is the only morality that can logically be decided from science and any morality other than that comes from emotion.
I don't see any logic to support that position, nor evidence to suggest either of those. Emotions are poor standards for making judgments. Pumping someone full of oxytocin is going to make them deeply love just about everything. Morality means being able to reason between right and wrong, and emotions are not able to do that.

Quote:
Nietzsche understood this and as a result I respect the consistency of his arguments that people like Harris are completely lacking, even if I disagree with Nietzsche.
Sure, but you haven't provided any real argument to say that logic leads us to survival of the fittest, or that morality only comes from emotion. I would argue against the later point especially considering that emotion does not make good judgment.
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 > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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