Philosophical question?

[RR7]

They are the same species Zybot. Darwism definition of "Survival of the Fittest" means that a species evolves into a better version of that species, then kills the weaker species. You disagree that it says that?

I disagree that it says that. The fitter species doesn't just turn around and kill the less fit.

 

[MadeFromDust]

So we use the western world, and count their death totals, or just specific ones? How do you get to that number. Is the US is founded on christian values, then deaths caused by US in some form count as deaths caused by christians? How does that work exactly to get your number. Or is it just the society as whole? The leader? Deaths under their watch?

The 17 million deaths were a result of the crusade against Muslims and random acts of Christian terrorism in the middle ages. The 130 million deaths in the 20th century were issued by atheist leaders who looked to rid the world of races they saw unfit. When you wipe God out of the picture and try to live by your own rules, history as proven that societies crumble. I'm also not aware of any mass genocides committed by followers of Jesus Christ.

 

[magnifier661]

see zybot's response. Natural selection, versus unnatural.

Natural selection is the same thing. You are massaging the issue. A lion would have no problem destroying millions of lions, if it felt those lions will weaken it's chance for survival. Anyone that studies animals would agree.

How about this. You put a highly agressive 12" fish in a fish tank and toss hundreds of community fish being only .24" in length; then don't feed those fish for a week. Come back and tell me what you see?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

I disagree that it says that. The fitter species doesn't just turn around and kill the less fit.

actually yes, it often does

 

[RR7]

How was hitler removing god from the picture? because he didn't act as a christian "should" shouldn't change how he interpreted something, and what he believed. I don't think it's fair to include his numbers in that count, just because you don't believe that he believed what he believed.

 

[Sedatedfork]

They are the same species Zybot. Darwism definition of "Survival of the Fittest" means that a species evolves into a better version of that species, then kills the weaker species. You disagree that it says that?

Survival of the fittest doesn't necessarily mean intentional killing of the weaker species. It just means that through natural selection the more genetically fit will survive vs. the less genetically fit. Are you suggesting that darwinism principles make the dominant cultures more "fit"? I suppose that in an age with advanced weaponry, the more "fit" could be cultures that are willing to use the weapons to wipe out their social competition. I am not that well versed in Darwinism, but I think that is a perversion of the theory and I mean that in the most nonperjorative way possible.

 

[magnifier661]

i'm not trying to make you look stupid. the examples you've been trying to use to demonstrate your argument aren't coherent. my moral views aren't dictated by 'survival of the fittest' or majority rule, nor is there any logical reason to think they necessarily should be.

Now we are getting somewhere! You just admitted that the truth or "morality" has always been there. How can this be? Is "morality" something with mass? If not, then how does it exist?

i think genocide is immoral because i value human life and well-being, in particular my own. that's a matter of simple common sense. there's no mysterious inner voice telling me what's right or wrong.

Yes because you already know right from wrong. Because you evolved with the inprint of this information; or maybe the information was already there and you know this because you have the ability to see this moral view.

 

[MadeFromDust]

How was hitler removing god from the picture? because he didn't act as a christian "should" shouldn't change how he interpreted something, and what he believed. I don't think it's fair to include his numbers in that count, just because you don't believe that he believed what he believed.

There are contradicting accounts on what Hitler actually believed. I doubt Hitler even knew what the hell he believed. Either way, he was a crazy mofo. I guess what you choose is based on your bias.

And even if you remove Hitler from the picture atheist societies still have an ugly track record.

 

[magnifier661]

Survival of the fittest doesn't necessarily mean intentional killing of the weaker species. It just means that through natural selection the more genetically fit will survive vs. the less genetically fit. Are you suggesting that darwinism principles make the dominant cultures more "fit"? I suppose that in an age with advanced weaponry, the more "fit" could be cultures that are willing to use the weapons to wipe out their social competition. I am not that well versed in Darwinism, but I think that is a perversion of the theory and I mean that in the most nonperjorative way possible.

See my response to RR7. A fish is a natural species. They follow the rule of natural selection right? So why is it okay for that fish to kill hundreds of its own to survive?

 

[Sedatedfork]

Natural selection is the same thing. You are massaging the issue. A lion would have no problem destroying millions of lions, if it felt those lions will weaken it's chance for survival. Anyone that studies animals would agree.

How about this. You put a highly agressive 12" fish in a fish tank and toss hundreds of community fish being only .24" in length; then don't feed those fish for a week. Come back and tell me what you see?

OK -- I think I see your point, but it really has nothing to do with Darwinism. You are more or less talking about natural law. Caveman and Lord of the Flies stuff.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

whites killed the weaker undeveloped "savages" upon landing in america. same as a gorilla killing a weaker gorilla over territory.

they had what we wanted, so we killed them and took it. and without so much as a minor moral objection i would guess

 

[RR7]

How about this. You put a highly agressive 12" fish in a fish tank and toss hundreds of community fish being only .24" in length; then don't feed those fish for a week. Come back and tell me what you see?

I see someone making absolutely no sense in now probably the 20th inane hypothetical you've posted. That's what I see. I look forward to the next one though.

did this 12" fish evolve from the other fish? Did he grow larger and more aggressive through thousands of years of, as a species, larger and more aggressive fish mating and outlasting the smaller, less aggressive fish by beating them to food?

 

[magnifier661]

How was hitler removing god from the picture? because he didn't act as a christian "should" shouldn't change how he interpreted something, and what he believed. I don't think it's fair to include his numbers in that count, just because you don't believe that he believed what he believed.

Let's say Hilter had a vision from God and God told him he was the supreme specicies. You don't believe in God, so who cares? Hitler is a natural species, just like the fish I just described. Don't even bring up Christianity, Budah, Mohamid, or Zues. You don't believe in them so why does it matter?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

mags, are you circling around to the "soul" argument? as in, humans are the only ones that should know better, because we arent just animals, we have souls?

if so, this thread could take awhile!

 

[RR7]

See my response to RR7. A fish is a natural species. They follow the rule of natural selection right? So why is it okay for that fish to kill hundreds of its own to survive?

You seem to have about 9 or 10 points you're maybe trying to make in this thread. And the hypotheticals only muddy it further.

 

[RR7]

Let's say Hilter had a vision from God and God told him he was the supreme specicies. You don't believe in God, so who cares? Hitler is a natural species, just like the fish I just described. Don't even bring up Christianity, Budah, Mohamid, or Zues. You don't believe in them so why does it matter?

Do you have a question in here?

 

[magnifier661]

I see someone making absolutely no sense in now probably the 20th inane hypothetical you've posted. That's what I see. I look forward to the next one though.

did this 12" fish evolve from the other fish? Did he grow larger and more aggressive through thousands of years of, as a species, larger and more aggressive fish mating and outlasting the smaller, less aggressive fish by beating them to food?

Why didn't it? Through Darwin's theory, we have the same ancestors as the Chimp or other monkeys right? At one time, we all were the same species. Natural selection made that agressive fish, agressive and bigger and strong and able to eat its own kind without prejudice. Since we evolved from the same line from our Chimp cousins; we have just as much right to kill our own through natural selection as the aggressive bigger fish. In fact, since we evolved to be the master species we have every right to kill pretty much everything because we can.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Natebishop photo with airsoft gun coming soon...

 

[RR7]

If that's what you want to think, sure. I try not to get involved in fish on fish crime issues.

 

[magnifier661]

Do you have a question in here?

Yes. Why does it matter what Hilter believes since you don't care? You don't believe in My God, nor any other God for that matter. It's irrelevant. We are talking about morality, not God. Well unless you think God is the only one that knows "morality"

 

[magnifier661]

If that's what you want to think, sure. I try not to get involved in fish on fish crime issues.

Oh okay, so a fish created a crime then? So it's a crime for nature to kill its own. Then we must destroy or punish every lion killing the weak or all the fish in the sea. They are acting in MASS GENOCIDE! <--- Slay the inhumane!

 

[RR7]

Yes. Why does it matter what Hilter believes since you don't care? You don't believe in My God, nor any other God for that matter. It's irrelevant. We are talking about morality, not God. Well unless you think God is the only one that knows "morality"

Are you able to follow the thread and the quoting function to know when people are commenting on another post, to know what they are referring to?
I don't give a shit really what hitler believed, to your end of the discussion, and how he justified it. I think it's wrong, christian or atheist.
However, a side discussion, somewhat, was being had on christian nations versus atheist nations and how many people that had killed. To that end, it was relevant.

 

[magnifier661]

Are you able to follow the thread and the quoting function to know when people are commenting on another post, to know what they are referring to?
I don't give a shit really what hitler believed, to your end of the discussion, and how he justified it. I think it's wrong, christian or atheist.
However, a side discussion, somewhat, was being had on christian nations versus atheist nations and how many people that had killed. To that end, it was relevant.

It has every relevance because you have just proven my point. RELIGION or BELIEFS don't classify morality. Morality already exists, it always has existed. We as humans have this "blue print" embedding in us, because we have "God" in us "The Holy Spirit" and if "Morality" always existed, and morality isn't a "mass"; then it must be something else. It's information! Information cannot come from nothing. Something had to put it there.

That's why there is a difference between a Human and an Ape, a Human and a fish, a human and basically any other species on the planet. We have a soul! We have God. If you believe in Science, then you must believe in God. Because information can't poof out of thin air, because it is inatimate. You don't have to believe in My God, but the refusal of God not existing is insane!

We can tell the difference between right and wrong!

 

[porkchopexpress]

Okay let's make it 50,000,000 people where killed by acts of Christian extremests and only 30 were killed in the act of Atheism. What's morally worse?

My question wasn't about which was worse. I just wanted to know where the numbers were coming from.

 

[crowTrobot]

Now we are getting somewhere! You just admitted that the truth or "morality" has always been there. How can this be? Is "morality" something with mass? If not, then how does it exist?

how does my desire not to see myself or other humans suffer and die exist? it's partially genetic and partially learned. it exists in my physical genes and in the electronic pulses in my brain, just like everything else about me.

Yes because you already know right from wrong. Because you evolved with the inprint of this information

i evolved not wanting to die, yes. no mystery about that.

 

[RR7]

you say it is irrelevant, and then follow up my post by saying it has every relevance.
insane is...i dunno, wherever you're aiming to take the discussion. I feel trolled.

 

[magnifier661]

you say it is irrelevant, and then follow up my post by saying it has every relevance.
insane is...i dunno, wherever you're aiming to take the discussion. I feel trolled.

The last part of my statement put my Christian hat on. When I was discussion the things in between it was irrelevant because I wasn't asking the questions as a "Christian". I actually asked them being completely unbias to any belief. It may have been confusing, but I think I made my point. And you can refuse what that point is because I'm not your mind. I am only trying to give you what I think I already know. You can take it in or toss it out, or try and discredit it because you don't want it to influence others. That's what a debate is about.

 

[crowTrobot]

It has every relevance because you have just proven my point. RELIGION or BELIEFS don't classify morality. Morality already exists, it always has existed. We as humans have this "blue print" embedding in us, because we have "God" in us "The Holy Spirit" and if "Morality" always existed, and morality isn't a "mass"; then it must be something else. It's information! Information cannot come from nothing. Something had to put it there.

who put god there?

 

[RR7]

I don't think you made your point. Or, rather, you made no point to me. And in a discussion, to make your point, you would have to get it across to the person in the discussion. So....you have morals because of god. If that's your point that you tried in 6 pages to get across, then, ok. Good for you, I guess.

 

[magnifier661]

who put god there?

Well if you believe science, there is such a thing as Quantum Physics, time and space can be one. That would mean there could be a possibility that there is an Alpha and Omega. Basically meaning that he, just like morality was always here.