Philosophical question?

[ABM]

Or just left them alone and not murdered them for oil companies.

I have a better idea....

[video=youtube;_EY8DFqFpws]

 

[magnifier661]

Aaaand since this thread has now fallen completely off the tracks, here is some pi.

[video=youtube;27OQfd_Sq4c]

This thread has been all over the place. And when the dust settles.... We will learn that a square is the universe and we are living in a circle.

 

[ABM]

This thread has been all over the place. And when the dust settles.... We will learn that a square is the universe and we are living in a circle.

Are you attempting to put God in a box?

 

[magnifier661]

Are you attempting to put God in a box?

Not me brother, not me

 

[ABM]

Not me brother, not me

I know, I know....just providing a bit of levity to the room.

 

[MARIS61]

How can people determine who is good?

That was the original question of this thread, and an excellent question it is.

But then someone must have had a typo because it quickly morphed into How can people determine who is god?

In answer to the original question all humans have varying degrees of good and bad in them, and the balance may change at different times in their life. Nobody is all bad, all the time. Nobody is all good, all the time.

 

[crowTrobot]

What's funny is that the killing was jumped on. I guess peace and love was just ignored. Lol

no, you ignored or didn't understand my response.

the generalized statement "humans desire peace and love" is not even a moral topic. when you say that you are not making a claim about how humans think we should behave. desire for peace and love is irrelevant to your argument that what humans think we should and shouldn't do is the result of a magical infusion from god.

what WOULD possibly be relevant evidence supporting your argument that morality is built into us by a higher power, is if humans agreed on what behavior we should use to achieve peace and love. but we don't.

 

[tlongII]

Good and bad depends on one's point of reference. There is no absolute.

 

[ABM]

How can people determine who is good?

In answer to the original question all humans have varying degrees of good and bad in them, and the balance may change at different times in their life. Nobody is all bad, all the time. Nobody is all good, all the time.

Nothing like good ol' moral relativism.

 

[magnifier661]

Good and bad depends on one's point of reference. There is no absolute.

So do you think it's moral for that soccer team that crashed in the Andes to eat each other for survival? And to go even further. Do you think it's moral for a woman to kill her 1 year old baby; because she found out that if she doesn't; her entire family would be killed?

 

[magnifier661]

How can people determine who is good?

That was the original question of this thread, and an excellent question it is.

But then someone must have had a typo because it quickly morphed into How can people determine who is god?

In answer to the original question all humans have varying degrees of good and bad in them, and the balance may change at different times in their life. Nobody is all bad, all the time. Nobody is all good, all the time.

Thank you! How can people determine what is good or bad? Very good question maris!

How would you answer that?

 

[magnifier661]

no, you ignored or didn't understand my response.

the generalized statement "humans desire peace and love" is not even a moral topic. when you say that you are not making a claim about how humans think we should behave. desire for peace and love is irrelevant to your argument that what humans think we should and shouldn't do is the result of a magical infusion from god.

what WOULD possibly be relevant evidence supporting your argument that morality is built into us by a higher power, is if humans agreed on what behavior we should use to achieve peace and love. but we don't.

Okay if 100% peace was to destroy entire civilizations, would you do it? What if, in your world, killing everyone that believed in God or Gods was without a shadow of a doubt scientifically proven to bring peace to the world; would it be okay to do it?

 

[crowTrobot]

Okay if 100% peace was to destroy entire civilizations, would you do it? What if, in your world, killing everyone that believed in God or Gods was without a shadow of a doubt scientifically proven to bring peace to the world; would it be okay to do it?

what i personally think isn't relevant, because for any answer i give you will find people who disagree with me. you were making a claim about moral prescriptions that humans agree about. if a hostile alien race appeared tomorrow humans would be widely split on what to do about it.

 

[magnifier661]

what i personally think isn't relevant, because whatever i say you will find people who disagree with me. you were making a claim about moral prescriptions that humans agree about. if a hostile alien race appeared tomorrow humans would be widely split on what to do about it.

That was a really good straddle of the fence. I want to know what "you" think. Not the worlds view.

 

[crowTrobot]

That was a really good straddle of the fence.

i'm not faced with a fence. your claim has nothing to do with me.

I want to know what "you" think. Not the worlds view.

what i think isn't going to change the fact that humans widely disagree about what is moral behavior. if moral knowledge is infused from god he apparently did a half-assed job.

if you're asking me if i think genocide is immoral in order to change the subject, then yes i think that : )

 

[magnifier661]

i'm not faced with a fence. your claim has nothing to do with me.



what i think isn't going to change the fact that humans widely disagree about what is moral behavior. if moral knowledge is infused from god he apparently did a half-assed job.

if you're asking me if i think genocide is immoral in order to change the subject, then yes i think that : )

So "genocide". Which isn't really the right term since "genocide" is more of a racist act. We are talking about a religious view. Has nothing to do with a race. This is about the proposed "well being" of humanity itself.

So let me ask you the question again.

If science undeniably proved that in order to establish pure peace was to eliminate religion from the face of the earth; and let's say they have a machine that can read the minds of everyone and can determine if they believe in a god; would it be alright to kill them?

 

[TripTango]

So "genocide". Which isn't really the right term since "genocide" is more of a racist act. We are talking about a religious view. Has nothing to do with a race. This is about the proposed "well being" of humanity itself.

So let me ask you the question again.

If science undeniably proved that in order to establish pure peace was to eliminate religion from the face of the earth; and let's say they have a machine that can read the minds of everyone and can determine if they believe in a god; would it be alright to kill them?

This question is very similar to "if god told you to slaughter your family, would you do it?" Science could never possibly make that kind of assertion, so it really is a moot point.

 

[crowTrobot]

So "genocide". Which isn't really the right term since "genocide" is more of a racist act. We are talking about a religious view. Has nothing to do with a race. This is about the proposed "well being" of humanity itself.

So let me ask you the question again.

If science undeniably proved that in order to establish pure peace was to eliminate religion from the face of the earth; and let's say they have a machine that can read the minds of everyone and can determine if they believe in a god; would it be alright to kill them?

the term genocide can be applied to any type of group including religious.

no it would not be "alright", unless you stipulate that humanity is faced with immediate extinction unless we do it or something simliarly ludicrous.

 

[magnifier661]

the term genocide can be applied to any type of group including religious.

no it would not be "alright", unless you stipulate that humanity is faced with immediate extinction unless we do it or something simliarly ludicrous.

Okay I'll give you it is also religious. But it's a little contridicting, since it is associated with "genome". So you think if humanity faces extinction; then genocide is okay?

 

[magnifier661]

This question is very similar to "if god told you to slaughter your family, would you do it?" Science could never possibly make that kind of assertion, so it really is a moot point.

Really? Are you sure?

 

[crowTrobot]

So you think if humanity faces extinction; then genocide is okay?

if there's a bomb in a building is it better to get whoever you can out or stand around and let everybody die?

if you want to continue this further you should just go ahead and make your point.

 

[TripTango]

Really? Are you sure?

Quite sure.

 

[magnifier661]

if there's a bomb in a building is it better to get whoever you can out or stand around and let everybody die?

if you want to continue this further you should just go ahead and make your point.

So you agree that genocide and the bomb in the building are about the same type of scenario? And Why should I get to my point? You are getting to it with each answer.

 

[magnifier661]

Quite sure.

So what if a "lie detector" was fined tune without fault. Many believe it's almost there.

 

[TripTango]

So what if a "lie detector" was fined tune without fault. Many believe it's almost there.

What does lying have to do with it?

 

[magnifier661]

What does lying have to do with it?

Oh I thought you were talking about "Proving if someone actually believed in a God". Guess I misunderstood your answer. So what are you saying? You think Science can't determine if Religion or the belief in God is detrimental to peace? Before we go further; do you believe phychology is science?

 

[TripTango]

Oh I thought you were talking about "Proving if someone actually believed in a God". Guess I misunderstood your answer. So what are you saying? You think Science can't determine if Religion or the belief in God is detrimental to peace? Before we go further; do you believe phychology is science?

I believe psychology is borderline science, but even that is not the question.

Can we perfectly predict human behavior? Could we ever make the statement "if we do this, then humanity will have no reason to fight"? Can we eradicate a way of thinking for all time by killing all the people who currently think that way?

The answer to all of these are pretty emphatic no's, as far as I can tell.

 

[tlongII]

So do you think it's moral for that soccer team that crashed in the Andes to eat each other for survival? And to go even further. Do you think it's moral for a woman to kill her 1 year old baby; because she found out that if she doesn't; her entire family would be killed?

I don't know.

 

[magnifier661]

I believe psychology is borderline science, but even that is not the question.

Can we perfectly predict human behavior? Could we ever make the statement "if we do this, then humanity will have no reason to fight"? Can we eradicate a way of thinking for all time by killing all the people who currently think that way?

The answer to all of these are pretty emphatic no's, as far as I can tell.

But wait a minute?!?! I thought morality is just a natural evolution and has no connection with God or a spirit? All we would have to do is find the information in the DNA; and we can make a perfect species. So how can we not predict human behavior; when it's just chemicals, protein and information imprinted in our DNA? Seems like a complete contridiction if you believe in Natural Selection.

Also, zoology has been pretty "spot on" with many species in predicting their behavior; either by studying their anatomy and life on this planet. What makes us different?

 

[magnifier661]

I don't know.

At least you're honest.