A Guide to Finding Faith

Cypress said:
For sure. I also believe humans have an inherent sense of justice, egalitarianism, empathy which cannot be measured in particle accelerators.

And even if justice could be scientifically measured and quantified under laboratory conditions, we would not need a scientific report to tell us it is something palpable that our minds can intuit and believe in
Click to expand...
But it can be measured in other ways such as personality tests: https://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test. Additionally, how much of that "inherent" sense is cultural leaning? We are almost immediately indoctrinated with cultural standards such as dressing boy babies one way and girl babies another.

Justice is relative. A man kills a 10 year old boy. Righteous kill or murder?

It depends. If the boy had a suicide vest and was about to blow up a bus load of refugees, I vote for "righteous kill".

Truth and facts are "Just" but as noted in the situation above, there is no universal standard when human relations are concerned.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Sure. Somebody should probably do it. We have time and resources for that.

My own third act, however, has been devoted to slowing down the deterioration of my golf game.
I have time and resources for that.
Click to expand...

It's a given that it would never be you doing the work. :)

Thanks for admitting you were wrong when you posted "The scientific "evidence" to which you refer tries to pretend that time is irrelevant."
"
 
Dutch Uncle said:
But it can be measured in other ways such as personality tests: https://www.16personalities.com/free-personality-test. Additionally, how much of that "inherent" sense is cultural leaning? We are almost immediately indoctrinated with cultural standards such as dressing boy babies one way and girl babies another.

Justice is relative. A man kills a 10 year old boy. Righteous kill or murder?

It depends. If the boy had a suicide vest and was about to blow up a bus load of refugees, I vote for "righteous kill".

Truth and facts are "Just" but as noted in the situation above, there is no universal standard when human relations are concerned.
Click to expand...

What I am saying is that because something is cultural does not make it untrue.

Neither does relativism. Einstein showed us that time and space are relative to the frame of reference of the observer.

I am saying that there are culturall and social aspects of human existence that we can legitimately intuit and believe in.

As to the question whether anything is literally true, from the strictest philosophical sense, that is an open question. Even science only gives us provisional knowledge, so absolute truth is a yardstick perhaps beyond science intuition, and belief.
 
Cypress said:
What I am saying is that because something is cultural does not make it untrue.

Neither does relativism. Einstein showed us that time and space are relative to the frame of reference of the observer.

I am saying that there are culturall and social aspects of human existence that we can legitimately intuit and believe in.

As to the question whether anything is literally true, from the strictest philosophical sense, that is an open question. Even science only gives us provisional knowledge, so absolute truth is a yardstick perhaps beyond science intuition, and belief.
Click to expand...

Agreed. For the most part, I think most cultural norms are "true" given the term applies to "workable".

In other cases it's flat out nonsensical such as Abrahamic religious rules on eating pork.

In past days where antibiotics and refrigeration were lacking, I can see why tribes of people would be concerned about trichinosis. However, given pork can be eaten in a safe manner, I fail to see why eating it is "wrong" much less "sinful".

What are the symptoms of trichinosis and when do they appear?
Stomach symptoms tend to appear 1-2 days after eating infected meat. These symptoms usually include diarrhea (loose stool/poop), nausea (feeling of sickness in the stomach), fatigue, and stomach pain. Other symptoms may appear 2-8 weeks after infection and may include fever, headaches, chills, muscle soreness, pain and swelling around the eyes. The length and severity of symptoms varies depending upon the number of parasites in the meat and the amount eaten. Although rare, complications can develop and affect the heart, brain, and lungs; these complications may be fatal.
Click to expand...

Absolute truth only applies to absolutes such as the maximum temperature of our Sun, the acceleration of gravity on Earth, etc. There is no "absolute truth" when it comes to one human being killing another. It depends on the context and circumstances.

"Thou shalt not kill" is in the Bible. Some take that as an absolute, but since the Israelis were very good at killing others, often with God's blessing, obviously it's not an absolute. It's relative to who is being killed by whom. :)
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed. For the most part, I think most cultural norms are "true" given the term applies to "workable".

In other cases it's flat out nonsensical such as Abrahamic religious rules on eating pork.

In past days where antibiotics and refrigeration were lacking, I can see why tribes of people would be concerned about trichinosis. However, given pork can be eaten in a safe manner, I fail to see why eating it is "wrong" much less "sinful".



Absolute truth only applies to absolutes such as the maximum temperature of our Sun, the acceleration of gravity on Earth, etc. There is no "absolute truth" when it comes to one human being killing another. It depends on the context and circumstances.

"Thou shalt not kill" is in the Bible. Some take that as an absolute, but since the Israelis were very good at killing others, often with God's blessing, obviously it's not an absolute. It's relative to who is being killed by whom. :)
Click to expand...

I generally agree.

Thomas Jefferson invoked a kind of truth of natural rights and justice in the Declaration of Independence.

The Nazis at Nuremberg were not prosecuted on the basis of German criminal law; the prosecutors invoked the notion of universal natural law and universal human rights.

To me, that is a demonstration that humanity believes in a kind of truth concerning certain values, universal rights, and natural law none of which can be proven to be true or quantified by scientific experimentation under laboratory conditions.
 
Cypress said:
I generally agree.

Thomas Jefferson invoked a kind of truth of natural rights and justice in the Declaration of Independence.

The Nazis at Nuremberg were not prosecuted on the basis of German criminal law; the prosecutors invoked the notion of universal natural law and universal human rights.

To me, that is a demonstration that humanity believes in a kind of truth concerning certain values, universal rights, and natural law none of which can be proven to be true or quantified by scientific experimentation under laboratory conditions.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your examples and line of argument in terms of accurately stating the cases, but theirs was a quasi-religious argument not based in fact even though I strongly agree with it.

"Might makes right" is part of the Laws of the Jungle along with "Kill or be killed" and "By any means necessary". It's the naked ape who literally rose up and began inventing a social structure that defies those Natural Laws. Natural because, in the Jungle, there is no moral right or wrong. It's live or die.

Mankind invented society and rules to govern. Hammurabi's Code and the Bible are among the best known early examples of these rules.

When a tribe only has one book, it better be a good one. The Old Testament provided rules of government, rules for conduct among tribal members, penalties for crimes, medical advice in the form of diet and other rules befitting the times and circumstances. It also included some really cool stories. Sort of like a combination Boy Scout Manual, Aesop's Fables and Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination.

Bottom line: Social rules are what we make them. Some rules work better than others but circumstances vary. The Ten Commandments are actually very good basic rules for a village: Don't hurt each other, don't lie to or about each other, don't steal from each other, etc.
Too bad the fucking Republicans don't abide by them anymore than the fucking Democrats. ;)

The 1700s BCE Hammurabi would have been proud of the 1300s BCE Moses when he wrote the first five books of the Bible. :)
 
AProudLefty said:
They used gravity at Jornada del Muerto.
Click to expand...

Great place for it. I actually have a little souvenir from there: https://atomicrockshop.com/index.html

1522063933.jpg


I keep it next to a piece of the Berlin Wall and 1.5 oz meteorite.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
While I agree with your examples and line of argument in terms of accurately stating the cases, but theirs was a quasi-religious argument not based in fact even though I strongly agree with it.

"Might makes right" is part of the Laws of the Jungle along with "Kill or be killed" and "By any means necessary". It's the naked ape who literally rose up and began inventing a social structure that defies those Natural Laws. Natural because, in the Jungle, there is no moral right or wrong. It's live or die.

Mankind invented society and rules to govern. Hammurabi's Code and the Bible are among the best known early examples of these rules.

When a tribe only has one book, it better be a good one. The Old Testament provided rules of government, rules for conduct among tribal members, penalties for crimes, medical advice in the form of diet and other rules befitting the times and circumstances. It also included some really cool stories. Sort of like a combination Boy Scout Manual, Aesop's Fables and Poe's Tales of Mystery and Imagination.

Bottom line: Social rules are what we make them. Some rules work better than others but circumstances vary. The Ten Commandments are actually very good basic rules for a village: Don't hurt each other, don't lie to or about each other, don't steal from each other, etc.
Too bad the fucking Republicans don't abide by them anymore than the fucking Democrats. ;)

The 1700s BCE Hammurabi would have been proud of the 1300s BCE Moses when he wrote the first five books of the Bible. :)
Click to expand...

I think that kind of moral relativism is a perfectly acceptable form of the philosophy of ethics.

But I tend to come down more on the side of Socrates and Plato in that there is a kind of truth underlying natural law and universal truths, and less on the side of Protagoras who famously said 'Man is the measure of all things'
 
Cypress said:
I think the kind of moral relativism is a perfectly acceptable form of the philosophy of ethics, I come down more on the side of Socrates and Plato that there is a kind of truth underlying natural law and universal truths, and less on the side of Protagoras who famously said 'Man is the measure of all things'
Click to expand...

Philosophy. Agreed 100%. No matter how far we look in the Universe or how deep we delve into subatomic structure, we'll never find a rule book or Ten Commandments. Those are human rules within a finite system.

A few days ago we discussed if the Universe was finite and rigid. To a large degree, it is. The nature of dark matter, dark energy, subatomic particles, wormholes, etc, might allow us to venture into areas violating that rigidity, but the rigidity exists by the simple fact we test it every day. Reality is rigid.

The Human Mind is not so rigid. It can be rather flexible. In a discussion free will vs. determinism I used this example: we're fish in a river. we can temporarily or permanently leave the river, but it's not recommended. We can fight the river, but the river is stronger than we'll ever be. We have to follow the rules of the river. That's Determinism. Free Will is our ability to give up and just float saying "I have no free will" or try swimming from side to side, up and down and enjoy your little part of the river. It's a choice. That's Free Will.

We don't have to like our choices, but we always have them available.




What's beyond reality is a different matter. Regardless, while I agree 100% that social rules such as the Ten Commandments or Hammurabi's Code are essential for a civil, united group of naked apes, it's not written in stone. <--Moses joke.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Childish moment of levity:

Click to expand...

LOL. Not childish. Although Wile E. Coyote had a problem with executing his plans, those are all excellents plans weaponizing gravity.

I was trying to think of something that couldn't be weaponized and there's nothing I can think of which can't, somehow, be used to kill.

After 9/11, all the aircrews were discussing weaponizing items in the cabin and which we could legally carry through security.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top