What is hell?

[Dutch Uncle]

Thanks for your input.
I like your analogy of the expansion of the universe following a predictable mathematical pattern m

I'm not sure life is increasing randomness if one looks at it through the prism of physics.
The way understand it is that life is a low entropy feature of the universe, so life is a more orderly and less random attribute of the cosmos. You couldn't have life in a thoroughly mixed high entropy condition. So in a certain sense, life is a more orderly attribute of the overall equilibrium of the universe.

Maybe what you're taking about is the willful actions of a conscious being.

Thanks.

IMO, Life is the X factor. The big problem, as you and I have discussed before, is that we only have one example of a planet with life despite over half a century of looking for it elsewhere. Still, as shown on Earth, life alters the natural, and predictable, features of our planet. Rain falls in the mountains to form streams then rivers. Life can alter that natural process by building dams be it by beavers or humans.

One historical example is the Owens Valley in California. Now an arid region, it used to be a lush valley until the Owens river was diverted to provide water to Los Angeles in 1913. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Valley#Water_diversion_to_Los_Angeles

Another example is global warming. As evidenced by NASA, there is no doubt that human industrial activities have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere enough to alter the climate. There have been natural climate changes in the past, but this one is induced by life. https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

As far as we know, the laws of physics apply equally across the Universe. The movements of everything in the Universe are not only predictable but were set in motion over 13.5B years ago. Even though there are plenty of mysteries in the Universe such as dark energy and dark matter, once understood, the motions of the Universe are predictable. The X factor is lifeforms altering those motions be it intentional, such as NASA altering the orbit of an asteroid, or unintentional such as a coral reef changing the currents off a coastline.

 

[Neoclitorus]

I think there is and it's based on the positive or negative experience experience of conscious creatures.Correct, but that doesn't mean that we, as humans who understand human suffering, can't say that it is immoral to not take care of your offspring, right? We can also say that it is immoral to kill off the weakest, despite it being acceptable to other species of animals who don't understand morality.
All morality originated with man. There's no sky wizard giving moral sirection.


Sure, so was I, but Christs are just people. Muslims are just people. If you grew up in another country, you'd probably have different views of morality because of culture, not because a different sky wizard had different rules.

wrong.

animals also cooperate for common thriving.

cooperating for common thriving is the definition of morality.

 

[Neoclitorus]

Ever hear of 'Every Man for Himself'?

this is considered a bad situation, the breakdown of morality and society when this expression is uttered.


you've become very stupid on many issues lately.

 

[ZenMode]

Your word games won't work, Void. The use of the word 'figuratively' changes nothing. You are still locked in your paradox.

The use of the word figurative changes everything.

Your Llack of understanding of the English language won’t work.

 

[ZenMode]

Ever hear of 'Every Man for Himself'?

Ever heard of "All for one and one for all"?

Are we doing irrelevant movie quotes today?

 

[ZenMode]

wrong.

animals also cooperate for common thriving.

cooperating for common thriving is the definition of morality.

Right. I've mentioned this before. Animals do things that appear to be moral or immoral, but animals have no concept of the English language or any complex language to understand the concept of morality. Animals do things because of genetics/instincts/evolution, etc, not because they think to themselves "It would be wrong to abandon a member of our group".

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Right. I've mentioned this before. Animals do things that appear to be moral or immoral, but animals have no concept of the English language or any complex language to understand the concept of morality. Animals do things because of genetics/instincts/evolution, etc, not because they think to themselves "It would be wrong to abandon a member of our group".

Please define "morality" and how it applies to my cat or dogs. TIA

Morality | Definition, Ethics, Comparative Ethics, Ethical Relativism, & Facts | Britannica

Morality, the moral beliefs and practices of a culture, community, or religion or a code or system of moral rules, principles, or values. The conceptual foundations and rational consistency of such standards are the subject matter of the philosophical discipline of ethics, also known as moral

www.britannica.com

morality, the moral beliefs and practices of a culture, community, or religion or a code or system of moral rules, principles, or values. The conceptual foundations and rational consistency of such standards are the subject matter of the philosophical discipline of ethics, also known as moral philosophy. In its contemporary usage, the term ethics is also applied to particular moral codes or systems and to the empirical study of their historical development and their social, economic, and geographic circumstances (see comparative ethics).

 

[ZenMode]

Please define "morality" and how it applies to my cat or dogs. TIA

Morality | Definition, Ethics, Comparative Ethics, Ethical Relativism, & Facts | Britannica

Morality, the moral beliefs and practices of a culture, community, or religion or a code or system of moral rules, principles, or values. The conceptual foundations and rational consistency of such standards are the subject matter of the philosophical discipline of ethics, also known as moral

www.britannica.com

morality, the moral beliefs and practices of a culture, community, or religion or a code or system of moral rules, principles, or values. The conceptual foundations and rational consistency of such standards are the subject matter of the philosophical discipline of ethics, also known as moral philosophy. In its contemporary usage, the term ethics is also applied to particular moral codes or systems and to the empirical study of their historical development and their social, economic, and geographic circumstances (see comparative ethics).

From their side it doesn't because, again, animals don't have complex language to be able to understand a concept like morality.

 

[serenity]

Jesus: the outer darkness, an unquenchable fire, a place of no return.
Buddhism: a place of torment, not eternal, but inconcievably long.
Catholic Church: Described mainly as a separation from God.
Anglican Church: Permanent annihilation and the extinguishing of all consciousness.

Never accepting time for how one exists adapting as eternally separated when adapting equally alive all the time living one of a kind. People minding ideas life isn't self evident create kingdoms of reasonable doubt pitting every ancestor against their own ancestry as well as any other alive so far.

Read between the lines of every society governing tomorrows midnight to noon, dawn to dusk, night and day, solstices to equinoxes annually each generation gap lived to current events..

Eternal life evolves in plain sight by combined chromosomes inhabiting space one at a time in specific ancestral generation gaps regardless plant or animal ancestral lineage, predator or prey nature, asexual, male, female means to reproduce another generation gap between inception and extinction, now, each specifically exists fertilized cell to decomposed corpse daily here.

Self evident.

 

[Cypress]

Thanks.

IMO, Life is the X factor. The big problem, as you and I have discussed before, is that we only have one example of a planet with life despite over half a century of looking for it elsewhere. Still, as shown on Earth, life alters the natural, and predictable, features of our planet. Rain falls in the mountains to form streams then rivers. Life can alter that natural process by building dams be it by beavers or humans.

One historical example is the Owens Valley in California. Now an arid region, it used to be a lush valley until the Owens river was diverted to provide water to Los Angeles in 1913. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Valley#Water_diversion_to_Los_Angeles

Another example is global warming. As evidenced by NASA, there is no doubt that human industrial activities have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere enough to alter the climate. There have been natural climate changes in the past, but this one is induced by life. https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

As far as we know, the laws of physics apply equally across the Universe. The movements of everything in the Universe are not only predictable but were set in motion over 13.5B years ago. Even though there are plenty of mysteries in the Universe such as dark energy and dark matter, once understood, the motions of the Universe are predictable. The X factor is lifeforms altering those motions be it intentional, such as NASA altering the orbit of an asteroid, or unintentional such as a coral reef changing the currents off a coastline.

You're right. Life changes the environment.

According to many materialist atheists, there is no free will and if you had enough information about the motion of subatomic particles in the brain you could predict the actions of humans. So the atheistic point of view is that everything is deterministic and predictable.

That's never made sense to me though.

 

[Cypress]

I think there is and it's based on the positive or negative experience experience of conscious creatures.Correct, but that doesn't mean that we, as humans who understand human suffering, can't say that it is immoral to not take care of your offspring, right? We can also say that it is immoral to kill off the weakest, despite it being acceptable to other species of animals who don't understand morality.

You can say now that human sacrifice and slavery are wrong from your perspective, from your opinion, or by the cultural consensus of your society.

But you can't say they are absolutely wrong if you are a moral relativist.

All morality originated with man. There's no sky wizard giving moral sirection.

I made no judgement on whether the Bible is inspired by God or if it's just literature written by humans.

I'm saying the moral outage you sometimes experience and the moral standards you purport to hold come from religious traditions - irrespective of it's ultimate source. In your case, you adopted a Judeo-Christian ethos without even realizing it, because you live in a civilization that has been permeated by a Christian ethos for two thousand years.

Sure, so was I, but Christs are just people. Muslims are just people. If you grew up in another country, you'd probably have different views of morality because of culture, not because a different sky wizard had different rules.

The main world religions we have now evolved during the Axial Age originating about 2000 to 2500 years ago. The evolution of human moral conscience tracks pretty well with Axial Age religions. Anyone who is reasonably familiar with world literature and world civilizations prior to the Axial Age can see a clear pivot point in human values and moral practices.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

From their side it doesn't because, again, animals don't have complex language to be able to understand a concept like morality.

Duh. Ergo, animals are neither moral nor immoral. They simply react to their instincts AKA genetic programming and experiences.

 

[ZenMode]

You can say now that human sacrifice and slavery are wrong from your perspective, from your opinion, or by the cultural consensus of your society.

But you can't say they are absolutely wrong if you are a moral relativist.


I made no judgement on whether the Bible is inspired by God or if it's just literature written by humans.

I'm saying the moral outage you sometimes experience and your moral standards come from religious traditions - irrespective of it's ultimate source. In your case, you adapted a Judeo- Christian ethos without even realizing it, because you live in a civilization that has been permeated by a Christian ethos for two thousand years.

The main world religions we have now evolved during the Axial Age originating about 2000 to 2500 years ago. The evolution of human moral conscience tracks pretty well with Axial Age religions. Anyone who is reasonably familiar with world literature and world civilizations prior to the Axial Age can see a clear pivot point in human values and moral practices.

"But you can't say they are absolutely wrong if you are a moral relativist."

That's the reason I bring up the experience of conscious creatures. Nobody (or at least no sane person) would say it's immoral to beat a rock. Why? Because rocks aren't conscious and, therefore, are unable to feel pain.

Nobody (at least no sane person) would say it's immoral to verbally abuse a tree because trees aren't conscious and, therefore, aren't affected by verbal abuse.

Humans, and other conscious creatures, are able to experience the pain of being beaten or the neurological effects of verbal abuse, which is why it should be viewed as objectively immoral to do those things.

 

[Cypress]

and there's no hell in buddhism.

Have you read the Dhammapada? I seriously doubt it.

It is Buddhism's most famous sacred text, and by tradition is attributed to Siddhartha Gatauma Buddha.

The Dhammapada makes repeated references to Hell.

Who do you think knows more about Buddhism?

You?

Or Siddhartha Gatauma Buddha?

 

[Daylight63]

Randomness doesn't make sense to me. Everywhere we look on Earth or in the universe we see rational organization, pattern, mathematical order, and nobody really knows why that is.

It's common. You can't really handle the fact that much of life is underlain by pure unadulterated probability. It scares you. It isn't a simple world like you demand. It isn't purely random but, by the same token, it isn't purely deterministic either.

You don't understand that even basic chemical reactions are largely probabilistic. Reactants have to hit at just the right orientation and just the right speed to react.

There's a significant degree of randomness in the world. Don't be afraid of it. And don't be sad if there is no "ultimate justice", that's just your inner toddler wanting a mommy or daddy to take care of everything for you. Sometimes bad shit happens.

 

[Daylight63]

Have you read the Dhammapada? I seriously doubt it.

But you have, right?

It is Buddhism's most famous sacred text, and by tradition is attributed to Siddhartha Gatauma Buddha.

The Dhammapada makes repeated references to Hell.

Who do you think knows more about Buddhism?

YOU!

You?

Or Siddhartha Gatauma Buddha?

YOU!

 

[Daylight63]

What would you suggest for infidels who fail to bow to your religion? Should Christian have their children forcibly removed so that you can teach them to believe as you do, in Atheism?

Atheism is as aggressive as Islam with forced conversion.

No, just keep your religion to yourself. I don't want it in my life. Your faith is your thing. Not mine.

Stop forcing people who dont' believe in your version of magic sky daddy to believe in your version of magic sky daddy.

If you can't understand that then you are the problem.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You're right. Life changes the environment.

According to many materialist atheists, there is no free will and if you had enough information about the motion of subatomic particles in the brain you could predict the actions of humans. So the atheistic point of view is that everything is deterministic and predictable.

That's never made sense to me though.

It doesn't make sense to me either. Since humans are, at base, animals, when not using our higher functions, we can act like animals. The 1/6 mob is an example.

Sticking with that example, what amount of math and knowledge of physics could predict the movements of the 1/6 mob? Knowledge of the weak spots in Congressional security would narrow down some movements, but there's a lot of choices being made there by individual humans. Not just the militia members who went in there with a plan, but the people caught up in the mob violence itself.

Would it have been possible to predict the outcome of the mob member's choice after Babbitt was shot? Would they have rushed the barrier? Ran like chickens? Or just stop as is what happened? Even with a psychological profile of each mob member present collated into a general profile of the mob in that corridor, could the outcome have been predicted? IMO, no, due to the "free will" factor. While general outcomes could be assigned probabilities for occurring, to be able to predict exactly what would have happened seems impossible to me due to the factor of free will.

Back on Life as the X factor, is it possible to predict the growth of roots in soil? There seems to be an element of randomness there. Sure, roots usually grow down and towards moisture, they can't go straight through rock so must go around or through a crack, but given everything is equal in terms of soil and moisture, would two identical seeds grow exactly the same way or not?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

No, just keep your religion to yourself. I don't want it in my life. Your faith is your thing. Not mine.

Stop forcing people who dont' believe in your version of magic sky daddy to believe in your version of magic sky daddy.

If you can't understand that then you are the problem.

Stop being so silly, Perry. It makes you look immature, stupid and selfish.

 

[Cypress]

It doesn't make sense to me either. Since humans are, at base, animals, when not using our higher functions, we can act like animals. The 1/6 mob is an example.

Sticking with that example, what amount of math and knowledge of physics could predict the movements of the 1/6 mob? Knowledge of the weak spots in Congressional security would narrow down some movements, but there's a lot of choices being made there by individual humans. Not just the militia members who went in there with a plan, but the people caught up in the mob violence itself.

Would it have been possible to predict the outcome of the mob member's choice after Babbitt was shot? Would they have rushed the barrier? Ran like chickens? Or just stop as is what happened? Even with a psychological profile of each mob member present collated into a general profile of the mob in that corridor, could the outcome have been predicted? IMO, no, due to the "free will" factor. While general outcomes could be assigned probabilities for occurring, to be able to predict exactly what would have happened seems impossible to me due to the factor of free will.

Back on Life as the X factor, is it possible to predict the growth of roots in soil? There seems to be an element of randomness there. Sure, roots usually grow down and towards moisture, they can't go straight through rock so must go around or through a crack, but given everything is equal in terms of soil and moisture, would two identical seeds grow exactly the same way or not?

You're right.

I think where materialist philosophy fails is in assuming the laws of physics, in principle, could extract information and prediction about the human conscience or the human will.