An atheist philosophy of life: hedonistic utilitarianism.

[goat]

I'm speaking in more general evolutionary terms. The reasons humans have been so successful is that they are a social animal and social animals cluster in groups.



But those isolated tribes still survive because they function as a group. Humans are a social animal.

I witnessed humans devolve over the years. We are a product of our environment. We should be able to agree that most here on JPP have become antisocial. The only consistency is anger and hate, which will result in failure.

I look to cause and effect. There has to be a reason so many of us get pleasure by causing others pain.

 

[Kafka]

^ This is unbelievably dumb.

And we jump off with the insults. -Sigh_

Did you think you were born knowing universal truths like the Pythagorean Theorem or the laws of physics?

They would still be obvious and derivable by mere observation to all people. How does one derive the truth that it is wrong to murder another person? (Hint: it's built into your nervous system as a social animal)

A human has to be taught or convinced of physical, mathematical, and moral truths by people like Newton, Pythagoras, or Confucious. A commitment to truth takes work - you aren't just handed it on a silver platter when you are a baby.

So you are saying that barring any teaching them, people would naturally murder?

That's an interesting hypothesis, and one I'd be willing to explore. But it does kind of scuttle the idea that morality is somehow a universal which is your previous position.

 

[Kafka]

I witnessed humans devolve over the years. We are a product of our environment. We should be able to agree that most here on JPP have become antisocial. The only consistency is anger and hate, which will result in failure.

I look to cause and effect. There has to be a reason so many of us get pleasure by causing others pain.

Indeed, it is arguable that the kind of posts that even the most "pious" and "moral" people on this forum partake in is inherently corrosive and abusive of others. As such it is highly immoral for us to all come on here and just hurl abuse at each other all the livelong day.

But humans are flawed apes. If you note the majority of the abuse here is coming from males who, across the animal kingdom, tend to fight each other as a matter of biological course.

A lot of this all points to raw unadulterated animal behavior. No "moral compass" involved. Humans are a special creature, though. We are among the few that we assume are capable of assessing our own actions and envisioning a behavior that is not instinctual. However we almost always go with the path of least resistance and we do the shit we are going to do anyway.

 

[Lao Tse]

There were Presbyterian ministers and Lutheran pastors who were murdered because they didn't consider the consequences of speaking out against established, lawful, and entrenched social conventions like slavery and Jewish oppression.

they're called heroes.

 

[Lao Tse]

^ This is unbelievably dumb. Did you think you were born knowing universal truths like the Pythagorean Theorem or the laws of physics?

A human has to be taught or convinced of physical, mathematical, and moral truths by people like Newton, Pythagoras, or Confucious. A commitment to truth takes work - you aren't just handed it on a silver platter when you are a baby.

who told newton and Pythagoras?

 

[Yakuda]

Stick to the topic of the thread. No one has time for your Hume-like behavior.

Stick to the topic of the thread. No one has time for your Hume-like behavior.

Heaven forbid I expect a leftist to actually offer evidence for their claims. YOU clearly are.

 

[Cypress]

And we jump off with the insults. -Sigh_



They would still be obvious and derivable by mere observation to all people. How does one derive the truth that it is wrong to murder another person? (Hint: it's built into your nervous system as a social animal)



So you are saying that barring any teaching them, people would naturally murder?

That's an interesting hypothesis, and one I'd be willing to explore. But it does kind of scuttle the idea that morality is somehow a universal which is your previous position.

I'm not to indulge your assertion that objective truths don't have to be taught or cultivated, because it's self evident that is just not true.

I thought you believed in some form of "objective truth" outside of the mere human mind as the source of morality. Now you seem to be saying that morality comes from reading what other people hypothesize.

You seem to be making a pretty solid case for morality not being a universal.

 

[Cypress]

]

who told newton and Pythagoras?

They discovered objective truths by careful observation and reasoning, and taught it to other people.

 

[goat]

Indeed, it is arguable that the kind of posts that even the most "pious" and "moral" people on this forum partake in is inherently corrosive and abusive of others. As such it is highly immoral for us to all come on here and just hurl abuse at each other all the livelong day.

But humans are flawed apes. If you note the majority of the abuse here is coming from males who, across the animal kingdom, tend to fight each other as a matter of biological course.

A lot of this all points to raw unadulterated animal behavior. No "moral compass" involved. Humans are a special creature, though. We are among the few that we assume are capable of assessing our own actions and envisioning a behavior that is not instinctual. However we almost always go with the path of least resistance and we do the shit we are going to do anyway.

Illusory superiority and cognitive dissonance have become the norm. It's difficult to tell what is real and what is not. There was a time when we were able to change our opinion with evidence. Way too many humans have become bots to bury evidence.

Reality is about to fall on us like a pallet of bricks. Most of the world will get satisfaction.

 

[Lao Tse]

]
They discovered objective truths by careful observation and reasoning, and taught it to other people.

others can also carefully observe for themselves.

this also implies there's something to observer a priori to subjective experience.

 

[Kafka]

I'm not to indulge your assertion

Oh my. That sounds serious.

that objective truths don't have to be taught or cultivated, because it's self evident that is just not true.

How do you "know" that a given moral command is "objectively true"?

 

[Cypress]

others can also carefully observe for themselves.

There is nobody on this board who independently would have come up with the principles of Euclidean geometry, the Newtonian universal law of gravitation, or identified the source of the problems and the solutions to the human predicament in the way Siddhartha Gautauma and Jesus did.

99.999999999 percent of people have to be taught or convinced of objective truths.

 

[Cypress]

How do you "know" that a given moral command is "objectively true"?

You must really crave my attention, because this question was asked and addressed over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

I think what Hitler did was objectively wrong, forever and for all time.

You just have a different opinion than Hitler, and you cannot say what he did was objectively wrong.

It obviously bothers you that I think Hitler was objectively wrong, but you will just have to live with that rather than asking me the same question over and over and over and over and over

 

[Lao Tse]

There is nobody on this board who independently would have come up with the principles of Euclidean geometry, the Newtonian universal law of gravitation, or identified the source of the problems and the solutions to the human predicament in the way Siddhartha Gautauma and Jesus did.

99.999999999 percent of people have to be taught or convinced of objective truths.

many of us would have.

You're just an elitist with contempt for most people.

so you prop up every elitist fiction under the sun.

your mind is mountain of lies and bullshit and you wallow in your evil.

 

[Kafka]

You must really crave my attention

OR: hear me out: I want to discuss the topic.

, because this question was asked and addressed over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

Someone's getting madder and madder and madder.

I think what Hitler did was objectively wrong, forever and for all time.

Don't you think that's a bit emotionally charged? You run to the "Nazi" card anytime someone so much as asks you a question.

It obviously bothers you that I think Hitler was objectively wrong, but you will just have to live with that rather than asking me the same question over and over and over and over and over

Yet you can't really answer the question.

I get it, though. As per usual you don't actually think about your position very deeply.

And now you're super pissed off because it has been pointed out yet again.

 

[Kafka]

There is nobody on this board who independently would have come up with the principles of Euclidean geometry, the Newtonian universal law of gravitation, or identified the source of the problems and the solutions to the human predicament in the way Siddhartha Gautauma and Jesus did.

99.999999999 percent of people have to be taught or convinced of objective truths.

Then you'll be able to prove the objective truth of any given moral commandment.

You invoke Euclidean Geometry but Euclidean geometry is true for all creatures on the planet and throughtout the universe whether they know it or not. It simply is.

So we are back to the older counterpoint that your version of "objective truth" really only applies to humans which really isn't objective truth like Euclidean Geometry. Is it "morally wrong" for a well-fed housecat to murder a songbird?

(Cue the screams and howls and insults.)

 

[Hume]

You must really crave my attention,

And you, his. No one cares about that psycho but you.

 

[Cypress]

many of us would have.

You're just an elitist with contempt for most people.

so you prop up every elitist fiction under the sun.

your mind is mountain of lies and bullshit and you wallow in your evil.

You're claiming to be a deeply original profound thinker who could have independently come up with the Pythagorean theorem, the universal law of gravity, and the ethos of the New Testament all on your own.

I'm saying that I am bounded by limits and have to learn or be convinced of these objective truths from the wisdom and and insights of deeply original sages, natural philosophers, and polymaths.

So which one of us here is actually is pretending to be an omniscient elitist?

 

[Cypress]

OR: hear me out: I want to discuss the topic.

No, you crave my attention and keep asking the same questions that have been addressed over and over and over.

 

[Hume]

You're claiming to be a deeply original profound thinker who could have independently come up with the Pythagorean theorem, the universal law of gravity, and the ethos of the New Testament all on your own.

I'm saying that I am bounded by limits and have to learn or be convinced of these objective truths from tgethe wisdom and and insights of deeply original sages, natural philosophers, and polymaths.

So which one of us here is actually is pretending to be an elitist?

The guy does not even know English grammar.