God is not intelligent, or, why I am a pantheist

Lao Tse said:
rational /răsh′ə-nəl/

adjective​

  1. Having or exercising the ability to reason. synonym: logical.
    Similar: logical
  2. Consistent with or based on reason or good judgment; logical or sensible.
    "rational decisions."
  3. Of sound mind; sane.
    "wondered if the eccentric neighbor was not completely rational."
Click to expand...
But you do not know what it means.
 
Lao Tse said:
luckily morality is rational.
don't you find?
Click to expand...
No, I don't. At least not in all cases.

What I see is that a Judeo-Christian ethos has been with us for so many thousands of years, it is ingrained so deeply at the conscious level and now just seems like "common sense".

There is nothing rational about loving your enemies, or sacrificing your interests on behalf of the welfare of a stranger.
There is no rational about reasoning that each and every human life has an inherent and equal value. Ritual human sacrifice and the discarding of the weak or feeble was part of human religious and cultural traditions for thousands of years.

The laws of Darwinian evolution and survival govern life on this Earth, and the kind of self-sacrifice, and innate objective moral truths about human life and relationships are not part of a biological or evolutionary law.
 
Cypress said:
No, I don't. At least not in all cases.

What I see is that a Judeo-Christian ethos has been with us for so many thousands of years, it is ingrained so deeply at the conscious level and now just seems like "common sense".

There is nothing rational about loving your enemies, or sacrificing your interests on behalf of the welfare of a stranger.
There is no rational about reasoning that each and every human life has an inherent and equal value. Ritual human sacrifice and the discarding of the weak or feeble was part of human religious and cultural traditions for thousands of years.

The laws of Darwinian evolution and survival govern life on this Earth, and the kind of self-sacrifice, and innate objective moral truths about human life and relationships are not part of a biological or evolutionary law.
Click to expand...
yes.
well as we've discussed previously, you're a masonic douchehole who's agenda is to keep religion violent and irrational.
 
Cypress said:
No, I don't. At least not in all cases.

What I see is that a Judeo-Christian ethos has been with us for so many thousands of years, it is ingrained so deeply at the conscious level and now just seems like "common sense".

There is nothing rational about loving your enemies, or sacrificing your interests on behalf of the welfare of a stranger.
There is no rational about reasoning that each and every human life has an inherent and equal value. Ritual human sacrifice and the discarding of the weak or feeble was part of human religious and cultural traditions for thousands of years.

The laws of Darwinian evolution and survival govern life on this Earth, and the kind of self-sacrifice, and innate objective moral truths about human life and relationships are not part of a biological or evolutionary law.
Click to expand...
as animals that can remember we absolutely do implement good deeds back to those who have been good to us.

consistent pro-social behavior is what allows evolution in the most human direction.

but you're a puppet of the military industrial complex mass murder machine, so you pervert everything under the sun, under satan's orders.
 
Cypress said:
No, I don't. At least not in all cases.

What I see is that a Judeo-Christian ethos has been with us for so many thousands of years, it is ingrained so deeply at the conscious level and now just seems like "common sense".

There is nothing rational about loving your enemies, or sacrificing your interests on behalf of the welfare of a stranger.
There is no rational about reasoning that each and every human life has an inherent and equal value. Ritual human sacrifice and the discarding of the weak or feeble was part of human religious and cultural traditions for thousands of years.

The laws of Darwinian evolution and survival govern life on this Earth, and the kind of self-sacrifice, and innate objective moral truths about human life and relationships are not part of a biological or evolutionary law.
Click to expand...
is there anything rational about preferring peace over war?

let's see how dedicated you are to upside down thinking and stupidity.
 
Lao Tse said:
yes.
well as we've discussed previously, you're a masonic douchehole who's agenda is to keep religion violent and irrational.
Click to expand...
During the black death, usually it was only priests or close family members who tended to the dying.

The rational response - the natural laws of survival - would be to run away from a diseased stranger. That's why Jesus tending to the lepers was considered so shocking and radical in his day.
 
Cypress said:
During the black death, usually it was only priests or close family members who tended to the dying.

The rational response - the natural laws of survival - would be to run away from a diseased stranger. That's why Jesus tending to the lepers was considered so shocking and radical in his day.
Click to expand...
and do you think before the Catholic church everyone ran away from injured loved ones?

did the Catholics invent love?

the rationality of morality is that helping each other is an advantage.
 
Lao Tse said:
and do you think before the Catholic church everyone ran away from injured loved ones?

did the Catholics invent love?

the rationality of morality is that helping each other is an advantage.
Click to expand...
Respond to what I actually wrote, not to what you wish I wrote.

Some prests and deacons tended to complete strangers who were diseased and dying during the plague.

The rational response to an infectious stranger is to run away from the lethal risk they pose to you. The laws of nature and survival point to that response.

Jesus tending to the lepers was completely shocking and radical. That's why the eyewitness reported it in the New Testament.
 
Cypress said:
Respond to what I actually wrote, not to what you wish I wrote.

Some prests and deacons tended to complete strangers who were diseased and dying during the plague.

The rational response to an infectious stranger is to run away from the lethal risk they pose to you. The laws of nature and survival point to that response.

Jesus tending to the lepers was completely shocking and radical. That's why the eyewitness reported it in the New Testament.
Click to expand...
no.

the laws of nature and survival prove that morality helps us survive better.
 
Lao Tse said:
The laws of nature and survival prove that morality helps us survive better.
Click to expand...
Slogans and platitudes don't cut it.

The laws of nature and survival compel you to runaway from an infectious diseased stranger. Every animal on the planet understands this instinctively.

The parable of the good Samaritan was so radical precisely because it was not rational. Sacrificing your own self interests for the welfare of a complete stranger most would consider an enemy or rival, is not a rational choice.

It only now seems like "common sense" because we have collectively been deeply infused at the level of consciousness by a two thousand year encounter with a Judeo-Christian ethos.
 
Cypress said:
Slogans and platitudes don't cut it.

The laws of nature and survival compel you to runaway from an infectious diseased stranger. Every animal on the planet understands this instinctively.

The parable of the good Samaritan was so radical precisely because it was not rational. Sacrificing your own self interests for the welfare of a complete stranger most would consider an enemy or rival, is not a rational choice.

It only seems now like "common sense" because we have collectively been deeply infused at the level of consciousness by a two thousand year encounter with a Judeo-Christian ethos.
Click to expand...
cooperation and combining talents to work together instead of warring on one another is not a platitude.

its' a verifiable rational advantage.

of course you are paid to defend divisiveness and war and deny morality.

so you may always be stupid or a liar.
 
Daylight63 said:
That's interesting. I don't think I've ever heard anyone respond to the "Golden Rule" like that. It feels far more intuitive to me.
Click to expand...
its very intuitive.

these people are Masonic anti-moralist deep state war machinist liars who are paid to keep religion crazy and immoral.

of course, they won't admit it.

they just keep avoiding and running away in fits of indignation.
 
Cypress said:
The laws of nature and survival compel you to runaway from an infectious diseased stranger. Every animal on the planet understands this instinctively.
Click to expand...

But animals often care for members of their group who are injured. Wolves will take care of injured wolves. You're probably right that OUTSIDE of one's clan the compulsion to help is possibly reduced or eliminated. But if one sees it as recognition of one's fellow individual and one is able to reframe what the "clan" is one is thinking about, then helping a fellow human might be quite reasonable even without someone needed to tell them to do it.

Cypress said:
The parable of the good Samaritan was so radical precisely because it was not rational. Sacrificing your own self interests for the welfare of a complete stranger most would consider an enemy or rival, is not a rational choice.
Click to expand...

This is really interesting question. Are humans the only animals that practice altruism? I don't know the answer. But just a quick internet search indicates maybe not. I'm not a biologist but it doesn't seem that far fetched.

Cypress said:
It only now seems like "common sense" because we have collectively been deeply infused at the level of consciousness by a two thousand year encounter with a Judeo-Christian ethos.
Click to expand...

I am curious about this statement. Is it the thought that people caring for a stranger was not really common before Jesus taught this parable? That would surprise me.
 
Lao Tse said:
is there anything rational about preferring peace over war?
Click to expand...
In the struggle for survival and in accordance with natural laws, conflict and violence are rational at some level.

No one bats an eye when a male lion kills the cubs of a rival, a leopard takes over the territory of a female and her cubs, or chimpanzees kill intruders from a rival chimp group.

Animals understand perfectly the reasons for conflict, and even the need for inflicting harm on rivals or taking their territory.


The type of Christian pacifism preached by Jesus is irrational compared to the natural order of things.
 
Daylight63 said:
But animals often care for members of their group who are injured. Wolves will take care of injured wolves. You're probably right that OUTSIDE of one's clan the compulsion to help is possibly reduced or eliminated. But if one sees it as recognition of one's fellow individual and one is able to reframe what the "clan" is one is thinking about, then helping a fellow human might be quite reasonable even without someone needed to tell them to do it.



This is really interesting question. Are humans the only animals that practice altruism? I don't know the answer. But just a quick internet search indicates maybe not. I'm not a biologist but it doesn't seem that far fetched.



I am curious about this statement. Is it the thought that people caring for a stranger was not really common before Jesus taught this parable? That would surprise me.
Click to expand...
it is the thought and its retarded horseshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top