The making of western morality

Cypress said:
The feeling of wetness is a subjective qualia our mind
Click to expand...

No. Wetness is NOT just a feeling. Some fluids can WET a surface.

You can't dance your way out of this one. It shows that emergent properties are QUITE REAL and not some esoteric word salad.


Cypress said:
creates internally from sense data. Wetness is only epistemological knowledge. We have no idea what water molecules feel like to a bacteria, algae, rocks, or fish.

That is qualitatively and radically different from the phenomenology of consciousness.
Click to expand...

Nope. Water can wet a surface. Mercury usually does not.

Can you point to a single mercury atom and tell me where the "wetness" fails to be such that in a molecule of H2O it is there.

The table isn't experiencing a "mental state" of wetness.

Just answer the question. It's YOUR QUESTION. So if you can't answer it then you shouldn't ask it.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Collectively, human beings seem capable of recognizing fundamental truths about the human condition. This includes other writings too such as John Donne's "No man is an island" and the Declaration of Independence.

No Man Is An Island by John Donne

Read, review and discuss the No Man Is An Island poem by John Donne on Poetry.com
www.poetry.com www.poetry.com
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
www.archives.gov

Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

Note: The following text is a transcription of the Stone Engraving of the parchment Declaration of Independence (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum.) The spelling and punctuation reflects the original.
www.archives.gov www.archives.gov
...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security....
Click to expand...
(y)Thanks, I know almost nothing about John Donne.

Jefferson's prologue to the Declaration of Independence is firmly rooted in Medieval ideas about natural law, and universal natural rights which really appealed to Enlightenment era thinkers.
 
Daylight63 said:
Show the class on the CARBON ATOM where the "human being" part is.
Click to expand...
All the genetic information necessary to biologically define an individual human is in the carbon-based DNA polymer.

If you are talking about what makes us "human beings" aka thinking, self-aware, conscious individuals you make a good point that our consciousness is still a mystery.

Cypress said:
Neuroscientist loses a 25-year bet on consciousness — to a philosopher
Will we ever unravel the mystery of consciousness? Two academics made a 25-year bet on it. The scientist lost.

Christof Koch wagered David Chalmers 25 years ago that researchers would learn how the brain achieves consciousness by now. But the quest continues.

What was the nature of the bet? Neuroscientist Christof Koch and philosopher David Chalmers bet 25 years ago on whether science would have an explanation for consciousness by now. Tests of the two leading theories of consciousness revealed that both are incomplete.

Chalmers’ “easy” problem of identifying neural correlates of consciousness proved more complex than expected, with crucial aspects like self-awareness overlooked in studies.

The “hard” problem of how brain processes create subjective conscious experience remains unsolved — and will remain that way for a very long time.


bigthink.com

Neuroscientist loses a 25-year bet on consciousness — to a philosopher

Will we ever unravel the mystery of consciousness? Two academics made a 25-year bet on it. The scientist lost.
bigthink.com bigthink.com
Click to expand...
 
Cypress said:
Back to being angry and agitated at me?
Click to expand...

No. Just curious why you hold Jesus' as a moral teacher but find the things he taught to be something you won't do.

When someone advocates for a moral system usually one does not then hold that same moral system as something not worth them following.
 
Cypress said:
All the genetic information necessary to biologically define an individual human is in the carbon-based DNA polymer.
Click to expand...

By your reasoning then you can find on the carbon atom where "humanity (bipedal primate)" is located. Remember: you don't allow for something to be part of something else without displaying all the features of that thing. I didn't make the rule. You did.

Cypress said:
If you are talking about what makes us "human beings"
Click to expand...

No. I mean 2 arms, 2 legs, omnivorous bipedal primate.

Cypress said:
aka thinking, self-aware, conscious individuals you make a good point that our consciousness is still a mystery.
Click to expand...

Not talking about consciousness in this example. So you have failed. I hope you will take some time to learn from this and perhaps construct a better critique of science you don't seem to understand.
 
What a strange approach to the subject of Western morality and the critical importance of Jesus' teachings only to have the primary advocates for this to be so divorced from, and acting in most ways completely antithetical to, said teachings.

Is it a mockery of the West's morality? Or does it mean the West has no real morality, least of all something that its own adherents would disavow so facilely.

If this morality is so easily jettisoned by the very people passionately defending it, it must not have much value.
 
Daylight63 said:
I am still able to. So far I'm the only one on here not actively trying to pick a fight.

That's because, unlike you, I actually VALUE many of the teachings of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Oh, Perry. Did you get a PhD in passive-aggressiveness or just pussified behavior?

If you valued the teaching of Jesus, you'd be spreading the good news, Perry, not picking fights online.

Example:
Daylight63 said:
No. Just curious why you hold Jesus' as a moral teacher but find the things he taught to be something you won't do.

When someone advocates for a moral system usually one does not then hold that same moral system as something not worth them following.
Click to expand...
 
Daylight63 said:
No. Wetness is NOT just a feeling. Some fluids can WET a surface.
Click to expand...
No. Cypress happens to be right on this one. Wetness is an interpretation of our senses. It is in the mind. It is a subjective description. Nothing else. There is no unit of measurement for 'wetness'.
Daylight63 said:
You can't dance your way out of this one. It shows that emergent properties are QUITE REAL and not some esoteric word salad.
Click to expand...
He's not dancing here. YOU ARE. You still don't know what 'real' means or how it's defined. The word salad is YOURS.
Daylight63 said:
Nope. Water can wet a surface. Mercury usually does not.
Click to expand...
A surface might be perceived as 'wet' from water, oil, mercury, or any number of liquids.
Daylight63 said:
Can you point to a single mercury atom and tell me where the "wetness" fails to be such that in a molecule of H2O it is there.
Click to expand...
No. 'Wetness' has no unit of measure. It is a subjective description.
Daylight63 said:
The table isn't experiencing a "mental state" of wetness.
Click to expand...
What 'table'?
Daylight63 said:
Just answer the question. It's YOUR QUESTION. So if you can't answer it then you shouldn't ask it.
Click to expand...
He already answered his own question.
 
Daylight63 said:
What a strange approach to the subject of Western morality and the critical importance of Jesus' teachings only to have the primary advocates for this to be so divorced from, and acting in most ways completely antithetical to, said teachings.

Is it a mockery of the West's morality? Or does it mean the West has no real morality, least of all something that its own adherents would disavow so facilely.

If this morality is so easily jettisoned by the very people passionately defending it, it must not have much value.
Click to expand...
Passive Aggressive Pussified Perry.
 
Cypress said:
All the genetic information necessary to biologically define an individual human is in the carbon-based DNA polymer.

If you are talking about what makes us "human beings" aka thinking, self-aware, conscious individuals you make a good point that our consciousness is still a mystery.
Click to expand...
And this brings us to an interesting point.

Is consciousness a part of every individual human? If so, then DNA is NOT the only thing defining a human. It may define the characteristics of a body, but it is not consciousness (or the Spirit, if you will).
 
Daylight63 said:
By your reasoning then you can find on the carbon atom where "humanity (bipedal primate)" is located. Remember: you don't allow for something to be part of something else without displaying all the features of that thing. I didn't make the rule. You did.



No. I mean 2 arms, 2 legs, omnivorous bipedal primate.



Not talking about consciousness in this example. So you have failed. I hope you will take some time to learn from this and perhaps construct a better critique of science you don't seem to understand.
Click to expand...
DNA is not a carbon atom. It is made up of compounds containing carbon, but it is not carbon itself.
 
Daylight63 said:
What a strange approach to the subject of Western morality and the critical importance of Jesus' teachings only to have the primary advocates for this to be so divorced from, and acting in most ways completely antithetical to, said teachings.

Is it a mockery of the West's morality? Or does it mean the West has no real morality, least of all something that its own adherents would disavow so facilely.

If this morality is so easily jettisoned by the very people passionately defending it, it must not have much value.
Click to expand...
The teachings of Jesus Christ apply to anyone, West or East. All they have to do is try to follow them, and their lives will be more enriched.
 
Daylight63 said:
By your reasoning then you can find on the carbon atom where "humanity (bipedal primate)" is located. Remember: you don't allow for something to be part of something else without displaying all the features of that thing. I didn't make the rule. You did.



No. I mean 2 arms, 2 legs, omnivorous bipedal primate.



Not talking about consciousness in this example. So you have failed. I hope you will take some time to learn from this and perhaps construct a better critique of science you don't seem to understand.
Click to expand...
Your diverting from the topic.
I never claimed to know all the mechanistic processes that went into building a human being from physical material.

Your claimed you had a really good idea of how human moral conscience arises from atomic material
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top