The problem of evil

[Scut Farkus]

^^ Hardly surprising you do not just naturally perceive and comprehend you have an inner conscience. You have been one of JPP's most notorious sociopaths and social deviants since day one.

what does your inner conscience tell you about what morality is?

you're still trying to switch the discussion to where morality comes from instead of what it IS.

what IS IT?

you still won't define it.

because you actually live and believe in immorality, or betrayal and crime, in other words.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I feel charitable this morning!

They clearly need some loving and probably a hug.

 

[IBDaMann]

Cold doesn't exist. I'm not interested in if you like it or not.

You're also not interested in allowing your brain to operate freely. You find it easier to gibber stupid crap because you find that actually engaging the brain requires too much effort to be worth the trouble.

If you had engaged your brain, you could have expressed your entire idea correctly in 4 words "Cold is a privative" and have been done with it. Instead, you felt that it would be easier to unintelligibly tell everyone how you don't understand physics.

Say it with me: Whatever.

 

[Daylight63]

You think you're the only one who knows how to Google,

No, but I knew you would have to google it.

Does the joke have anything to do with you being a talking ass?

 

[Daylight63]

I'm never trusting your references again, because not only was it obvious you did not read your own reference, but the paper's conclusion actually supported what I've said from day one. Your insistence that I read whatever you just happen to frantically Google was a massive waste of time.

LOL. It was obvious you didn't understand the point I was making if you think they didn't support my position.

You see, CYpress, it is possible you are in error from time to time. I know it's hard to imagine but it is true. It is true for everyone.

Everything I posted supported my position. Sorry you didn't understand that.

 

[Daylight63]

So literally every interesting topic on this forum goes to die in this sort of bullshit of people bitching at each other over personal shit.

Wow.

Can you guys even TRY to debate a topic without constantly whining at each other over slights perceived and imaginary?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

No, but I knew you would have to google it.

Like you did, Perry PhD?

 

[Cypress]

what IS IT?

It's the inner feeling you have that stealing lunch money from a child is objectively wrong, not because you are trying to build a peaceful civilization.

 

[IBDaMann]

I'm never trusting your references again,

You are being rather disingenuous here. You have never trusted anyone's references because you simply don't accept anyone's commentary, even when it compliments your post(s). You can't afford to accept any references because that would imply that you don't already know all the material presented by those references, and at worst, would imply that you are mistaken about something. You can't have that, now can you?

because not only was it obvious you did not read your own reference,

You might not be aware of this, but one of your "tells" is when you use the word "obvious" or "obviously." It means that you are lying and that you recognize that the opposite is true ... and that you are feeling threatened.

but the paper's conclusion actually supported what I've said from day one.

That's not what you believe. That is, however, what you say whenever you are shown to be mistaken, i.e. you assert that whatever kills your argument is actually fully corroborating everything you have ever posted.

Your insistence that I read whatever you just happen to frantically Google was a massive waste of time.

You don't have to convince anyone of your heightened self-conscienceness over your frantic Googling, Quora-ing and Wikipedia-ing, without which you wouldn't have any material to copy-paste into posts.

 

[Scut Farkus]

It's the inner feeling you have that stealing lunch money from a child is objectively wrong, not because you are trying to build a peaceful civilization.

there's a nature / nurture argument there, but we can put a pin in that.

maybe your good parents raised your right.

though I'm not opposed to the notion that some individuals have figured out morality on their own at a young age.



You're just looking for excuses for vagueness.



do you believe laws are an attempt at a basic public morality?

 

[Yakuda]

You're also not interested in allowing your brain to operate freely. You find it easier to gibber stupid crap because you find that actually engaging the brain requires too much effort to be worth the trouble.

If you had engaged your brain, you could have expressed your entire idea correctly in 4 words "Cold is a privative" and have been done with it. Instead, you felt that it would be easier to unintelligibly tell everyone how you don't understand physics.

Say it with me: Whatever.

You make the mistake of thinking my mind doesn't operate freely based solely on the fact I'm not listening to you, but thats precisely why I'm not listening to you.

 

[Scut Farkus]

So literally every interesting topic on this forum goes to die in this sort of bullshit of people bitching at each other over personal shit.

Wow.

Can you guys even TRY to debate a topic without constantly whining at each other over slights perceived and imaginary?

is law an attempt at a basic morality?

and if not, why do you oppose basic obviousness?

 

[Cypress]

You're just looking for excuses for vagueness.

I have no idea how and why humans have a moral conscience that surpasses anything needed for basic Darwinian evolutionary requirements. I just know we have this conscience.

You claim to know why and how we have it.

So who here is actually is the pretentious know-it-all?

Go go ahead and explain to me scientifically exactly how the deoxyribonucleic acid molecule provides a moral conscience, and point to the widely accepted consensus scientific theory that supports this.

 

[Scut Farkus]

I have no idea how and why humans have a moral conscience that surpasses anything needed for basic Darwinian evolutionary requirements. I just know we have this conscience.

You claim to know why and how we have it.

So who here is actually is the pretentious know-it-all?

Go go ahead and explain to me scientifically exactly how the deoxyribonucleic acid molecule provides a moral conscience, and point to the widely accepted consensus scientific theory that supports this.

it's an outgrowth of our enhanced intelligence.

intelligent conclusions feel like instinct for advanced species.



now can you just get on board without espousing morality instead of just emitting sophistric gasses all day?


people like you are why there's flouride in the water to keep people stupid and keep them sucking Satan into their moral voids.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

It's the inner feeling you have that stealing lunch money from a child is objectively wrong, not because you are trying to build a peaceful civilization.

Isn't that social conditioning? Some kids have no problem stealing from others. Same for adults. Look at Donald Trump for an example.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

now can you just get on board without espousing morality instead of just emitting sophistric gasses all day?

^^^
Fredo reveals the limits of his morality and intellect.

 

[Cypress]

it's an outgrowth of our enhanced intelligence.

intelligent conclusions feel like instinct for advanced species.

^^ So no scientific explanation which can actually ground this in the principles of physical materialism.

In other words, just vague arm-waving horseshit ^^.

 

[Scut Farkus]

^^^
Fredo reveals the limits of his morality and intellect.

not really, captain Dunce-o.

 

[Scut Farkus]

^^ So no scientific explanation which can actually ground this in the principles of physical materialism.

In other words, just vague arm leaving horseshit ^^.

is intelligence not a scientific thing?

 

[Scut Farkus]

Cypress has Achieved Peak Gibberish.