What is hell?

[Cypress]

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

People who have an agenda practice rhetoric.

People with an agenda are not looking for the truth.

Whatever one wants to believe about the God of Abraham or Jesus Christ, it is basically a fact that everyone who grew up in Western civilization has had their moral ethos profoundly shaped by our culture's two thousand year immersion in Christianity. The Decalogue, the sermon on the Mount, the parable of the good Samaritan, etc. are part of our cultural memory and cultural milieu, whether we are consciously aware of it or not.

 

[Daylight63]

Whatever one wants to believe about the God of Abraham or Jesus Christ, it is basically a fact that everyone who grew up in Western civilization has had their moral ethos profoundly shaped by our culture's two thousand year immersion in Christianity.

There's no one really debating against that point. You seem awfully proud of it, you should be. No one is really debating it.

What is being debated is "is that so-called CHristian morality anything other than simply codifying our behaviors in the face of instinctual behaviors?"

In other words IS MURDER WRONG BECAUSE GOD SAYS IT IS WRONG or is there another reason?

For people like you who need morality to come from "outside" of the animal obviously you need something to DECREE the morality. For those of us who are more materialist realize there's about a billion good perfectly non-supernatural reasons to assume something like murder is "wrong".

The Decalogue,

Just for once say "The Ten Commandments". We all know you're super duper smart and know all the big words. Just once try talking like someone who is DESPERATE for everyone to be impressed.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

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.

My thoughts exactly. IMO, it's an example of confirmation bias. They assume that existence is bound to the natural universe, and "when you're dead, you're dead", then they assume facts not in evidence to support their beliefs.

 

[Daylight63]

My thoughts exactly. IMO, it's an example of confirmation bias. They assume that existence is bound to the natural universe, and "when you're dead, you're dead", then they assume facts not in evidence to support their beliefs.

Do you know of a life beyond this life? How did you come to the knowledge?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

People who have an agenda practice rhetoric.

People with an agenda are not looking for the truth.

Whatever one wants to believe about the God of Abraham or Jesus Christ, it is basically a fact that everyone who grew up in Western civilization has had their moral ethos profoundly shaped by our culture's two thousand year immersion in Christianity. The Decalogue, the sermon on the Mount, the parable of the good Samaritan, etc. are part of our cultural memory and cultural milieu, whether we are consciously aware of it or not.

Agreed....which is where Western atheists learn their morals.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Do you know of a life beyond this life? How did you come to the knowledge?

NDE early in my Junior year of HS. I was a pure atheist before for 2-3 years. You know, the "There is no God. When you're dead, you're dead".

Afterwards I spent a few decades exploring both physical explanations and spiritual ones....along with studying altered states of consciousness in college.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

For people like you who need morality to come from "outside" of the animal obviously you need something to DECREE the morality. For those of us who are more materialist realize there's about a billion good perfectly non-supernatural reasons to assume something like murder is "wrong".

Just for once say "The Ten Commandments". We all know you're super duper smart and know all the big words.

Just once try talking like someone who is DESPERATE for everyone to be impressed.

There's the obsessed stalker coming out of you again, Perry.

QED. Jealous much, Perry PhD?

Awesome Freudian slip, son.

 

[Into the Night]

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.

A dam does not stop a river from flowing, Sybil.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Valley#Water_diversion_to_Los_Angeles

Another example is global warming.

You can't create energy out of nothing, Sybil. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

As evidenced by NASA,

Science isn't a government agency. Like you, NASA has been ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.

there is no doubt that human industrial activities have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere enough to alter the climate.

Climate cannot change, Sybil. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth either. There is no such thing as a global climate.

There have been natural climate changes in the past, but this one is induced by life. https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

Climate cannot change.

As far as we know, the laws of physics apply equally across the Universe.

Climate is not the Universe. Redefinition fallacy. You are ignoring laws of physics.

The movements of everything in the Universe are not only predictable but were set in motion over 13.5B years ago.

Go roll the dice.

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.

Mismash.

 

[Cypress]

There's no one really debating against that point. You seem awfully proud of it, you should be. No one is really debating it.

What is being debated is "is that so-called CHristian morality anything other than simply codifying our behaviors in the face of instinctual behaviors?"

In other words IS MURDER WRONG BECAUSE GOD SAYS IT IS WRONG or is there another reason?

For people like you who need morality to come from "outside" of the animal obviously you need something to DECREE the morality. For those of us who are more materialist realize there's about a billion good perfectly non-supernatural reasons to assume something like murder is "wrong".




Just for once say "The Ten Commandments". We all know you're super duper smart and know all the big words. Just once try talking like someone who is DESPERATE for everyone to be impressed.

Plenty of American atheists have denied their own moral ethos has roots in the Judeo-Christian western tradition. If I searched hard enough, I could probably find one of your previous sock puppets asserting that Perry.

I don't care what you or anyone else believes about the God of Abraham and Jesus Christ. You can howl in anger against Christianity all you want.

I'm saying that the moral standards you have about the innate value of all human life, the belief you have about the value and dignity of the poor, diseased, and oppressed, and faint guilt you feel about disproportionate revenge and retribution, all are rooted in your cultural memory of the Christian Bible.

Prior to the Judeo-Christian sacred literature, there really is no Bronze or Iron age literature that really systematically upholds the dignity and innate value of the poor, the diseased, the oppressed - and the claim that the innate value of a peasant's soul is equal to an emperor's soul is unprecedented in the ancient Mediterranean world.

 

[Into the Night]

wrong.

animals also cooperate for common thriving.

cooperating for common thriving is the definition of morality.

So when one group of monkeys attacks and kills members of another group, that's 'thriving'? It is cooperation, yes...at least in their own group. But they are killing another of their own species. Is this 'morality'?

And it's not just monkeys.

 

[Into the Night]

this is considered a bad situation,

Okay. But according to you, this act is included in your definition of 'morality'.

the breakdown of morality and society when this expression is uttered.

Uttering an expression does not break down society.

you've become very stupid on many issues lately.

Mantra 1a. Lame.

 

[Into the Night]

The use of the word figurative changes everything.

Changes nothing. You are still locked in paradox.

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

Inversion fallacy. Your word games won't work.

 

[Into the Night]

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

Sure. Pivot fallacy.

Are we doing irrelevant movie quotes today?

It was relevant. Fallacy fallacy. You assumed that people naturally cooperate. I pointed out an exception to your rule, falsifying it.

 

[Into the Night]

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".

Animals do have a language. You just don't understand it.

 

[Into the Night]

People who have an agenda practice rhetoric.

That's a given.

People with an agenda are not looking for the truth.

Compositional error fallacy. An agenda can certainly be around looking for a truth. Indeed, most any religion is designed around this.

Whatever one wants to believe about the God of Abraham or Jesus Christ, it is basically a fact that everyone who grew up in Western civilization has had their moral ethos profoundly shaped by our culture's two thousand year immersion in Christianity. The Decalogue, the sermon on the Mount, the parable of the good Samaritan, etc. are part of our cultural memory and cultural milieu, whether we are consciously aware of it or not.

A valid point. The same thing happens in Eastern cultures, except it centered around Buddism and Shinto. Both of these teach a morality as well.

 

[Into the Night]

There's no one really debating against that point. You seem awfully proud of it, you should be. No one is really debating it.

What is being debated is "is that so-called CHristian morality anything other than simply codifying our behaviors in the face of instinctual behaviors?"

Just like any religion, including the Church of No God.

In other words IS MURDER WRONG BECAUSE GOD SAYS IT IS WRONG or is there another reason?

To that, let me pose a question to you: How wouldl you like it if someone murdered you, even though you were just minding your own business? How about your brother or sister (assuming you have them)?

 

[Into the Night]

Afterwards I spent a few decades exploring both physical explanations and spiritual ones....along with studying altered states of consciousness in college.

So THAT's how you wound up in the mental institution!

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So THAT's how you wound up in the mental institution!

No, my son, but it's understandable that you think about mental institutions a lot.

 

[ZenMode]

Animals do have a language. You just don't understand it.

Again, your lack of grasp of the English language is clear... I never said animals don't have language, I specifically and repeatedly said COMPLEX language.

Stop
Being
Dumb

 

[Daylight63]

Plenty of American atheists have denied their own moral ethos has roots in the Judeo-Christian western tradition.

That's highly doubtful.

If I searched hard enough, I could probably find one of your previous sock puppets asserting that Perry.

Knock yerself out, since I don't have any socks it should be a quickie for you.

I don't care what you or anyone else believes about the God of Abraham and Jesus Christ. You can howl in anger against Christianity all you want.

I'm not howling in anger. So far the ONLY person who blathers on about anger is YOU. You seem to want people to be angry. I guess that makes you a troll?

I'm saying that the moral standards you have about the innate value of all human life, the belief you have about the value and dignity of the poor, diseased, and oppressed, and faint guilt you feel about disproportionate revenge and retribution, all are rooted in your cultural memory of the Christian Bible.

So because someone wrote down something you think that's the ONLY source of that information? Interestingly poor reasoning on your part.

Prior to the Judeo-Christian sacred literature, there really is no Bronze or Iron age literature that really systematically upholds the dignity and innate value of the poor, the diseased, the oppressed

And you know this evidence of absence...HOW?

And you assume the ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE is EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE?

Again, weak reasoning. I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how shitty your logic usually is.