You can say Socrates is the recognizable the farther of philosophy but wasn't what the pre-Socratic doing definitionally philosophy? correct me if I'm wrong. It seems arbitrary and pointless to me, like calling somebody the recognizable farther of kicking a ball. — Restitutor
Our idea of morality and truth should fit with particle physics, — Restitutor
Most people would however agree that the universe is expanding and it used to be incredibly hot and dense. These are very very hard problems physicists are trying to solve. — Restitutor
Also the concept of morality fits sooo perfectly with evolution, if you want i could explain why if you want?. — Restitutor
I have started this topic because I haven’t heard any good arguments for what underpins the concept of morality in the absence of religion. — Restitutor
It seems quite clear to me that morality is simply a concept that is encoded into our neurons and influences the way we process information. — Restitutor
we are just the packaging for our DNA — Restitutor
We are a a very similar proposition, we are just the packaging for our DNA, the host that allows for there replication. It makes sence that genes wouldn't just control what our bodies look like bout would control behavior, or at least create a the framework within which we can indoctrinate each other with useful ideas. — Restitutor
Is there any reason that the individual should be content with being a slave to the evolutionary process? — Tzeentch
And what rational analysis pertaining to this process can be expected from individuals which, as you say, are indoctrinated in a framework to enforce it? — Tzeentch
It is not a master-save relationship. — god must be atheist
I would brush up on learning the evolutionary process if I were you and wished to understand natural processes of evolution. — god must be atheist
A slave without a master is a slave nonetheless. — Tzeentch
It's a bit like asking God for absolute verification of our observations. — Echarmion
When i wrote the question i was hoping to find out if A) it was general accepted amongst atheists that morality wasn’t an objective reality and B) weather or people believe in morality as an objective reality despite being an atheist. — Restitutor
If evolution isn't driving our behaviors then what is? Do you not see any role for evolution at all in any human behavior? — Restitutor
Consider the fact that human action ranges to the extremes. People can perform extraordinary acts of altruism, including kindness toward other species — or they can utterly fail to be altruistic, even toward their own children. So whatever tendencies we may have inherited leave ample room for variation; our choices will determine which end of the spectrum we approach. This is where ethical discourse comes in — not in explaining how we’re “built,” but in deliberating on our own future acts. Should I cheat on this test? Should I give this stranger a ride? Knowing how my selfish and altruistic feelings evolved doesn’t help me decide at all. Most, though not all, moral codes advise me to cultivate altruism. But since the human race has evolved to be capable of a wide range of both selfish and altruistic behavior, there is no reason to say that altruism is superior to selfishness in any biological sense. — Richard Polt
I would suggest reading "Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment" which looks at Buddhist beliefs in the context of evolutionary psychology. — Restitutor
Its not a mystery the basic construction that religious people use to undergured their belief in morality. — Restitutor
We want to satisfy our hunger, we want to have sex, we want to acquire things and do things that help with survival and pass on our genes. To overcome this "slavery" would involve being able to ignore the imperatives evolution sets up. It would involve not desiring food when hungry, not desiring sex when horny, it would involve not reacting to fear when scared, not reacting with angree words when offended. Monks through meditation have been able to do this to different extents so in a seance monks are overcoming there "slave to the evolutionary process" — Restitutor
If evolution isn't driving our behaviors then what is? — Restitutor
Do you not see any role for evolution at all in any human behavior? — Restitutor
nor do need to appeal to him to compare our experiences and come to an unbiased consensus on what is moral. — Pfhorrest
We don’t need to appeal to God to compare our experiences and come to an unbiased consensus on what is real — Pfhorrest
Morality isn’t “a reality” in any sense, but it is every bit as objective as reality — Pfhorrest
I think the problem with that approach is this: that there is no biological difference between criminals and saints. — Wayfarer
I think you're looking to evolutionary theory for things it was never intended to provide. It is an account of the evolution of species - it's not an ethical theory, per se. As I've said, even a lot of ardent Darwinists, like Richard Dawkins, recognize that Darwinism, and social Darwinism, are terrible bases for ethical philosophy. — Wayfarer
People can perform extraordinary acts of altruism, including kindness toward other species or they can utterly fail to be altruistic, even toward their own children — Richard Polt
Quite a good book, from what I read about it, with the caveat that Buddhism doesn't need endorsement by evolutionary psychology. As you say, individuals can work to overcome the selfish tendencies which appear to be the consequences of evolutionary drives; but by what star do they set their compass when they do that? — Wayfarer
The point about the evolutionary paradigm, generally, is that it has a sole aim, which is successful proliferation. Actually there's a saying in evolutionary biology that all creatures are driven by the Four F's - feeding, fleeing, fighting, and reproduction. So the question is, do these circumsribe the horizons for h. sapiens? Or can we see further than that? And, if so, to what? — Wayfarer
It would be good to know your metaphysical perspective is and what your justification for it is. I am totally interested. — Restitutor
People have a life time of memories and experiences all encoded in their brain through short term and long-term potentiation. Science says that memories are encoded into the brain on cellular and molecule level, same with opinions, beliefs how they understand the world. There connectome will be so different. There are conservatively 10 trillion synapses joined up in an utterly unique way, the number of possible arrangements for 10 trillion synapse has to be more than the number of atoms in the universe. In a sense, no two similarly objects could be more different, not when you look at the mount of variations on the theme possible. — Restitutor
Sequences that give rise to properties that result in the continued existence of the sequence continue existing. Sequences that give rise to properties that do not result the continued existence of the sequence stop existing — Restitutor
I am of the opinion that the world is quietly screaming at us that nothing really matters, — Restitutor
For an atheist, there is not even the concept of truth — Rafaella Leon
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.