It's like you say, our level of belief in any particular idea is determined by our biology, and our environmental feedback to date. You can want to believe something, because you think it would benefit you, but for an actual change in level of belief to occur, you need to experience something (or the lack thereof).

For example, my current level of belief in some sort of intelligent design of the universe is about a 9.5 out of 10. My current level of belief in a God similar to that depicted in the Bible is about a 0.1 out of 10. While I may want to believe, or hope that there is a Bible-like God, my actual level of belief will only change if I receive new information. Note that this new information can be passive in nature - for example, the more time that passes without evidence of a Bible-like God, the lower my level of belief will likely become, even if no one comes along with an argument against its existence.

Unfortunately, man currently doesn't have the means of explaining such paradoxes (otherwise they wouldn't be paradoxes!). How could something always have existed? How could nothing exist, and then something come from nothing? Either alternative seems entirely nonsensical. Yet there must be one ultimate truth, because here we are!

It would make far more sense if nothing were to exist. But... here we are! Since we exist, and can't begin to truly comprehend ideas like infinite and nothingness, I'm thinking we must be missing pieces of the puzzle. I'm pretty sure we won't be figuring out the solution in our lifetimes... just hoping there will be answers at some point.

Also, morality is a man-made concept. It makes no sense to discuss it outside of the context of living things that experience a sense of goodness or badness.

I can't believe this discussion is still going... The way @SonJnana is defining objective, it is an absolute truth, like 1 + 1 = 2. Morality is by definition "concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character". The question is: Why does it matter that morality is subjective? It's like wondering why there are no neon pink bananas. They just don't exist. It in no way changes the way we will think about reality or apply our concepts of morality.

Those are both subjective, though...we're discussing objective morality. — JustSomeGuy

Since we're discussing human morality, I think it makes sense to discuss it in terms of human biological instinct, no? You can't have morality without context, or without intentional acts and the ability to assess rightness or wrongness.

like trying to look at your own eyes or taste your own tongue. Still, that doesn't stop me from thinking about it nearly every day. It's truly the single greatest mystery. — JustSomeGuy

Hahaha! Especially funny when removed from the rest of your comment... :)

Parasitic organisms are biologically programmed to thrive off of harming others. In that context, harming others is good. How does that tell you anything about the morality of it though? — SonJnana

Parasitic organisms don't know they are causing harm to another conscious entity. There is no morality involved when the organism isn't capable of assessing possible rightness or wrongness of an intentional act.

You just listed things that you claim are objectively moral without providing any argument or reasoning as to why. — JustSomeGuy

You can't agree that human survival is good, in the context of human biological motivation? How about avoidance of unwanted suffering?

I think it's more honest to say that the person is acting morally based on a subjective morality that values the extension of conscious life. — SonJnana

Humans are biologically programmed to survive. In that context, human survival is good. It follows that any intentional act extending human survival, without negatively affecting other conscious life, is good.

I would say morality can be objective, at least in the context of our biological programming. Our survival instinct would be the most obvious one. Anything that extends conscious life would be considered moral. For example, if someone discovers a plant extract that will extend life and reduce suffering, and distributes it to everyone in equal amounts, that act would be objectively moral. It only gets more complicated when resources are limited, and extending the life of one person shortens the life of another, or causes unwanted suffering in others.

Do you think morality is innate? Are we born with it? — TheMadFool

Whenever I consider this type of question, I try to imagine one or more people born on an island, isolated from any sort of existing human culture.

I think morality is based first on survival, then on thriving. Think of two people growing up alone on separate sides of an island, each with an adequate supply of food and shelter. One day, they meet. I don't think either person would feel compelled to hurt the other. After the initial shock of seeing another human, I think they would eventually feel compelled to communicate in some way, and maybe even cooperate. At a minimum, I think the instinct would be to avoid, rather than engage in a hurtful way.

However, change the circumstances by drastically reducing the available resources, and the meeting might not go so well. The individuals may feel compelled to eliminate each other, in order to secure more resources for their own survival. If they had already met and formed a relationship prior to the scarcity of resources coming into play, I imagine the spirit would be more of a cooperative one.

Perhaps my logic is tainted by the hope that we are all innately moral, and that hurtful choices are only made by those who haven't had a decent upbringing, have grown up in a morally questionable society, or have experienced more than their fair share of difficult circumstances...

"How can one be mentally healthy in (mentally) sick society?" — Mitchell

Amen! Only with lots of therapy and/or medication. Or with a very solid upbringing that recognizes the sick state of society, and offers proper tools for coping and living within it.

In honour of my ongoing mobility/custody battle... I think the odds are very much in my favor, but the thought of losing consistent quality contact with my daughters is... quite distressing.

The Wait

Deep in a fear-infused limbo,
Waiting for God’s silent gavel.
Weaving wisps of hope,
Into a blanket of dread.

My heart struggles to beat,
In a phobic death clutch.
Blood flowing in a panic,
To escape this looming terror.

Muscles straining against collapse,
The walls imbued with frail faith.
Anger boils up inside,
Seeking worthy targets.

A war of words and emotions,
Who will strike the killing blow?
Hurry soldiers, sit and wait!
Time is a formidable foe…

Don't be offended by Sapientia wanting to throw you off a cliff. He has thrown many of his would-be children off of cliffs...

No response... Guess Purple Pond got distracted...

I answered 'No', because if a God exists, I have to believe he's not a complete dick, which is what he would be if he condemned someone to eternal damnation because they didn't believe in him, when they had absolutely no control over the inputs of their creation, nor the environment into which they were born.

First visit with the lawyer today - wish me luck!!!

If you could remove trauma and dysfunctional thinking, I think the normal state of mind would be contentment, assuming that all of your basic needs are being satisfied. Look at a cat - if it is fed, watered, and sheltered, it is usually content to just sit around and take in the surroundings.

The trouble is that trauma and dysfunctional thinking can wreak havoc with the proper functioning of the human brain, and can have effects that significantly outlive the related events. I've experienced extreme depression during periods when everything was going well in my life; and propped up with medication, CBT, and rTMS, I've been able to weather storms that would have crushed me earlier in life.

I think people could be generally content their entire lives, if they were taught to think properly about themselves and life from an early age, and were able to avoid any sort of extreme emotional trauma.

{{{{{Kev}}}}}}<<<<online hug — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Thanks!

I understand how you feel. Both of my EX's moved to other continents and I never got to see my kids. — Sir2u

Sorry to hear that. I can't imagine how that must feel...

What cake?
Where the hell is it?
Who is trying to eat it? — Sir2u

Ah, just venting... my ex is trying to move with my 2 daughters to a city 6 hours away. Pretty sure she won't be able to, but still causes unneeded stress. I currently live 5 minutes away, and see them over 80 times a year. She wants me to see them 12 times a year! >:o

Ex-spouses who think they own their children, and try to use them as leverage to get what they want.

She can't have her cake and eat it too. Especially when her cake is actually our cake!

Happy Halloween!

Shhh... I'm right behind you!

Oooooh... maybe there will be a Happy Ending after all?

What is this goal of having no goals? — t0m

I've been trying out this outlook on life over the past few months, and it seems to be conducive to continuing peace of mind. At my psych appointment this week, I told the doc that lately I seem to lack the urge to improve myself - a drive I have felt very strongly my whole life, to the point of feeling guilty when I didn't feel motivated to strive. Despite lacking this type of motivation, I feel pretty content with life right now. It feels good to take the pressure off, to cast away the need to be great and special. After all, there can only be so many Donald Trumps and Justin Biebers... the rest of us need to be content with being more on the average side of things.

Did you know the song Cocaine is about being high on life?

It's Mental Health Awareness Week! It's been almost 3 years since my last episode of major depression. I still experience depression-like thoughts from time to time, but they don't seem to carry the same weight these days. Despite the prolonged improvement in mood, there's an ever so slight lingering fear that the deep well of depression is just around the corner, waiting to swallow me up again. Hopefully the meds, the rTMS, and the CBT training will keep me on the right track. I'm thankful for all of the love and support in my life, especially from my partner, my mother, my daughters, and my son. They definitely make the battle for continuing peace of mind feel worthwhile.

Korn - Freak on a Leash

That's why it is "First cause". — Agustino

Calling something 'First cause' is ignoring the paradox of creation and existence, not solving it.

Intelligent design just gives us an infinite regress. — Nils Loc

However experience shows that no such arguments are ever convincing, otherwise there would be nothing to debate. — Wayfarer

With no indisputable argument or proof presented amongst all of the great minds in this world, there must be a missing element or two that humans either haven't yet discovered, or will never be capable of understanding.

There has to be a truth that solves the paradox of creation and existence - i.e. If we were created by some intelligent force, what created the intelligent force? What created the structure within which its thoughts are processed? If we were not created by some intelligent force, how did something come from nothing, or how could something have always existed?

There has to be a truth that solves the problem of infinite space and nothingness - i.e. How can there be no end to space? If there is an end to space, what is on the other side of that border? Nothingness? What is nothingness?

Man, TranscendedRealms seems to really think he can change the world with his thoughts on life. But no matter how many times he rewords his post, I still don't understand what his point is... I just hope he doesn't start talking about his packets again!

@MikeL

I find your arguments the most convincing I've heard so far with regard to there being intelligent design in the universe. Do you have any thoughts as to the form and nature of that intelligence? Here is something I posted in another thread, as a rough possible description of whatever force exists:

"OK, so what if a semi-aware consciousness pervades all living things, and receives input from each entity's experiences, which it then uses to decide on periodic evolutionary changes to genetic programs? Genetic code is its programming language, but unlike computer code, it has a natural degree of chaotic behaviour, especially when subjected to various environmental factors (explaining things like cancer). The consciousness has a general sense of what is possible, and puts forth program changes that enable its entities to adapt to the ever-changing environment. Add to this a desire to expand its population of entities, a sensitivity to pleasure and pain, and a deep yearning for its children to achieve the limits of physical existence. With the evolution of humans, and seeing how they can be so self-destructive, it questions the benefit of introducing further evolutionary changes until the humans can get their act together. Voila! An explanation for everything that is evolution. :) "

In this scenario, environmental factors like gravity are constants - whether they were pre-existing (the computer hardware), or were programmed as such (the operating system).

Yes, what makes a person incapable of tolerating pain or emotion? — Agustino

I would say a number of factors, including but not limited to:
- lack of proper coping mechanisms
- lack of support system
- unrealistic expectations
- being averse to change
- unhealthy levels of attachment
- genetic predisposition
- childhood trauma
- underexposure/overprotection

To me, true suffering equates to not wanting to live.

A person can be experiencing pain, but be able to tolerate it mentally. A person can grieve over the loss of a loved one, but be able to tolerate the emotions. It is only when a person becomes incapable of tolerating the pain or emotion (due to intensity or duration) that they start losing the will to live. However, in most cases, the survival instinct and the desire to minimize the pain and negative emotions of others, will outweigh the desire to end their life.

It makes me think that in order to minimize true suffering in the world, we need to do a better job of grooming our children to be more resilient, to have more realistic expectations, and to be less change averse.

I don't think true randomness exists. We are just incapable of defining all of the variables that go into causing an outcome. If we could perfectly understand and measure how every neuron in the brain will behave under certain circumstances, we could predict exactly how hard you would flip a coin at any moment, and therefore know how it will land. But since we have no clue how consciousness even arises from matter, there is currently no way to come close to the level of precision that would be required to measure the variables and predict the outcome.

If there is some sort of intelligence force behind creation and evolution, I doubt that even it would be able to predict the outcome of a seemingly random event. More likely is that the intelligence has created the program, but the number of variables is too large to be able to reliably predict outcomes in real time. By the time you've measured all the variables, the variables have changed. So God could play dice! (Even though the result of each roll would be determined by the billions of variables that existed at the time of the roll.)

I lean toward intelligent design of some sort, but not sure what to think about the form or nature of the source. It is all so paradoxical... How could something always have existed? But on the other hand how could nothing have existed? If nothing existed, how did something come from nothing? Surely it relies on concepts humans are not currently capable of understanding.

I hope someone figures it out before I die, because I'm very interested in the answer!

I think most people procreate before reaching this level of philosophical thinking! Amidst a battle with depression, I found myself married with two children before reaching the point of being suicidal, which finally made me want to take a serious look at the way I was living my life.

Now that my children exist, I want to minimize the amount of suffering in their lives, by equipping them with tools that will hopefully make them more mentally resilient later in life.

Because if they see and hear just like normal embodied people, then my guess would be that they're still embodied, but are experiencing a form of psychological dissociation where it seems like they've become separated from their bodies. — Marchesk

Agreed! It's too bad we can't intentionally bring these people back to near death, and have their disembodied spirits read some flash cards.