Does God exist? (7 Viewers)

[Kwayera]

Bah!
Your talk of rights implies a higher authority that we are accountable to. Our intelligence is not an insight into right and wrong, good and bad. These are just tools that allow us to quickly judge threats/opportunities; language allows us to communicate them.

But people like you insist (incorrectly) that humans alone do possess morality and indeed, that is a consequence of our intelligence, that we have empathy and altruism and ultimately morality. While our intelligence is indeed a tool, it also allows us those insights. Do you thus deny that you have morality at all?

If we are animals, if there is no greater meaning attached to being human as there is to being an..elephant, then all our efforts and struggles in life are for domination and control - for MIGHT to quote the delightfully Nietzschian NTBright.
If we squander, we squander -So? we're animals. If we cause extinctions, so? as long as they werent useful to us, like cows and sheep.
We will only stop this when we are threatened as a species.

You don't think that we, as a species, aren't doing this already?

 

[Enteebee]

You need to think harder.

My wording sucked, damn it.

Not really, unless you want to reject the law of the excluded middle or something...? The thread can't 'prove' both things true.

 

[Kwayera]

I think you're going to have to elaborate on this loyalty concept, I mean the best differentiation that I can think of would be that you feel you have a duty to value humans over others is imposed on you by virtue of being human, but that doesn't change the fact that you DO value them higher.

I've tried very hard to elaborate further on this but to be honest I'm in the middle of my crisis-of-species, not the culmination.

Would I choose to save a human life over an animal's? Yes. If I had to choose to kill either, would I kill the animal over the human? Yes. But I wouldn't think it was right, and that is my loyalty to my species.

Also, just because you think you're better than someone else doesn't mean you think you should rule over them.

You just said you did, Chadd. Because we're mightier.

It saddens me that someone studying the natural sciences (in particular marine sciences) isn't aware of other species that "move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area".

I'm continually aware of this (and, I might add, species that do this are very rare. Parasites, in fact, rarely kill their hosts because it's self-defeating), and it's an insult to my institution to imply that I'm not. What I am saying is that we have a choice not to do it.

 

[Iron]

Kwayera!
I overestimated you.
But I still LOVE you. If that makes me an animal, then I dont want to be a human.

 

[conics2008]

Simple answer, yes God does exist.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

We clearly ARE the dominant species.

Not really, we just believe we are.

 

[Kwayera]

Kwayera!
I overestimated you.
But I still LOVE you. If that makes me an animal, then I dont want to be a human.

To be honest, I don't particularly want to be human either, sometimes. Life would be a lot simpler.



I wonder what we'll do, if ever we are so lucky to go to an extra-solar planet and encounter alien "animal" life. Will we dominate them too? What about sentient aliens - would we treat them as underlings, because neccesarily as non-humans, they would be below us?

 

[Kwayera]

Simple answer, yes God does exist.

Simple answer, yes the Tooth Fairy does exist.

 

[Stevo.]

I believe in biotechnology. I believe in genetic engineering. I believe in mechnical/biological hybrid technology. We will build customised life to work for us. We will alter life to suit us, to help us, to feed us. It is our right.

 

[Kwayera]

We will alter life to suit us, to help us, to feed us. It is our right.

Why?

 

[Stevo.]

Because we hold the power to wipe out another species... or bring it back to life.

 

[Iron]

To be honest, I don't particularly want to be human either, sometimes. Life would be a lot simpler.



I wonder what we'll do, if ever we are so lucky to go to an extra-solar planet and encounter alien "animal" life. Will we dominate them too? What about sentient aliens - would we treat them as underlings, because neccesarily as non-humans, they would be below us?

Communist! Such lofty ideals. Come children, twirl in the mountains and dress up in curtains while singing about our feelings and releasing doves!
Celestial choirs will be singing!
Everyone will just know that we should come together
And the world will be perfect!

Would we have faith that they wouldnt "dominate" us?
Ive seen Independece Day, ok? With my own eyes, ive seen what your friendly green men would do to us if we dont work out a way to do it to them first. Kill or be killed.

You children must be moulded
Shaped and taught
That life's a looming battle
To be faced and fought

 

[Kwayera]

Because we hold the power to wipe out another species...

Yes, and that is a terrible thing.

or bring it back to life.

That's debateable, yet. And it wouldn't excuse the crime of wiping them out in the first place.

 

[Stevo.]

In my opinion, we are gods. It's about time we streamlined this ethics and morality bullshit and got on with the job of advancing science. It's the only way we'll save the world.

 

[Enteebee]

Would I choose to save a human life over an animal's? Yes. If I had to choose to kill either, would I kill the animal over the human? Yes. But I wouldn't think it was right, and that is my loyalty to my species.

Obviously morals in the end are equal to each other but I think we need to think about why we hold our moral stance i.e. Why do we value life at all? Why not value non-life (or plant life)?

Why would you value humans more when it really comes down to it (although having no intellectual argument as to why)? The reason, I'd argue, is because naturally our species has evolved to feel empathy for one another, for the most part empathy for other animals (other than perhaps a few... dogs per say) would have no evolutionary advantage and may in fact be a disadvantage. It is at the core of human being that we value other human lives (unless we're a sociopath) quite a bit.... it is one of the axioms of human morality so you're not going to have an intelligent argument for it, but it will probably be the basis for much of your ethical thinking.

I guess I take a homo-centric perspective on morality (it is after all a human construct). Morals are a human thing, any moral which is repugnant to humanity imo is a repugnant moral.

You just said you did, Chadd. Because we're mightier.

Having greater might gives you the right to do whatever you want, it doesn't mean you should do it. You can very well be a benevolent power.

I'm continually aware of this, and it's an insult to my institution to imply that I'm not. What I am saying is that we have a choice not to do it.

lol I know you did I just wanted to highlight that it's a sensationalised piece of shit quote.

In my opinion, we are gods. It's about time we streamlined this ethics and morality bullshit and got on with the job of advancing science. It's the only way we'll save the world.

Without the 'ethics and morality bullshit' what sort of a world will we be saving?

 

[Kwayera]

Obviously morals in the end are equal to each other but I think we need to think about why we hold our moral stance i.e. Why do we value life at all? Why not value non-life (or plant life)?

Well, I suppose that if we did not value life at all we couldn't value ourselves. And I think we do value non-life - we glory at the stars, the moon, a waterfall, and I think there would be a lot of objection to someone destroying Ayer's Rock.

Why would you value humans more when it really comes down to it (although having no intellectual argument as to why). The reason, I'd argue, is because naturally our species has evolved to feel empathy for one another, for the most part empathy for other animals (other than perhaps a few... dogs per say) would have no evolutionary advantage and may in fact be a disadvantage. It is at the core of human being that we value other human lives (unless we're a sociopath) quite a bit.

I would agree with that - in fact that's probably the only valid explanation. The fact that we can impart empathy and altruism on another species (indeed, species that would have been our direct competitors in the dim dark past, to use your example of Canis lupus familiaris), and do, is important, I think.

I guess I take a homo-centric perspective on morality (it is after all a human construct). Morals are a human thing, any moral which is repugnant to humanity imo is a repugnant moral.

Having greater might gives you the right to do whatever you want, it doesn't mean you should do it. You can very well be a benevolent power.

So essentially you agree with me?

Without the 'ethics and morality bullshit' what sort of a world will we be saving?

And that, my friend, is what I think we're in danger of losing.

 

[Enteebee]

So essentially you agree with me?

Well I think humans are greater than animals... I can't escape this fact imho. Just because you are more powerful though doesn't mean you have to be a 'plague on the planet', might gives you the right to do so, but we can choose otherwise. I might agree a fair bit with your ends (i.e. more protections for animals etc) but I don't agree with your reasons why.

 

[Iron]

I take it that NTB has followed Nietzsche's white rabbit down the black hole
Good-bye Dinah!

 

[*TRUE*]

Obviously morals in the end are equal to each other but I think we need to think about why we hold our moral stance i.e. Why do we value life at all? Why not value non-life (or plant life)?
much of your ethical thinking.







Without the 'ethics and morality bullshit' what sort of a world will we be saving?

How do u define morals and know what they should be?

 

[KFunk]

Clever girl!

Love JP - I was such a dinosaur kid.

On an unrelated note: I don't think I've mentioned it before, but moral relativism has made these debates a lot less stressful for me. No longer do I have to scramble around for objective justificatory reasons wondering why others cannot see 'The Truth'. It's mildly refreshing really.