It is not on someone to disprove, you have to prove the premises to make the argument true. You cannot do this, have never done this in the multiple threads you tried, and continue to make this blanket statement.
Absolutely not. It is not proven that God exists, that is not a known fact. It’s honestly impressive (in a sad way) how convince you are and how you relentlessly use this bad reasoning around here. If anybody needs any context read the Proof of God thread @H_factor linked to or the other atheist thread. Mind-boggling this has come up again.
Really? What specific reasoning are you referring to? Which argument are you even talking about? If I am wrong about something, prove it…
I love it when people say ‘you said something wrong a long time ago, therefore, you must be wrong about everything.’
It doesn’t matter, it’s all subjective. So everybody gets to be right.
All science is physics. Other branches exist only because physics isn’t perfect. Every type of science stepped away from physics is a step incorporating more inaccuracy. This assumes that the theory of science is correct. A perfect physics is identical to a perfect psychology. Perfect physics with perfect equations and total measuring and computational ability could perfectly model a human brain and all behavior and predict the outcome of any intervention. Everything not physics is science simplified/dumbed down to our abilities and knowledge.And again in that system there is no thing called an emotion.
As an arbitrary label on an arbitrarily defined pattern of behavior in humans, sure. as a thing in itself, no. There is no force/matter/thing called morality in the physical universe.
So you wouldn’t like to actually answer the question?
I’m asking you. To your own personal reasonings (not dodging the question using mine), which of us is being logical and which isn’t?
Not at all what that means.
This is a non answer. The answer requires 1 word. Either “Pat” or “Pfury.” Which of us is being logical and rational? If logic/rational is OBJECTIVE, and we have 2 completely opposite viewpoints, 1 of us HAS to be right, and the other wrong.
Could even be as simple as you saying Pat = rational, Pfury = irrational or vice versa. Your call.
Absolutely not at all what I’ve said from the very start. Actually it seems like you’ve been blatantly ignoring what I’ve actually been saying.
I don’t particularly enjoy these discussions regarding religion. If you’d like to answer my question directly, I’d be more than happy to continue. Everything else and we’ve reached agree to disagree territory.
I don’t know if anything is really wrong or not. I do know I wouldn’t enjoy being a slave. I’m sorry I can’t answer your question but I don’t suffer from self-righteousness.
OK, that actually gets a little respect. A real answer out of you. You do not know that anything is right or wrong. That is both bold and honest of you to admit. While I think it’s a silly outlook on life and I seriously doubt you live in a way that reflects that belief (who really does), that is at least an answer, and a rationally consistent one at that.
And would you look at that, we got somewhere. This right here is the base of our disagreement and why we don’t have common ground on the issue. I’m self righteous enough to assert that some things are inherently bad. While we certainly disagree, at least there is a conclusion and we have reached a full disclosure of our different perspectives.
Obviously some things are bad. Sunburns are bad for the skin, for example. If we are talking about good and evil that is a different matter. I have my beliefs but I can’t be so sure to say that they reflect some cosmic absolute that exists outside of the human mind.
Bad is even a subjective term in regards to sunburns if you mean it is something that shouldn’t happen. Regardless, I get you. I’d even go as far as to say that is possibly the most rational answer. It would just make life suck and leads to things like not being about to say unequivocally things like murder or slavery are wrong. I largely reject the belief because I reject the consequences of the belief, not explicitly because I reject it’s basis.
Sunburns are bad for the health of skin. It’s not a question of whether it should or shouldn’t happen as under certain conditions it should happen.
I can say unequivocally that slavery is wrong under the conditions of a free society. Murder would fall under that as well. In a society that doesn’t value individual freedom in the way the West does, or should, slavery could be argued as right.