Life After Death

Off Topic
307

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I think people should be weened off of faith and it’s traditions so we can go with reason and the things we know.

We have a lot of people on this world who use faith, and everything with them stops at faith. There is no reasoning with them, they believe their world view is true and that God wants this and that for everyone, and they will kill you if you don’t agree as stated at the end of the video.
[/quote]

This is a fundamental human state of mind. You can replace religion with nationalism or feminism or even fucking soccer fandom and you’d essentially have the same thing.

I don’t get why people focus specifically on religion as if it’s the ONLY thing.[/quote]

You see those are all the same types of things based on bullshit we can connect on. We are so inventive in the ways we are empathetic that we create connections with one another that cause groups like the KKK and Nazi’s. In the process of our stupidly easy connections people become dogmatic about Nationalism, Racism and all kinds of horrible things, its true.

But, what if we put that sort of energy that really is a result of our Empathy, back into Empathy and recognize it as a valuable thing for it’s own sake? Fucks sake, if the people are right about mirror neurons it means we are programmed to feel empathetic as a result of our intelligence. Think of the magnitude of that for a minute? We do things like appreciate and develop artwork, music, culture, because of it. It comes totally natural to us, doesn’t need to be learned but maybe it can be refined and more appreciated. I don’t need to claim feeling what others feel is in our nature, it’s in the way our nervous system and brain work. [/quote]

Empathy and actions from empathy are entirely irrational. I though you wanted to abandon irrationality and leave only the rational.

If, as you desire, we stick only to what is known, do you claim to know that murder is wrong?[/quote]

Exactly. If empathy merely serves a biological purpose then it is largely obsolete. The rational thing to do would be to suppress empathy when it gets in the way of rational decisions. In a purely rational world we should have no concern at all about the suffering of other human beings. The rational thing to do would be to overcome feelings of empathy and restrictive and irrational moral precepts.

309

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

[/quote]

In a way, yes. Hardwired instinct seems to suggest there are forces beyond our comprehension at work.

310

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Who believes in it, and why?

Your thoughts?[/quote]

Me.

Because it pleases me to do so and there is no evidence to the contrary.[/quote]

No it’s because your parents threatened you with eternal damnation or a proxy as a child.

That’s why it pleases you in place of actually doing good while you were alive.

In fact, the idea of virtue and pleasure in the afterlife in diametrically opposed to achieving virtue and happiness in this life.[/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

Something about Emily makes me believe she does a awful lot of good while she is alive… More than most.

There you go assuming and projecting again.

I’m sorry but this is utter nonsense. Just… stop now.
[/quote]

The proxy for god and heaven/hell for militant atheists is the State, so nothing changes there.

Also, without a objective and secular morality, all the good she may have done will be clouded by all the evil in support of state violence, parental violence against children, domestic violence, that is not even apparent to her because of the quite literal disconnect from reality that is God and the many proxies for God.[/quote]

It’s as if you can see right through me, TooHuman!

Except that my parents both rejected religion. My mother wouldn’t talk about her beliefs (“I don’t want to play Twenty Questions with you, Emily”). My father was the son of an abusive drunk and if he believed in God disliked him. He saw a world so fucked up, no compassionate god could have created it.

I see a world so exquisite, no accident could possibly account for it.

The other thing that differs from the profile you assigned me is that I work with abused kids, domestic violence from both sides, ex-cons, chronically ill, etc. I also manage to have a good deal of fun, both at work and outside of it. I work, play, and love pretty enthusiastically, so if this is all there is I’m making the best of it.

But other than those minor misses, you’re spot on!

(Counting Beans, thank you for the compliment.)

311

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

So, my friends, to wind this back around - does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

If we were a random smattering of energy, what purpose would the ability to have empathy serve?

Do other animals have this that we know of? I think so…

[/quote]

I only know that if there is no divine power, there is no reason to put effort into anything, because all your thoughts are pre-determined chemical reactions devoid of meaning. You could “believe” that if you want, but no non-insane person would ever behave in accordance with that belief.

312

[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

No it’s because your parents threatened you with eternal damnation or a proxy as a child.[/quote]

Utter bullshit. I was indoctrinated in the tenants of Militant Atheism growing up and have had a very hard time coming to terms with the fact I do actually believe in some sort of “thing” where it be God, G_D, Alah, nature, karma, what ever you want to call it.

You’re using assumptive conjecture to project your own individual feelings on the whole. Stop that shit.

[/quote]

I, too, grew up in a militant atheist environment back in Holland with atheist parents and friends and from an early age I could not shake the feeling that I in fact believed in God.[/quote]

My experience as well, though as stated above my parents weren’t interested enough in the matter to be dedicated atheists, or chose not to say so aloud at any rate. I was told from early on that I would be allowed to make my own decisions about faith and religion.

I’m not sure I believe in an involved God in the day-to-day sense, though I would like to and may someday come to that. But intelligent design makes more sense to me than any of the other options and I believe strongly in it.

I’ve also (skipping around a bit here to save time) watched three people die, and two of them behaved in ways that were suggestive to me of otherworldly experiences.

313

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Who believes in it, and why?

Your thoughts?[/quote]

Me.

Because it pleases me to do so and there is no evidence to the contrary.[/quote]

No it’s because your parents threatened you with eternal damnation or a proxy as a child.

That’s why it pleases you in place of actually doing good while you were alive.

In fact, the idea of virtue and pleasure in the afterlife in diametrically opposed to achieving virtue and happiness in this life.[/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

Something about Emily makes me believe she does a awful lot of good while she is alive… More than most.

There you go assuming and projecting again.

I’m sorry but this is utter nonsense. Just… stop now.
[/quote]

The proxy for god and heaven/hell for militant atheists is the State, so nothing changes there.

Also, without a objective and secular morality, all the good she may have done will be clouded by all the evil in support of state violence, parental violence against children, domestic violence, that is not even apparent to her because of the quite literal disconnect from reality that is God and the many proxies for God.[/quote]

It’s as if you can see right through me, TooHuman!

Except that my parents both rejected religion. My mother wouldn’t talk about her beliefs (“I don’t want to play Twenty Questions with you, Emily”). My father was the son of an abusive drunk and if he believed in God disliked him. He saw a world so fucked up, no compassionate god could have created it.

I see a world so exquisite, no accident could possibly account for it.

The other thing that differs from the profile you assigned me is that I work with abused kids, domestic violence from both sides, ex-cons, chronically ill, etc. I also manage to have a good deal of fun, both at work and outside of it. I work, play, and love pretty enthusiastically, so if this is all there is I’m making the best of it.

But other than those minor misses, you’re spot on!

(Counting Beans, thank you for the compliment.)

[/quote]

That’s quite a lot of information about what you claim your parents didn’t do.
It seems your parents were very dispassionate and un-empathetic with you as a child as they refused a concerted discourse with you about their beliefs.

You’re missing the parts about what they did do and what methods they used to set rules and create structure.

How specifically did they enforce rules with you?

314

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Who believes in it, and why?

Your thoughts?[/quote]

Me.

Because it pleases me to do so and there is no evidence to the contrary.[/quote]

No it’s because your parents threatened you with eternal damnation or a proxy as a child.

That’s why it pleases you in place of actually doing good while you were alive.

In fact, the idea of virtue and pleasure in the afterlife in diametrically opposed to achieving virtue and happiness in this life.[/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

Something about Emily makes me believe she does a awful lot of good while she is alive… More than most.

There you go assuming and projecting again.

I’m sorry but this is utter nonsense. Just… stop now.
[/quote]

The proxy for god and heaven/hell for militant atheists is the State, so nothing changes there.

Also, without a objective and secular morality, all the good she may have done will be clouded by all the evil in support of state violence, parental violence against children, domestic violence, that is not even apparent to her because of the quite literal disconnect from reality that is God and the many proxies for God.[/quote]

It’s as if you can see right through me, TooHuman!

Except that my parents both rejected religion. My mother wouldn’t talk about her beliefs (“I don’t want to play Twenty Questions with you, Emily”). My father was the son of an abusive drunk and if he believed in God disliked him. He saw a world so fucked up, no compassionate god could have created it.

I see a world so exquisite, no accident could possibly account for it.

The other thing that differs from the profile you assigned me is that I work with abused kids, domestic violence from both sides, ex-cons, chronically ill, etc. I also manage to have a good deal of fun, both at work and outside of it. I work, play, and love pretty enthusiastically, so if this is all there is I’m making the best of it.

But other than those minor misses, you’re spot on!

(Counting Beans, thank you for the compliment.)

[/quote]

That’s quite a lot of information about what you claim your parents didn’t do.
It seems your parents were very dispassionate and un-empathetic with you as a child as they refused a concerted discourse with you about their beliefs.

You’re missing the parts about what they did do and what methods they used to set rules and create structure.

How specifically did they enforce rules with you?[/quote]

Quite a lot of information? Lol, you have no idea what “quite a lot of information” from me looks like. Much more than a short paragraph! As for discipline, what possible difference could it make to you? Are you going to create a new set of assumptions about me and inform us all based upon these guesses?

318

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

So, my friends, to wind this back around - does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

[/quote]

Not necessarily. What I think is suggestive is that there appears to be universal moral laws. For example, it is pretty much universally understood that murder is wrong and that stealing is wrong. The fact that these things are universally understood is suggestive of a transcendent moral order. And the existence of objective moral laws implies a lawgiver.

319

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

So, my friends, to wind this back around - does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

[/quote]

Not necessarily. What I think is suggestive is that there appears to be universal moral laws. For example, it is pretty much universally understood that murder is wrong and that stealing is wrong. The fact that these things are universally understood is suggestive of a transcendent moral order. And the existence of objective moral laws implies a lawgiver.[/quote]

That is neither universally understood nor would its existence imply anything other than self preservation and advantageous social behaviours.

320

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

So, my friends, to wind this back around - does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

[/quote]

Not necessarily. What I think is suggestive is that there appears to be universal moral laws. For example, it is pretty much universally understood that murder is wrong and that stealing is wrong. The fact that these things are universally understood is suggestive of a transcendent moral order. And the existence of objective moral laws implies a lawgiver.[/quote]

That is neither universally understood nor would its existence imply anything other than self preservation and advantageous social behaviours. [/quote]

I disagree. I say it is pretty much universally understood even if many people don’t observe it. This is what I said in another thread about objective moral laws versus physical laws:

"Where does the law of gravity reside? Gravity is simply the observation that mass conforms to certain rules on the non-quantum level. Gravity like everything else needs a causal agent but it doesn’t need to be personified. A moral law is not simply a rule that something adheres to. It requires a sentient being with free will to perceive its existence then use free will to adhere to it. Universal moral law implies the existence of a law giver - it implies the “thou.”

321

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

So, my friends, to wind this back around - does the fact that such things appear “built in” to us suggest that a divine power exists?

If we were a random smattering of energy, what purpose would the ability to have empathy serve?

Do other animals have this that we know of? I think so…

[/quote]

Instead of asking questions to be answered, question your beliefs you already have. Who am I? What is god? Is there ever such thing as an absolutely true thought? What do I know for certain? Just contemplate on those type of things and do not expect an answer just be still and listen to silence. Animals instinctively have these characteristics as even all life forms do to some degree.

322

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I think people should be weened off of faith and it’s traditions so we can go with reason and the things we know.

We have a lot of people on this world who use faith, and everything with them stops at faith. There is no reasoning with them, they believe their world view is true and that God wants this and that for everyone, and they will kill you if you don’t agree as stated at the end of the video.
[/quote]

This is a fundamental human state of mind. You can replace religion with nationalism or feminism or even fucking soccer fandom and you’d essentially have the same thing.

I don’t get why people focus specifically on religion as if it’s the ONLY thing.[/quote]

You see those are all the same types of things based on bullshit we can connect on. We are so inventive in the ways we are empathetic that we create connections with one another that cause groups like the KKK and Nazi’s. In the process of our stupidly easy connections people become dogmatic about Nationalism, Racism and all kinds of horrible things, its true.

But, what if we put that sort of energy that really is a result of our Empathy, back into Empathy and recognize it as a valuable thing for it’s own sake? Fucks sake, if the people are right about mirror neurons it means we are programmed to feel empathetic as a result of our intelligence. Think of the magnitude of that for a minute? We do things like appreciate and develop artwork, music, culture, because of it. It comes totally natural to us, doesn’t need to be learned but maybe it can be refined and more appreciated. I don’t need to claim feeling what others feel is in our nature, it’s in the way our nervous system and brain work. [/quote]

Empathy and actions from empathy are entirely irrational. I thought you wanted to abandon irrationality and leave only the rational.

If, as you desire, we stick only to what is known, do you claim to know that murder is wrong?[/quote]

That’s whats so amazing about the mirror neuron. We watch people suffer, we understand and grasp the suffering because we feel our own version of it in a strong way. In fact we have other neurons in place to prevent us from literally feeling with the feelings that others feel. As Ramachandran says, if you saw someone get their arm chopped off and experience pain, you would connect with their pain and you would actually feel the same pain if not for neurons in place that prevent you from feeling it. That’s how connected we are. I don’t know why I’m one of the few people who recognizes how amazing this is.

So, with Empathy and murder, or any other way of causing harm or pain to others, we know in our hardwiring and the way we process that it is wrong. It’s not at all irrational either, following our empathy is the smartest thing mankind has ever done.

Empathy is responsible for, or at least contributed to just about everything worthwhile we have ever done as a species. Society, artwork, music/various entertainment, our sociability as animals, even much of our intelligence is a result of our empathy/ how we are wired, and how we recognize and learn from other people.

323

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I think people should be weened off of faith and it’s traditions so we can go with reason and the things we know.

We have a lot of people on this world who use faith, and everything with them stops at faith. There is no reasoning with them, they believe their world view is true and that God wants this and that for everyone, and they will kill you if you don’t agree as stated at the end of the video.
[/quote]

This is a fundamental human state of mind. You can replace religion with nationalism or feminism or even fucking soccer fandom and you’d essentially have the same thing.

I don’t get why people focus specifically on religion as if it’s the ONLY thing.[/quote]

You see those are all the same types of things based on bullshit we can connect on. We are so inventive in the ways we are empathetic that we create connections with one another that cause groups like the KKK and Nazi’s. In the process of our stupidly easy connections people become dogmatic about Nationalism, Racism and all kinds of horrible things, its true.

But, what if we put that sort of energy that really is a result of our Empathy, back into Empathy and recognize it as a valuable thing for it’s own sake? Fucks sake, if the people are right about mirror neurons it means we are programmed to feel empathetic as a result of our intelligence. Think of the magnitude of that for a minute? We do things like appreciate and develop artwork, music, culture, because of it. It comes totally natural to us, doesn’t need to be learned but maybe it can be refined and more appreciated. I don’t need to claim feeling what others feel is in our nature, it’s in the way our nervous system and brain work. [/quote]

Empathy and actions from empathy are entirely irrational. I thought you wanted to abandon irrationality and leave only the rational.

If, as you desire, we stick only to what is known, do you claim to know that murder is wrong?[/quote]

That’s whats so amazing about the mirror neuron. We watch people suffer, we understand and grasp the suffering because we feel our own version of it in a strong way. In fact we have other neurons in place to prevent us from literally feeling with the feelings that others feel. As Ramachandran says, if you saw someone get their arm chopped off and experience pain, you would connect with their pain and you would actually feel the same pain if not for neurons in place that prevent you from feeling it. That’s how connected we are. I don’t know why I’m one of the few people who recognizes how amazing this is.

So, with Empathy and murder, or any other way of causing harm or pain to others, we know in our hardwiring and the way we process that it is wrong. It’s not at all irrational either, following our empathy is the smartest thing mankind has ever done.

Empathy is responsible for, or at least contributed to just about everything worthwhile we have ever done as a species. Society, artwork, music/various entertainment, our sociability as animals, even much of our intelligence is a result of our empathy/ how we are wired, and how we recognize and learn from other people. [/quote]

I think there’s some irony in posts like this given your willingness to argue various matters from a position of understanding the underlying thoughts and motives of others despite people telling you “no, that’s not how I think or feel at all.”

An example is the fear thing. Your argument against faith in afterlife is predicated on it, but multiple people have disputed that you understand them.

Personally, I find empathy lacking in general. “What is the view from the perspective of another?” is an extremely challenging concept for many. Possibly most.

324

[quote]Severiano wrote:

That’s whats so amazing about the mirror neuron. We watch people suffer, we understand and grasp the suffering because we feel our own version of it in a strong way. In fact we have other neurons in place to prevent us from literally feeling with the feelings that others feel. As Ramachandran says, if you saw someone get their arm chopped off and experience pain, you would connect with their pain and you would actually feel the same pain if not for neurons in place that prevent you from feeling it. That’s how connected we are. I don’t know why I’m one of the few people who recognizes how amazing this is.

[/quote]

You’re still missing the point. Understanding that other people are suffering can translate to > I don’t want to suffer like that. But you haven’t explained how it translates to > I don’t want anyone else to suffer like that.

Even if the mirror neuron process actually caused us to experience the actual physical suffering of another person - eg, if I punch someone in the head I actually feel the same physical pain as if I had been punched - even if that were the case, then logically I might choose to take some drug or undergo some surgery to override this empathy response. If the shared pain is the only thing that empathy is grounded in then it’s not actual authentic empathy is it? Authentic empathy is an irrational response. Rationally, if the only thing stopping me from killing someone else for gain is guilt or shared pain then the rational thing to do would be to override or suppress that empathic response. Right?

If “wrong” is only a biological response that we find unpleasant then it’s not authentic empathy. Authentic empathy is transcendental - it’s irrational.

Because it’s in our interest right? Okay, then I could argue it’s in my interest to go and steal some old lady’s life savings. That would make me feel guilty? Okay, then the rational thing to do would be to find some way to suppress my guilt. Right?

325

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I think people should be weened off of faith and it’s traditions so we can go with reason and the things we know.

We have a lot of people on this world who use faith, and everything with them stops at faith. There is no reasoning with them, they believe their world view is true and that God wants this and that for everyone, and they will kill you if you don’t agree as stated at the end of the video.
[/quote]

This is a fundamental human state of mind. You can replace religion with nationalism or feminism or even fucking soccer fandom and you’d essentially have the same thing.

I don’t get why people focus specifically on religion as if it’s the ONLY thing.[/quote]

You see those are all the same types of things based on bullshit we can connect on. We are so inventive in the ways we are empathetic that we create connections with one another that cause groups like the KKK and Nazi’s. In the process of our stupidly easy connections people become dogmatic about Nationalism, Racism and all kinds of horrible things, its true.

But, what if we put that sort of energy that really is a result of our Empathy, back into Empathy and recognize it as a valuable thing for it’s own sake? Fucks sake, if the people are right about mirror neurons it means we are programmed to feel empathetic as a result of our intelligence. Think of the magnitude of that for a minute? We do things like appreciate and develop artwork, music, culture, because of it. It comes totally natural to us, doesn’t need to be learned but maybe it can be refined and more appreciated. I don’t need to claim feeling what others feel is in our nature, it’s in the way our nervous system and brain work. [/quote]

Empathy and actions from empathy are entirely irrational. I thought you wanted to abandon irrationality and leave only the rational.

If, as you desire, we stick only to what is known, do you claim to know that murder is wrong?[/quote]

That’s whats so amazing about the mirror neuron. We watch people suffer, we understand and grasp the suffering because we feel our own version of it in a strong way. In fact we have other neurons in place to prevent us from literally feeling with the feelings that others feel. As Ramachandran says, if you saw someone get their arm chopped off and experience pain, you would connect with their pain and you would actually feel the same pain if not for neurons in place that prevent you from feeling it. That’s how connected we are. I don’t know why I’m one of the few people who recognizes how amazing this is.

So, with Empathy and murder, or any other way of causing harm or pain to others, we know in our hardwiring and the way we process that it is wrong. It’s not at all irrational either, following our empathy is the smartest thing mankind has ever done.

Empathy is responsible for, or at least contributed to just about everything worthwhile we have ever done as a species. Society, artwork, music/various entertainment, our sociability as animals, even much of our intelligence is a result of our empathy/ how we are wired, and how we recognize and learn from other people. [/quote]

I think there’s some irony in posts like this given your willingness to argue various matters from a position of understanding the underlying thoughts and motives of others despite people telling you “no, that’s not how I think or feel at all.”

An example is the fear thing. Your argument against faith in afterlife is predicated on it, but multiple people have disputed that you understand them.

Personally, I find empathy lacking in general. “What is the view from the perspective of another?” is an extremely challenging concept for many. Possibly most.[/quote]

Have you watched any video’s or read anything of the links I’ve shared about Ramachandran? Here’s a good one, article and a vid within it. I get that you have your own professional understandings, before you beat me up please take the time to check them out.

Check out Ramachandran too if you would. This stuff is right up your ally. He’s a very well respected intellectual.

326

To summarise - DoubleDuce and I have clearly demonstrated that atheist/rationalist ethics is not an authentic ethical system at all but rather rational egoism. This should be obvious from the way such an argument is phrased - it is in our interests to nurture/encourage virtuous/ethical behaviour. Our interests being the motivation for ethical conduct.

Authentic ethics is irrational because our interests are not relevant. So why should we act ethically? What is the motivation? In short, because that is what God has commanded us to do. The motivation for behaving ethically is to do God’s will - to obey God. That is the only authentic ethical position.

327

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
To summarise - DoubleDuce and I have clearly demonstrated that atheist/rationalist ethics is not an authentic ethical system at all but rather rational egoism. This should be obvious from the way such an argument is phrased - it is in our interests to nurture/encourage virtuous/ethical behaviour. Our interests being the motivation for ethical conduct.

Authentic ethics is irrational because our interests are not relevant. So why should we act ethically? What is the motivation? In short, because that is what God has commanded us to do. The motivation for behaving ethically is to do God’s will - to obey God. That is the only authentic ethical position.

[/quote]

Except that, you got your ethics from Aristotle, not God. :smiley: