As Dr. de Waal sees it, human morality may be severely limited by having evolved as a way of banding together against adversaries, with moral restraints being observed only toward the in group, not toward outsiders. ?The profound irony is that our noblest achievement ? morality ? has evolutionary ties to our basest behavior ? warfare,? he writes. ?The sense of community required by the former was provided by the latter.?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Forget it, I’m going to call you out.
When the question was asked, it was asked to remove all doubt. Well, that’s not even what most atheists claim. And those that do, are claiming it in on faith. No atheist knows with ‘absolute certainty’ that God doesn’t exist.
The relevant question to reality would’ve been “If you thought it unlikely that a God (god-like) existed, yadda, yadda.”
But that would’ve been problematic, because now my behavior, whatever it would be, would be colored by doubt in my atheistic worldview, conscious or subconscious.
[/quote]
In an imaginary world where you were able to know for sure that God did not exist, but exactly like our own other than this one thing, would you go around raping, murdering, pillage, and stealing?[/quote]
Watch him dodge the question.
The crickets have had a busy day today.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Forget it, I’m going to call you out.
When the question was asked, it was asked to remove all doubt. Well, that’s not even what most atheists claim. And those that do, are claiming it in on faith. No atheist knows with ‘absolute certainty’ that God doesn’t exist.
The relevant question to reality would’ve been “If you thought it unlikely that a God (god-like) existed, yadda, yadda.”
But that would’ve been problematic, because now my behavior, whatever it would be, would be colored by doubt in my atheistic worldview, conscious or subconscious.
[/quote]
In an imaginary world where you were able to know for sure that God did not exist, but exactly like our own other than this one thing, would you go around raping, murdering, pillage, and stealing?[/quote]
That wouldn’t be a world anything remotely like ours. That world would be completely knowable to me. I would have to have omniscience. And in order to have to have omniscience I would be far past anything remotely human. So I would be a god.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Forget it, I’m going to call you out.
When the question was asked, it was asked to remove all doubt. Well, that’s not even what most atheists claim. And those that do, are claiming it in on faith. No atheist knows with ‘absolute certainty’ that God doesn’t exist.
The relevant question to reality would’ve been “If you thought it unlikely that a God (god-like) existed, yadda, yadda.”
But that would’ve been problematic, because now my behavior, whatever it would be, would be colored by doubt in my atheistic worldview, conscious or subconscious.
[/quote]
In an imaginary world where you were able to know for sure that God did not exist, but exactly like our own other than this one thing, would you go around raping, murdering, pillage, and stealing?[/quote]
That wouldn’t be a world anything remotely like ours. That world would be completely knowable to me. I would have to have omniscience. And in order to have to have omniscience I would be far past anything remotely human. So I would be a god.[/quote]
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING. That’s the only one thing other than what you already know, that you know in that world.
I’m thoroughly disappointed,btw. I honestly thought that maybe some of the people on this board debating their views were interested in learning. But you aren’t interested in anything that involves an idea that you don’t already cling to. Everything you’ve said has been a dodge or a strategy to not even consider examining an outside viewpoint.
This is boring and sad.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[/quote]
What does it say?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING.
[/quote]
Then how would I’ve come to know it?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[/quote]
What does it say? [/quote]
You didn’t read it?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING.
[/quote]
Then how would I’ve come to know it?[/quote]
Sloth, this is sad. How old are you?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[/quote]
What does it say? [/quote]
You didn’t read it?
[/quote]
I did. I want to know what you think it says.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING.
[/quote]
Then how would I’ve come to know it?[/quote]
Sloth, this is sad. How old are you?[/quote]
Old enough to pick apart a silly question. What’s funny is you guys haven’t done the easy and obvious thing.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[/quote]
What does it say? [/quote]
You didn’t read it?
[/quote]
I did. I want to know what you think it says.
[/quote]
That human beings are capable of empathy and violence. Which we already knew.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Forget it, I’m going to call you out.
When the question was asked, it was asked to remove all doubt. Well, that’s not even what most atheists claim. And those that do, are claiming it in on faith. No atheist knows with ‘absolute certainty’ that God doesn’t exist.
The relevant question to reality would’ve been “If you thought it unlikely that a God (god-like) existed, yadda, yadda.”
But that would’ve been problematic, because now my behavior, whatever it would be, would be colored by doubt in my atheistic worldview, conscious or subconscious.
[/quote]
In an imaginary world where you were able to know for sure that God did not exist, but exactly like our own other than this one thing, would you go around raping, murdering, pillage, and stealing?[/quote]
That wouldn’t be a world anything remotely like ours. That world would be completely knowable to me. I would have to have omniscience. And in order to have to have omniscience I would be far past anything remotely human. So I would be a god.[/quote]
Are you and all other humans incapable of knowing for ourselves that murder is wrong?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
My use goes back to the basic observation that individuals are trying to thrive and pass on their genes.[/quote]
It’s an observation, yes. But that’s all it is. Individuals can also contracept (like the secular west). And ‘thriving’ covers a lot of ground. Those are also observations.
Risk vs. Reward. Many don’t even have ‘offspring’ these days. The wealthy man is almost certainly not going to be helped out by the homeless at the soup kitchen. Nor is the man who rushes into a river to pull a grandmother from a submerging vehicle.
[/quote]
Here’s a bit of what I want to tell you:
I know.
[/quote]
What does it say? [/quote]
You didn’t read it?
[/quote]
I did. I want to know what you think it says.
[/quote]
That human beings are capable of empathy and violence. Which we already knew.[/quote]
lol. You didn’t read it. Silly rabbit.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING.
[/quote]
Then how would I’ve come to know it?[/quote]
Sloth, this is sad. How old are you?[/quote]
Old enough to pick apart a silly question. What’s funny is you guys haven’t done the easy and obvious thing. [/quote]
My guess for you is around the 15-19 year old range.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Nope. You only know THAT ONE THING.
[/quote]
Then how would I’ve come to know it?[/quote]
Irrelevant.
If you knew there was no God, would you be a murderer and/or rapist?
Come on now, it’s not a hard question, no matter how many evasion games you play.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Forget it, I’m going to call you out.
When the question was asked, it was asked to remove all doubt. Well, that’s not even what most atheists claim. And those that do, are claiming it in on faith. No atheist knows with ‘absolute certainty’ that God doesn’t exist.
The relevant question to reality would’ve been “If you thought it unlikely that a God (god-like) existed, yadda, yadda.”
But that would’ve been problematic, because now my behavior, whatever it would be, would be colored by doubt in my atheistic worldview, conscious or subconscious.
[/quote]
In an imaginary world where you were able to know for sure that God did not exist, but exactly like our own other than this one thing, would you go around raping, murdering, pillage, and stealing?[/quote]
That wouldn’t be a world anything remotely like ours. That world would be completely knowable to me. I would have to have omniscience. And in order to have to have omniscience I would be far past anything remotely human. So I would be a god.[/quote]
Are you and all other humans incapable of knowing for ourselves that murder is wrong?[/quote]
Well, we can know it’s risky.