Quebec bans religious teaching in publicly subsidized daycares

[Kuciwalker]

If you write an argument like "if I ignore my eyes I am physically constrained but if I ignore my moral sentiments I am not" then you are begging the question. You can only actually be physically constrained if an objective physical reality exists.

[DinoDoc]

For most people, if they ignore morality and steal 1) they feel bad about it (directly perceive it as wrong) and 2) other people feel that it was wrong.

1) Why would they feel bad? 2) This assumes they get caught. What happens if that isn't the case?

[Hauldren Collider]

Making **** up is better than being boring and irrelevant, but only barely. Don't put words in my mouth I never said.

You sure as hell did say it. Maybe you no longer feel that way now? Good, it was stupid.

That said, being boring and irrelevant is better than being outright stupid. Simple axioms produce complex outcomes, something you've never been bright enough to understand.

Simple axioms can produce complex outcomes but that doesn't mean the simple axioms are enough to define a specific complex outcome. Sometimes they can, often they can't. Theory's always nice when it works.

[Kidlicious]

Congrats, you came up with something more absurd than a tautology... also, feel free to expose the arrogance of thinking morality involves helping other people. That should be an interesting argument.

No you numbskull. It's absurd to say, "I'm a good person" because of all the scientific evidence on how the mind works. Any person who says they are a good person is surely being deceptive.

Once you say, "I'm a good person" you stop trying to become a good person.

[Kidlicious]

The fact that Stalin was an atheist isn't what made him evil. The fact that he butchered and starved millions of people made him evil. He didn't do that because he was atheist.

He certainly wouldn't have done all that if he believed in God.

[Kidlicious]

Humans almost universally have strong personal beliefs about right and wrong, educed from their moral sentiments. These moral sentiments are essentially similar to all of the other inputs to our brain (in a Descartes-style picture of the mind). To the same degree that abduction from sights, sounds, etc. to testable hypothesis about a physical reality is true, so is abduction from these sentiments to testable hypotheses about right and wrong. The fact that these sentiments are even strongly consistent between individuals and cultures makes an even better case for a shared, objective, true morality.

I think what you're talking about is common sense, not morality and it's certainly not objective.

[Kidlicious]

Morality is entirely biological, possibly originally stemming from species-game-rules governing reproduction. We can see this in the behaviour of lower mammals with basic social rules governing the model of reproduction, like meerkats.

We interpret it in various social ways, including a need to please the magic-man in the sky, or the need to please our peers for our own well-being, but there's nothing mystical about it.

That's all, really.

No. Pleasing God is the opposite of pleasing yourself and/or pleasing your group. It has nothing to do with the survival of the individual's life or the continuation of the group that the individual identifies himself with. It has nothing to do with biology.

[giblets]

No you numbskull. It's absurd to say, "I'm a good person" because of all the scientific evidence on how the mind works. Any person who says they are a good person is surely being deceptive.

Once you say, "I'm a good person" you stop trying to become a good person.

Where have I said I'm a good person? You're not reading anything I'm saying, you're just repeating some preconceived bull****.

[Kidlicious]

What you guys seem to be missing in all of this is that if morality is just as objective as physics.

That's nonsense. Morality is the result of faith, which is the highest passion. It's subjective.

[Kidlicious]

Where have I said I'm a good person? You're not reading anything I'm saying, you're just repeating some preconceived bull****.

You said if you are a good person you can have morals even though you don't believe in God. Or what did you say?

[giblets]

He certainly wouldn't have done all that if he believed in God.

Of course he would have, theists kill people all the time... some of them strap on bomb vests and blow themselves up... would the 9/11 hijackers have done what they did if they were atheists?

[giblets]

You said if you are a good person you can have morals even though you don't believe in God. Or what did you say?

I said people with good intentions don't need to be given a reason to behave morally... they can still fail, of course.

[Kidlicious]

i actually believe that most people act in a moral way most of the time.

If you believe that morality is biology it's no wonder that you believe this. Human beings are not good. They do all their thinking in the unconcious mind where they use self-deception to get what they want and insure the survival of the individual and the group. That's not morality. Morality is the rejection of the natural inclinations of human thinking and behaviour.

[giblets]

If you believe that morality is biology it's no wonder that you believe this. Human beings are not good. They do all their thinking in the unconcious mind where they use self-deception to get what they want and insure the survival of the individual and the group. That's not morality. Morality is the rejection of the natural inclinations of human thinking and behaviour.

So suicide is moral? Since it involves the rejection of the natural inclination to survive...

[Hauldren Collider]

Yay! A kidicious thread!

So suicide is moral? Since it involves the rejection of the natural inclination to survive...

I've heard you get sent to hell for it. That's depressing...almost makes you want to....wait nvm