Religion

• O-Trap

  

  WebFire;1385133 wrote:Wait, you have proof of this?

  Remove the impossible, and whatever is left ...
  
  It is impossible for a passive, non-living entity to act truly spontaneously, as I recall. Environmental conditions and outside forces and energies provoke movement naturally. However, since we're discussing what must have existed prior to any environment or outside forces and energies, that isn't a possibility.
  
  As such, the logical answer is some kind of volition.
  
  If you're asking for scientific proof, then you're asking for a weighing in from an insufficient epistemological system, similar to asking about the visual properties of pi, as visual study is insufficient to evaluate pi.
• Heretic

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385146 wrote:who's logic?

  Anyone with the mental capacity to use logic.
• BORIStheCrusher

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385137 wrote:You say you're a good person or have morals. You're feel good b/c you you were told you were doing what you were supposed to.

  How do you know I was ever told what was right or wrong?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Heretic;1385150 wrote:Anyone with the mental capacity to use logic.

  that would require everyone to think the same way. And they don't
• sleeper

  

  O-Trap;1385098 wrote:Quite simply, we enjoy our time here on earth as well. Being on earth isn't a bad thing, and given that it's all we know at the moment, not only is there no motivation to end that in the short order, but there's no reason to, as if an afterlife is for an infinite amount of time, then we'll all experience it for the same length as everyone else.
  
  That's aside from the fact that my own beliefs suggest that murder is wrong.
  
  However, as I look at your reasoning, it appears that your reasons for not killing and stealing are entirely based on the law of the land prohibiting it. If the law of the land was to suddenly disappear, and you could receive pleasure from killing people in order to take their possessions without fear of social or legal repercussions, would you do so?

  I'll ignore the unproven assumptions that the afterlife is infinite because a statement that states the afterlife is "X" has the same validity and proof no matter what you make X.
  
  To answer your question, no I still will not murder regardless if the law of the land allowed me to do so. I find it to be a broken question because there would be social reprocussions since killing someone else who have a material impact on your ability to achieve happiness in life. For example, if I kill someone from family "Y", they might have a vested interest in making sure I don't have a happy life. In reverse, if I prevent someone from family "Y" from getting killed they will likely have a vested interest in keeping me happy and protected.
  
  There is a social fabric that binds us as human and being religious accomplishes none of that sort. In fact, being religious inbreeds a sense of division since one is simply an infidel if they don't maintain the same belief system. A world without religion would be much better off as those who choose to murder, steal, etc. would have a bad time and be unlikely able to survive long enough to reproduce; whereas those who treat their fellow humans well would have the ability to reproduce more causing more and more self-reinforcing societal norms to become prevalent.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  BORIStheCrusher;1385152 wrote:How do you know I was ever told what was right or wrong?

  I don't know about you.. Justin's the one that said murder and stealing were wrong.
• WebFire

  O-Trap;1385149 wrote:Remove the impossible, and whatever is left ...
  
  It is impossible for a passive, non-living entity to act truly spontaneously, as I recall. Environmental conditions and outside forces and energies provoke movement naturally. However, since we're discussing what must have existed prior to any environment or outside forces and energies, that isn't a possibility.
  
  As such, the logical answer is some kind of volition.
  
  If you're asking for scientific proof, then you're asking for a weighing in from an insufficient epistemological system, similar to asking about the visual properties of pi.

  Impossible to the human brain. If we are a creation of something else, then our brain may only have a subset of the available knowledge required to answer these types of questions.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385141 wrote:but you're commanded not to kill

  This is unproven. God has made no such claim and given his status on allowing free will to exist one could make a stronger argument that god allows(and possibly even enjoys) murder and destruction. Please refrain from using unproven statements as truth; this is simply illogical and unfair in general discourse.
• justincredible

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385156 wrote:I don't know about you.. Justin's the one that said murder and stealing were wrong.

  It's simple. Would I want someone to steal from and/or kill me? No. Sounds like a pretty bad time. Given that, I will not steal from and/or kill someone else.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1385158 wrote:This is unproven. God has made no such claim and given his status on allowing free will to exist one could make a stronger argument that god allows(and possibly even enjoys) murder and destruction. Please refrain from using unproven statements as truth; this is simply illogical and unfair in general discourse.

  Everything is unproven. There not being a God is unproven.
• sleeper

  

  justincredible;1385139 wrote:What are the stats on the number of people killed throughout history in the name of religious beliefs?

  I put the number as greater than y; where y equals 100x more than any religious believer will admit or take credit for.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  justincredible;1385159 wrote:It's simple. Would I want someone to steal from and/or kill me? No. Sounds like a pretty bad time. Given that, I will not steal from and/or kill someone else.

  yeah but if you have something I want and I can take it from you, i ought to steal it. And If you bother me and I'd like it better if you weren't around, i ought to kill you right?
  
  I mean.. thats logical.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385160 wrote:Everything is unproven. There not being a God is unproven.

  Perhaps highly correlated would be a better answer. I reject your notion as "God is unproven" because that is not the way logic works. If "god is unproven" is sufficient proof(ie. high correlation that such claim is truthful), then you supporting a world in which evidence is irrelevant. You can't prove that an invisible flying pink unicorn does not exist, therefore it exists! Is this the kind of logic you use at your day job? :thumbdown:
• justincredible

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385163 wrote:yeah but if you have something I want and I can take it from you, i ought to steal it. And If you bother me and I'd like it better if you weren't around, i ought to kill you right?
  
  I mean.. thats logical.

  If you're a psychopath, maybe.
• Con_Alma

  sleeper;1385162 wrote:I put the number as greater than y; where y equals 100x more than any religious believer will admit or take credit for.

  I'm a "religious believer" and acknowledge the amount of deaths that have occurred in the name of religion as too many for me to even count! I'll acknowledge most any number you like.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1385167 wrote:Perhaps highly correlated would be a better answer. I reject your notion as "God is unproven" because that is not the way logic works. If "god is unproven" is sufficient proof(ie. high correlation that such claim is truthful), then you supporting a world in which evidence is irrelevant. You can't prove that an invisible flying pink unicorn does not exist, therefore it exists! Is this the kind of logic you use at your day job? :thumbdown:

  No i use ladder logic a lot.
• BORIStheCrusher

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385163 wrote:yeah but if you have something I want and I can take it from you, i ought to steal it. And If you bother me and I'd like it better if you weren't around, i ought to kill you right?
  
  I mean.. thats logical.

  So you don't kill people because that's what religion taught you?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  justincredible;1385168 wrote:If you're a psychopath, maybe.

  Who says you're not the psychopath for not wanting to steal from someone?
• O-Trap

  

  sleeper;1385154 wrote:I find it to be a broken question because there would be social reprocussions since killing someone else who have a material impact on your ability to achieve happiness in life. For example, if I kill someone from family "Y", they might have a vested interest in making sure I don't have a happy life. In reverse, if I prevent someone from family "Y" from getting killed they will likely have a vested interest in keeping me happy and protected.

  You assume the knowledge of the killer in your example. You might have a vested interest in not being KNOWN as a killer. However, that is not the same as having a vested interest in not actually being a killer. As such, you've merely exchanged legal repercussions (assuming you get caught) with social repercussions (again, assuming you get caught).
  
  And consider if Family Y has little influence, and by killing a member of their family, you wind up with great influence. As such, they have no realistic means by which they can do anything to inconvenience you.
  
  Would you still have a reason not to kill?
  

  sleeper;1385154 wrote:There is a social fabric that binds us as human and being religious accomplishes none of that sort.

  This social fabric only suggests an arbitrary morality is common if and only if it is possibly observed by the rest of the community. In other words, it doesn't establish a morality. It established what you're not allowed to be CAUGHT doing.
  

  sleeper;1385154 wrote:In fact, being religious inbreeds a sense of division since one is simply an infidel if they don't maintain the same belief system.

  This is incorrect.
  
  Would you like me to cite defeaters of that statement, or will you acknowledge that it was an incorrect statement?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  BORIStheCrusher;1385173 wrote:So you don't kill people because that's what religion taught you?

  I believe God wrote his laws in your heart, which is why you "feel" its good or bad to do stuff.
• justincredible

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385174 wrote:Who says you're not the psychopath for not wanting to steal from someone?

  Apparently Jesus. You win. I'll go to church on Sunday.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1385145 wrote:By your own description here, being born with no knowledge, we are all born agnostic and our life experiences as well as our drive for knowledge leads us down the path of our own belief system.

  I agree. By life experiences you mean subjected impressionable minds with fairy tales and fear that can't be undone. If you need an example of this, look in the mirror. The good news, at least from my perspective, is we are slowly seeing generations of believers evaporating right before our eyes as information becomes readily available Gone are the days where someone couldn't release the traps of religious belief for fear of repercussions by their family and community. I enjoy it very much. :thumbup:
• O-Trap

  

  WebFire;1385157 wrote:Impossible to the human brain. If we are a creation of something else, then our brain may only have a subset of the available knowledge required to answer these types of questions.

  Occam's Razor would suggest that to be less likely.
  
  And too, if you suggest this as a likely alternative, you call known physics (a hard science) into question, epistemologically. Now, that's not inherently bad, but we're getting to a Descartes-like recognition of truth.
• BORIStheCrusher

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385179 wrote:I believe God wrote his laws in your heart, which is why you "feel" its good or bad to do stuff.

  I've done plenty of things that god/the church would not approve of and don't "feel" wrong about it. Do you think I'm a bad person because I had sex before I was married?
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1385163 wrote:yeah but if you have something I want and I can take it from you, i ought to steal it. And If you bother me and I'd like it better if you weren't around, i ought to kill you right?
  
  I mean.. thats logical.

  You will likely die in an unregulated scenario. While you may have already reproduced, your children will likely also have a vendetta against them and might not have the opportunity to reproduce. Morality will evolve whether there is religious belief or whether there isn't; simple.