Sunday School

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Whose Christianity do Christian nationalists want?

Texas pays over $358K to end lawsuit over atheist group’s Bill of Rights ‘nativity’ scene.

Anti-trans Texas pastor arrested after paying undercover cop for sex.

World of Woo: Mercury in retrograde will disrupt all technology except social media.

Environment:  The devastating new UN report on climate change, explained.

How Jefferson and Madison shaped America’s separation of church and state.

Seeing the Light of Secular Humanism.

Why the Olympics are a ‘civil religious’ ceremony with a global congregation.

A study into the presumed link between belief in a god and good behavior. Can our capacity for moral reasoning be strengthened?

Scientists develop artificial knee cartilage that can outperform the real thing.

Might we discover the origins to life on Earth in dust from the Bennu asteroid.

Quantum Entanglement in neurons may actually explain Consciousness and why AI will never be conscious. Could it be that conscious reality is only a memory of unconscious actions?

Long Reads:  Busting 13 of the Smithsonian’s most persistent myths. Inside the Texas Crime Lab that’s solving cold cases. E = mc².

Sunday Book Club:  Liberalism as a Way of Life.

Some photographs taken last week.  Seven of the Paris Olympics’ most striking images – as classical artworks

While you are waiting for the kettle to boil……

Coffee Break Videos:  DEBATE: Is Morality Objective? – Alex O’Connor vs. Craig Biddle. Your beliefs are WRONG… here’s why.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Have a great week everyone!

[StregaModerator]

Thanks, Reg 🙂

[_Robert_Participant]

I found that article

why AI will never be conscious

less than convincing.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

DEBATE: Is Morality Objective? – Alex O’Connor vs. Craig Biddle.

The usual complete load of old tosh that you get whenever moral philosophers have discussions.  I think that no two of them agree on anything.  Their ideas are bollocks.

However, they do raise some excellent questions, and if I am going to make assertions like that, I need to have my own answers that make sense.  What does it mean to say that “murder is wrong”?  Alex O’Connor says it means “I don’t like murder”, and Craig Biddle says it’s “murder is really, factually wrong”.

It turns out that Craig Biddle, via Ayn Rand, is all over my ideas of the pressure to do the things that will allow us to thrive, survive and reproduce.  That’s the pressure to seek utilitarian value.  But moral values are different from utilitarian values, and value is different from values and a value.

Something is morally right because it is an ideal way to achieve utilitarian value according to its moral domain.  So, reciprocity, fairness, helping those in the vicinity, are all ways to achieve mutual benefit, and they are all morally right within that domain.

[_Robert_Participant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

DEBATE: Is Morality Objective? – Alex O’Connor vs. Craig Biddle.

The usual complete load of old tosh that you get whenever moral philosophers have discussions. I think that no two of them agree on anything. Their ideas are bollocks. However, they do raise some excellent questions, and if I am going to make assertions like that, I need to have my own answers that make sense. What does it mean to say that “murder is wrong”? Alex O’Connor says it means “I don’t like murder”, and Craig Biddle says it’s “murder is really, factually wrong”. It turns out that Craig Biddle, via Ayn Rand, is all over my ideas of the pressure to do the things that will allow us to thrive, survive and reproduce. That’s the pressure to seek utilitarian value. But moral values are different from utilitarian values, and value is different from values and a value. Something is morally right because it is an ideal way to achieve utilitarian value according to its moral domain. So, reciprocity, fairness, helping those in the vicinity, are all ways to achieve mutual benefit, and they are all morally right within that domain..

The big fallacy is that somehow all this morality or (lack of) cosmically matters. The memory of every single human act will disappear. A Neanderthal murdered his neighbor, or Trump has sex for money. There is no cosmic karma, the only consequences are relatively immediate or null.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

_Robert_ wrote:

There is no cosmic karma, the only consequences are relatively immediate or null.

Yes, a Christian said to me that heaven and hell must exist, otherwise there is no ultimate justice.

[jakelafortParticipant]

Yes the article about AI was sophomoric.

Yes, i have no bananas. I have no bananas today.

[UnseenParticipant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

Yes, a Christian said to me that heaven and hell must exist, otherwise there is no ultimate justice.

That is a summary of Kant’s moral proof of God’s existence. “Shit. If I eff my neighbor’s wife and never suffer for it in my lifetime, then if God isn’t there to send me to suffer forever in a burning lake of fire,” there is no justice.

Well, that makes no sense at all. So, God must exist.

Hogwash.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

The Christian idea of heaven and hell never made sense to me.  Is there some kind of binary division between good people and bad people?  No, there isn’t.  So, apparently you only get in to heaven if you believe in Jesus.  Anything else is “hating God”.  If God exists, he has the morals of a toddler.

I think heaven or hell makes sense in the context of someone being tortured by their conscience, forever, after they die.  If some people don’t have a conscience, then they aren’t tortured by what they have done wrong, and the process doesn’t work on them, and there is no ultimate justice.

Why would someone not have a conscience?  Presumably, they care about themselves exclusively and don’t see other people as important enough to care about.

[_Robert_Participant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

The Christian idea of heaven and hell never made sense to me. Is there some kind of binary division between good people and bad people? No, there isn’t. So, apparently you only get in to heaven if you believe in Jesus. Anything else is “hating God”. If God exists, he has the morals of a toddler. I think heaven or hell makes sense in the context of someone being tortured by their conscience, forever, after they die. If some people don’t have a conscience, then they aren’t tortured by what they have done wrong, and the process doesn’t work on them, and there is no ultimate justice. Why would someone not have a conscience? Presumably, they care about themselves exclusively and don’t see other people as important enough to care about.

The entire “you gotta believe” trope smacks of social control. Otherwise, this creator gives you a brain and then specifically instructs you not to use it. Right. And your simple agreement to “believe” is so important that an eternity of hellfire awaits you if you don’t. Of course, when people construct religions and want you to give up some other gods, so of course they are using that sort of scare tactic bullshit. The biblical god even tells you he is jealous of other gods. All part of the evolution of local god YHWH from his Canaanite polytheistic origins while the region was conquered by the Persian Zoroastrians, Macedonians, Romans all who influenced the still existing modern myth we call “God”.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

@jakelafort

Not sure about A.I. but I know what I do like. I am happy to share some of my bananas.

[jakelafortParticipant]

I’d be happy to pay you tuesday for a hamburger today. In the meantime i would be obliged to bum a banana or two.

[_Robert_Participant]

jakelafort wrote:

I’d be happy to pay you tuesday for a hamburger today. In the meantime i would be obliged to bum a banana or two.

Never ever bring a banana aboard a boat. This is why monkeys don’t sail.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

I think I would fell safer with a monkey at the helm rather than Mr. Magoo.

 

[Author]

Posts