Science of Morality

[Tassman]

No Tass, that is why I asked - what would a "natural" universe look like compared to a universe that did not have a natural source. You had no answer.

But I did answer. The universe we live in is by definition, the natural universe. If you choose to believe in a universe that

Again Tass no, one of your main arguments against the possibility of LFW was the fact that we live in a deterministic universe - just admit that we don't and we can move on.

And of course you again did not answer the main question: When one group of male chimps kills another group of male chimps and take their females and territory how are the morally responsible?

a deity?

And I'm not sure what is "sad" about what ISIS is doing - they are only doing what nature determined them to do. Is it "sad" when a large fish eats a smaller fish?

How do you know that? What would you compare it to?

To the best of our knowledge there's nothing to compare the 'natural universe' to, it simply "is".

[seer]

But I did answer. The universe we live in is by definition, the natural universe. If you choose to believe in a universe that

No Tass, it is not natural by definition, since that definition is completely arbitrary. So I will ask again, what would a "natural" universe look like compared to a universe that did not have a natural source?



Nonsense Tass, one of you main arguments against any form of freedom was because we live in a deterministic universe. But that claim is false, we don't.

a deity?

What? Now you say we and the apes have control over what we do? So the ISIS killers were not determined to kill, and the chimp was not determined to eat the banana? You are not making sense Tass.


But they are only doing what they were determined to, and what is wrong with tribalism if it has survival value?

To the best of our knowledge there's nothing to compare the 'natural universe' to, it simply "is".

I'm still waiting for you to support your faith that this universe was created by a natural source with actual evidence.

[Tassman]

No Tass, it is not natural by definition, since that definition is completely arbitrary. So I will ask again, what would a "natural" universe look like compared to a universe that did not have a natural source?

still waiting!

Nonsense Tass, one of you main arguments against any form of freedom was because we live in a deterministic universe. But that claim is false, we don't.

we have the illusion

What? Now you say we and the apes have control over what we do? So the ISIS killers were not determined to kill, and the chimp was not determined to eat the banana? You are not making sense Tass.

really

But they are only doing what they were determined to,

and what is wrong with tribalism if it has survival value?

I'm still waiting for you to support your faith that this universe was created by a natural source with actual evidence.

only substantive evidence we have of ANY

[seer]

The natural universe would look exactly like the universe in which we live.

How do you KNOW that, as compared to what?

we have the illusion

Are you doing this on purpose? This has nothing to do with LFW, yet - I just want you to admit we do not live in a deterministic universe.


So the Chimp was not determined to eat the banana?


Nonsense, how do you know that? You are just making stuff up now. If ISIS takes the world, they win.

only substantive evidence we have of ANY

Then where is your evidence that a natural force gave rise to this universe?

[Tassman]

How do you KNOW that, as compared to what?

Are you doing this on purpose? This has nothing to do with LFW, yet - I just want you to admit we do not live in a deterministic universe.

So the Chimp was not determined to eat the banana?

Nonsense, how do you know that? You are just making stuff up now. If ISIS takes the world, they win.

Whether this will enhance the survival of the species, which is what it's all about, is another question.

Then where is your evidence that a natural force gave rise to this universe?

[seer]

Right, and you have no idea if this universe is the result of a naturalistic cause or not. To say it is "natural" is begging the question.



No Tass, you are just avoiding. My only point in this discussion is whether the universe is deterministic or not -



So our mental events are deterministic, and we have no control over what we think, do or believe? The chimp is determined to eat the banana as ISIS is determined to kill.

Whether this will enhance the survival of the species, which is what it's all about, is another question.

Right, and you can never really know if it has an overall survival value.



No Tass, you are the one who first demanded "evidence." Evidence that you do not even have for your position. That is call a double standard bro...

[JimL]

How do you know that? What would you compare it to?

Seer, we can't know, because there is nothing we can compare it to, and there is no evidence that there is anything else for which to compare it to. But all we do know about existence is that everything that does exists, exists within its cause, emerges from that cause, and is of the same substance as its cause. This we know by observation. Your argument denies this, your claim is that there is a distinct agency that creates things out of nothing, that thinks matter into existence where there once was no matter, but you have no evidence to back up your claim. In other words, your argument isn't reasonable.

[seer]

and is of the same substance as its cause. This we know by observation.

Prove that.

[JimL]

Prove that.

I said that all we "know" of, all that we can observe, of that which exists is of one and the same substance. What is there to prove? Do you "know" of, have you observed the existence of another substance? I know that you believe and argue for the existence of the supernatural and spirits and all that, and that the one substance, the supernatural, can create the other, the natural, out of nothing, but you don't "know" that, you haven't ever observed that, and you have no evidence of that.

[Tassman]

Right, and you have no idea if this universe is the result of a naturalistic cause or not. To say it is "natural" is begging the question.

No Tass, you are just avoiding. My only point in this discussion is whether the universe is deterministic or not -

So our mental events are deterministic, and we have no control over what we think, do or believe? The chimp is determined to eat the banana as ISIS is determined to kill.

Right, and you can never really know if it has an overall survival value.

If not then Homo sapiens, like most species before us, will become extinct.

No Tass, you are the one who first demanded "evidence." Evidence that you do not even have for your position. That is call a double standard bro...

[seer]

I said that all we "know" of, all that we can observe, of that which exists is of one and the same substance. What is there to prove? Do you "know" of, have you observed the existence of another substance? I know that you believe and argue for the existence of the supernatural and spirits and all that, and that the one substance, the supernatural, can create the other, the natural, out of nothing, but you don't "know" that, you haven't ever observed that, and you have no evidence of that.

No Jim, you said what caused this universe was of the same substance. I asked you to prove that.

[seer]

Then prove that this universe can rightly be called "natural" by giving evidence of a natural source.



And one of your main arguments against LFW has been because we live in a deterministic universe. Do you agree that we don't live in a deterministic universe - yes or no?


Tass, if all my decisions are formed by antecedent conditions then how is my choice not inevitable?

If not then Homo sapiens, like most species before us, will become extinct.

Right, so the ISIS mindset may actually have survival value. Therefore would be "good."


What does that have to do with anything? This is exactly what one would expect from a rational God, a God who thinks and acts logically, with order. We live in an intelligible universe because there is an intelligence behind it. What is behind your universe Tass - the non-rational?

And you still have not produced one lick of evidence demonstrating that this is a "natural" universe, i.e. had a natural source.

[JimL]

No Jim, you said what caused this universe was of the same substance. I asked you to prove that.

No i didn't seer. Go back and read it again. I said that we can't know. But I said that "everything that we do know" everything we can observe, shows that causes and there effects are of one and the same substance, that effects exist in their cause, and causes in their effects. I can't know that the same is true for the material world as a whole, I can't know that it didn't come from nothing as you suggest that it did. But you have no evidence for this, and there is no reason to believe it. There is no reason to believe that anything comes from nothing.

[Tassman]

Then prove that this universe can rightly be called "natural" by giving evidence of a natural source.

non-natural universe.

And one of your main arguments against LFW has been because we live in a deterministic universe. Do you agree that we don't live in a deterministic universe - yes or no?

Tass, if all my decisions are formed by antecedent conditions then how is my choice not inevitable?

Right, so the ISIS mindset may actually have survival value. Therefore would be "good."

What does that have to do with anything? This is exactly what one would expect from a rational God, a God who thinks and acts logically, with order. We live in an intelligible universe because there is an intelligence behind it. What is behind your universe Tass - the non-rational?

And you still have not produced one lick of evidence demonstrating that this is a "natural" universe, i.e. had a natural source.

Why do you assume it had a source at all, that it hasn't always existed in one form or another?

[seer]

No i didn't seer. Go back and read it again. I said that we can't know. But I said that "everything that we do know" everything we can observe, shows that causes and there effects are of one and the same substance, that effects exist in their cause, and causes in their effects. I can't know that the same is true for the material world as a whole, I can't know that it didn't come from nothing as you suggest that it did. But you have no evidence for this, and there is no reason to believe it. There is no reason to believe that anything comes from nothing.

OK, I misunderstood you then.