Are any of you interested in moral philosophy?
Yes I am interested in the subject and particularly how science can contribute to informing one’s morality.
@Morganfreeman No, meaning that I would like to have an objective morality to respond to people that say morality is whatever you want it to be. I think that perhaps science could be one such contributor to the body of knowledge which could inform the formation of a moral theory. Admittedly, I don’t know much about moral philosophy so hence why I am interested.
Currently, I don’t have an argument against that and it seriously bothers me. I don’t like the idea that the far right attempt to use IQ measures to support statements like “white people are superior because they tend to have higher IQs on average” which if you go by that measure, then Asians are really “the superior race”.Of course there are scientific explanations why neither of these conclusions are valid( one of which being that IQ isn’t an accurate measure of overall intelligence anyway), but often you need to make moral arguments to convince ideologies of any strip.
As far as your comments related to the creation of men’s bending medications or nano tech goes, what are you talking about? To my knowledge, Da Vinci never dabbled in any type of medicine. Also, how exactly does nanotechnology play I to mind control?
Morality has been philosophized to death. There’s not much to it. Find a balance among individual, family, village, and society well being. Obviously that balance is not absolute or static.
A teaching attributed to Jesus that I like is this: Don’t follow the rules because they are so written and you are trying to be a good person to win favor, avoid punishment, or to enhance your ego. Let your actions be governed by love, love brought on by personal awareness, appreciation, and gratitude for life in a mind-boggling reality. Jesus didn’t put it just that way of course—I’m having to help him out a bit with his phrasing. Following that advice will give you great flexibility in deciding how to act.
OK, another jebus scriptural interpretation.
Of course. I think one of the nice things about being an atheist is trying make sense of morality. I a bit anarchistic myself but I read Marx, Trotsky, Ambergen, etc. My favorite thing was from Vonnegut, however, in his semi - autobiography, when he was talking about Jesus and why Jesus would do "good." Basically the idea is that Jesus wouldn't have the motivation of trying to get to an afterlife, that an appropriate imitation of Christ is a non - religious one. We do good because we should. That doing good is, for its own sake, the thing we should do. I could on about the philosophy which backs that up, and we could argue about what "good" actually is, but I think, short form, Kurt's right.
Not really, living in a civil society shouldn't be complicated.