Bhutto killed
- Started
- Last post
- 72 Responses
- TheBlueOne0
Gee, look a politically unstable Islamic country with nuclear weapons and fundamentalist terrorists all over the place. Glad we spent so much money and blood to make sure that wouldn't happen...
- You should shut that useless mouth of yours.JesseJensen
- nice zinger.nearestexit
- teleos0
Mikotondria: How can you not understand that humanity, compassion and kindness are qualities which cannot be explained by blind material processes, but rather are the hallmarks of intentional design and purpose?
And again, you capitalize on incidents involving religious groups and then make broad sweeping generalizations. All the while discarding those inconvenient facts about all the good that has been done in the name of "religion" throughout the centuries. You lack intellectual honesty.
Further, I have not argued for "religion" as the source of morality. I have argued that morality only makes sense within a theistic framework where an absolute and objective standard has been established. Otherwise your only other option is to accept that morality is a pragmatic necessity resulting from material processes and thus dies when the human brain dies. This is absurd.
- you can't "logic" people into believing your mumbo jumbo...mrdobolina
- Randd0
another victory for insanity
- AndyRoss0
Who killed her?
Some Muslim extremist, or one of Musharaf's hirelings? Or are they the same thing?
- mrdobolina0
I am at a loss as to how my saying all non-religious people are immoral is in any way different than what you are saying above.
- or is it that I have this morality given to my by your religion even though I choose not to accept it?mrdobolina
- TheBlueOne0
Also interesting news, from the day before her assassination:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/e…
"US to Put Troops On Ground In Pakistan"
- Ramanisky20
I cant wait until I can go to Pakistan/Afghanistan for vacation
that place looks so warm & inviting
- mikotondria20
"Also, be careful to not co-opt moral standards of "right" and "wrong" when they only have any intrinsic worth within the context of a worldview you would deny."
Copting moral standards ?
Where the hell do you get off claiming that just because you believe in one particular superstition that I do not, that this entitles you to 'own' morality ?
I am perfectly capable of examining the questions of morality and drawing my conclusions about what is right and wrong, drawn broadly along the principals of not doing something to someone that I would like to have done to me, without fooling myself and others that I believe in an unseen unprovable unevidential 'force', thank you very much.
If you're only ability to discern how you and other people should behave towards each other is the alleged 'divine' source of some perfectly and utterly 'common' sense guidelines drawn up by nomadic palestians, then Im afraid, sir, you are entirely lost in an increasingly complex world populated by a growing number of people who actually have the balls to take the responsibility for examining themselves and their behavior for themselves, and who do not submit their powers of reason and responsibility to someone else...
If the Israelites and the thousands of generations of their forebears had not done this, and worked out how we should all behave, there wouldnt have been anyone on the mount to received this so-called divine revelation of the commandments...
"Oh, it says thou shalt not kill - hadnt thought of that one, good, good - and adultery is bad you say ? Well, I guess it is, yes...stealing too ? It all makes sense now - ok - everyone who hasnt been killed, please return all the stuff you have stolen, and try to stay faithful, please - oh how much better life will be with these previously unfathomable concepts....".
- teleos0
"right" and "wrong" only have any meaning if there is an absolute standard with which to juxtapose them. Otherwise, what is right for you may not be right for me (and who is to judge?). Superstition has nothing to do with this; it is a matter of logic. The point of the argument is that right and wrong must have immaterial value and not reducable to social conventions, etc... The only other option is that they are the product of the human mind and therefore die when the human mind is gone from this earth. ie. prior to the human mind, there was no such thing as right or wrong, as this is what a materialistic framework necessitates. And therefore, such concepts are illusory and useless.
- ...and therefore something beyond blind material causes must be the originator of what we recognize as right and wrong.teleos
- yeah that thing is called societal norms. in times of war people kill, are they all heallbound?mrdobolina
- there is no absolute standardribit
- Good job, ribit. Do you mind then if we go out and rob the elderly together? I mean, it's acceptable by MY standard of right and wrong. It's a stress reliever.teleos
- mikotondria20
"absolute standard" ? What does this even mean here ?
Do you mean some kind of meta-rule by which the other rules are formed ?
And yes, it is utterly superstition to believe that the rules described as the 10 commandments (there were many others that were discarded), were dictated from a supernatural source. Its almost the definition of superstition..
"The only other option is that they are the product of the human mind and therefore die when the human mind is gone from this earth."
Yes of course they are the product of the human mind, they are abstract concepts, but being such cannot 'die' for they are not material.
But even there you confoud the issue...'gone from this earth '? Do you mean in space, on the moon, how far away from the earth do you mean ?
The meta rule for morality, I will postulate, (and it will probably sound familiar to you), is:
"Dont do something to someone else, that you wouldnt want them to do to you"...
I think that fits your idea of "what is right for you may not be right for me (and who is to judge?)".
And for that matter, we are all to judge, for we are all responsible for each other, whether we like it or not.- If such a meta rule is the product of molecules in motion, then in principle it doesn't matter what we do. Do as you please. No one may judge you.teleos
- No one is responsible to anyone else. Unless there is a universal absolute standard, I can do anything I want. In principle. This is not a difficult concept.teleos
- PonyBoy0
Inconceivable!
- ninjasavant0
its times like this I'm really disappointed in humans in general. Its also unfortunate that times like this means times like every day.
- TheBlueOne0
"Otherwise your only other option is to accept that morality is a pragmatic necessity resulting from material processes and thus dies when the human brain dies. This is absurd."
A) Not Absurd.
B) Better than believing in some all powerful supreme nanny in the sky.
C) It's what adults do, take responsibilty for their actions in the real material world where real material things can help or harm us depending on our choices. Children believe in fairies, boogie men and the dumber ones, "god".
d) stop turning every freaking discussion about political events into your lame ass religious morality crap with a side order of you r half ass psuedo science discussion and cliff notes from freshman philosophy classes.
- Yes.madirish
- Corollary: If there were no humans, would there be "morality"?TheBlueOne
- That was my point. If there is no "mind" which set an absolute standard and gave us our sense of right and wrong, then no. The illusory notion of morality dies with the human brain.
teleos
- instrmntl0
so sad (pics of her last day)
- mikotondria20
To bring it slightly back to topic, the people that killed Bhutto and themselves did so because they believed they were entitled to do so because their god said it was ok, and they believed this to be the case because someone ELSE told them that was true.
You can examine that sentence and see that their reasoning is uttely false, yet you lack the ability to turn that logic upon yourself and your own ideas on the origin or basis of morality, for to do so would reveal that such a position bears a great deal more in common with murdering fundamentalists than with the rest of the world that have to put up with them, and you, and that whereas they will murder in these cirucmstances based on their idiotic superstition, you would require a different set of circumstances to carry out acts which contraviened 'mere mortal' morality, it is simply a question of degree: you would harm someone based on nothing other than an unprovable, abstract belief in divinity, and divine purpose , or you would not, and I will fight you every inch to make sure you and the billions of other innocent people affected by this idiocy don't get near me or my family.
The sooner you all get taken up, the sooner the rest of us can get on with whatever other non-cloud-floating activities we please.- You seem to have a problem with compartmentalizing people into neat little groups that you can understand/label. Evidently, anyone who has faith in a higher being is a "murdering fundamentalist". Sounds like you might be an Atheist fundie.
It is superstitious to believe that matter produced matter and information out of nothing. Whereas an inference to a designing intelligence is logical and warranted, based on the empirical evidence. We've been over this before, don't you know.teleos - Remember, right/wrong is subjective, so you are contradicting yourself by expressing righteous indignation in defense of "innocent people".teleos
- You seem to have a problem with compartmentalizing people into neat little groups that you can understand/label. Evidently, anyone who has faith in a higher being is a "murdering fundamentalist". Sounds like you might be an Atheist fundie.
- mrdobolina0
the instability in Pakistan seems a lot more important than talking shit about Iran, no?
- mrdobolina0
bin Laden is about as relevant as prince charles, IMO.
- agreed... I was just saying it's another piece of the whole ordeal... and something that most Americans at least 'get'.PonyBoy
- mrdobolina0
everyone who is not christian is immoral, don't you get it?
- did you check hickabee's act on meet the press? particularly his spin on sin, homosexuality and abortion?
fuck that closed-minded aholeBonSeff - what is terrible is the politicization of abortion. It's not exclusively a conservative/xian standpoint that it is wrong.mikotondria2
- You are terribly thick, mrdobolina. The point you insist on missing is that there really is no such thing as morality/immorality if they are illusory products of animal brains.teleos
- everytime you insult me, baby jesus criesmrdobolina
- did you check hickabee's act on meet the press? particularly his spin on sin, homosexuality and abortion?
- teleos0
This might provide you with some perspective, mikotondria...
- http://en.wikipedia.…BonSeff
- a really interesting thing about that article is religious peeps arent "supposed" to kill anyone...mrdobolina
- while seculars make no such claim.mrdobolina
- lol. Read a book, mrdobolina. My goodness you can't even glean the point of a simple poignant article like that one!?teleos
- BonSeff: Godwin's Law applies to a comparison to Hitler. Not the listing of statistics regarding Hitler's regime. Please put your critical thinking/reading cap on and and then report back to me.teleos