To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 6266
6265  |  6267
Subject: 
Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:05:05 GMT
Viewed: 
306 times
  
Christopher Weeks wrote:

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:

Maybe I missed it, but what's free will? That's never made sense to me. I
don't really believe in what I think it is.

I think it the freedom to exert some control over how you biochemically react
to stimuli.  The opposite is to assume we're part of a complex chemical
reaction racing forward into the future and what we do, as a product of that
reaction, doesn't matter since it is inevitable.  All my logic suggests the
latter is true, that is that we have no free will and that it's all a farce,
but I see no benefit in accepting that.

Taking this tack, why the heck would it matter if you ate meat or not, and why
would eating meat be evil, if nothing we do matters to the total reaction?




But the nature of morality is the central issue in some ways.  One thing that
is uncomfortable for many people is the idea that morality is just a feeling
and thus is different from person to person.

It is, though "generally", there are some "universal" morals that "most" humans
tend to agree on.


I think that many people would
say that the actualization of (im)moral behavior varies from person to person,
but that morality is immutable.

Personally, I waver.  I feel and think different things.  I feel very moral --
as mentioned previously I enjoy taking the moral high ground -- but I also
think that morals are just made up ideas (like the ten commandments) to keep
society in line and productive.

Wow, something we CAN agree on!


--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
 
(...) react (...) Well, that's a perfect example of why I don't take that tack. Even if it's true, we don't gain by accepting no free will. And if it's wrong, we lose a _huge_ amount (like everything that humanity is) by assuming the contrary (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
 
(...) I think it the freedom to exert some control over how you biochemically react to stimuli. The opposite is to assume we're part of a complex chemical reaction racing forward into the future and what we do, as a product of that reaction, doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 3-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

10 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR