7thangel

posted by Shadowyman:

7thangel:
IMHO, you actually have no intellectual integrity. Please correct me if I am not laying down properly what you mean.

To simplify, you believe that the final arbiter is the laws governing all physical things. My understanding is that the laws about physical things are fixed. Thus man, no matter how complicated it’s make as a physical being, has a fix collective reaction dependent on the make of it’s physical nature. And that thinking does not really exist in him, for he does not differ from the Deep Blue computer who could beat in the game of chess the amateur chess players whom I may not even have chance to defeat in chess. So in reality, everything is just a process and that all things happen on the dictate of the laws of physical things. In this estate, neither you nor I can change one of the other for our interaction with each other is dependent and fixed on the physical nature of our being. So in the end, no such intellectual integrity exists. For our existence, together with our actions, is just a product of complex physical reaction of physical things.

Base from what I stated above, from your point of view, there is therefore no good and evil that exists. So when the earth existed and filled with living creatures, and then with humans, all these things are a process of constant reaction of the physical things. And that we just can say that it happened, and that is it.

To all who responded:
Thanks, please bear with me if I am slow. But will surely post my responses.

God Bless,
NILO

xeren

How surprising. The truth comes out. Intelectual integrity, to 7thangel means "morals". This is now an "atheists can't have morals" thread.

Well, first 7thangel, please make the connection for me between determinism and a lack of intelectual integrity, or morals. I'm just not seeing it.

And second, humans have found cures for all sorts of diseases, walked on the moon, and create machines that make ridiculous amounts of calculations per second, all without the help of a god, but you seem to be suggesting that we aren't smart enough to realize that murder, rape, theft, and so on, are bad for our society. I repectfully disagree.

And what if that IS it? There is nothing that says that that can't be it, except your intense need for there to be something more. Have you ever thought about that?

-xeren

Mr. Sammi

Intellectual implies Knowledge which implies Information. To have intellectual integrity there must be integrity in your knowledge which means integrity in your information and in the way you process this information. The implication also exists in the manner in which your intellect is derived from your knowledge, that is whether it is skewed or not.

All this should have no implication on whether you are a believer or NOT. All brains work the same. It is the mind which matters.


Sammi Na Boodie ()

Shadowy Man

I'm sorry that you chose to interpret what I said this way, because I don't believe that to be true.

You are not.

The context in which I stated that the universe is the final arbiter was in the sense of what I believe. I meant that if someone says to believe "X happens" but I have never seen X happen, nor can I come up with any reason to believe that X happens, nor can I come up with any mechanism that could cause X to happen, all of this based on my observations of the universe around me and the way that it works, it would be a lack of intellectual integrity for me to believe that X happens.


I don't know how you get to all of this, but I don't see that it is really related to your initial question. If you state that "thinking does not really exist" then what possible meaning can "intellectual integrity" have? I would disagree with the idea that thinking does not exist.

Well, I thought the original question was about intellectual integrity, not morality.

But you are correct. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist in any absolute, independent-of-human-morality sense. "Good" and "Evil" are moral judgements, not direct observations of physical attributes of the universe. However, the existence of good and bad in society is wholly consistent with my observations of the universe around me.

I tend not to be too verbose on this bulletin board, which may explain why my thoughts aren't fully understood by some.

Mr. Sammi

When one uses a particular system of beliefs to construct ones knowledge and intellect then a philosopher can say that the information (perceptive understanding) is biased towards the system of beliefs. This is true in the case of believers and non-believers, each bias their knowledge and intellect because of their beliefs.

*I can add here that beliefs can be rewritten like a mathematical equation to be a system of understanding, a system of comprehension.

Using this system of understanding, the knowledge created from information will be biased because of the same said understanding and biased towards the understanding.

The integrity of the knowledge becomes, how true one is to ones understanding, or how correctly one applies ones bias. The logical implication of this is the believer can achieve intellectual integrity and still be diametrically opposed to the non-believer (atheist) who also has intellectual integrity.


This is why we sane people in this world, try to PRY the two apart. The two should not argue BUT should share their views and the reasons for their views with perhaps the bias which allowed then to construct such a view. Basically it devolves into the not1ofUS theory which excludes all else due to the bais embedded. This is the 1ofUS bias.


Sammi Na Boodie ()

*edited to undo thinking ahead of typing.

7thangel

To Jayjay:

In my opinion, anyone who ignore reality has no intellectual ability, thus lacking integrity in almost everything. For those who responded with this same conviction I surely agree with them. But as I pointed out on my respond unto Shadowyman, the laws governing physical things lies the foundation of his intellect. And in the end, in reality, our common notion of what intellect is all about is not present in him. I wish you did get the idea I am going into.


To AnthonyAdams45:

You are right, wisdom as it is rest our integrity. The reason of the way I made up my response to Shadowyman’s is to cut some unnecessary discussion, and to focus on what really I intend to. My focus is not to be personal but to understand of what we really understand of how the intellect really works. I am not asking about integrity in applying the intellect, but rather the integrity of one’s intellect itself.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I believe in science. And everything I said on my respond unto Shadowyman is scientific. And I, in fact, believe them. So I understand that the intellect that is a product of science is nothing but vanity, actually meaningless. Thus I believe that the force that directs me to a goal, calling it wisdom, to make things meaningful and purposeful, is not really subject unto the physical laws.


To lunachik:

I do believe that atheist have integrity, and that they are sincere and honest. But I believe there is a difference when you lack intellect, no matter how sincere you are and trying to be honest. I am not about proving personal trust and honesty. It is about really knowing what we are talking about. The way I point out why Shadowyman lack intellectual integrity is based on science, which I myself believe as true even to me as a physical being. Thus I stated in my initial post that wisdom is not subject to the laws of physics; I knew that if my intellect is due to physics, then my intellect has no intellectual integrity. I guess that is supposed I should have had said. But I was thinking that some might answer differently. Indeed many answered differently, and I have to admit that I did not have a lucid question. So things did not go as I was expecting.

But just in case you come to understand what really is going in my mind through my responses, then let us move on.


To all:

Just in case I have not responded yet, is because I am very busy. I am actually encouraged by your sincere and meaningful responses. But I guess you have to have more patience of me. Thanks.

NILO.

AnthonyAdams45

Why? If it leads to vanity, why believe in it? Wouldn't it be wiser to avoid and mistrust something which leads to vanity?

xeren

7thangel,

Please explain why this is true, and how I might go about procuring intellectual integrity.

-xeren

Shadowy Man

I guess I don't have to worry about intellectual integrity since I don't even have an intellect!!

NialScorva

I'm sorry, we're not going to have a thread that even slightly *appears* to be a "athiests have no justification for morality" thread in philosophy. The roullette wheel of acceptible forums landed on Moral Foundations.