Freethought & Rationalism Archive

NZAmoeba · 09-06-2003, 02:49 AM

Magus, we were made disobediant?

So he created us in his image, but created us flawed?

that was stupid of him.... you'd think he'd know better, and you'd think he'd know the outcome of that mistake.

BrotherMan · 09-06-2003, 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55 It refers to our personality, morality and spirituality. We are distinct from all other creatures on Earth in those regards.

We're not as unique as you think.

Quote:

There is evidence that humans are not the only animals capable of making moral decisions. As one example, below is a passage from the book Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors, written by Drs. Sagan and Druyan, about an experiment performed on macaque monkeys.

"In the annals of primate ethics, there are some accounts that have the ring of parable. In a laboratory setting, macaques were fed if they were willing to pull a chain and electrically shock an unrelated macaque whose agony was in plain view through a one-way mirror. Otherwise, they starved. After learning the ropes, the monkeys frequently refused to pull the chain; in one experiment only 13% would do so - 87% preferred to go hungry. One macaque went without food for nearly two weeks rather than hurt its fellow. Macaques who had themselves been shocked in previous experiments were even less willing to pull the chain. The relative social status or gender of the macaques had little bearing on their reluctance to hurt others.

"If asked to choose between the human experimenters offering the macaques this Faustian bargain and the macaques themselves - suffering from real hunger rather than causing pain to others-our own moral sympathies do not lie with the scientists. But their experiments permit us to glimpse in non-humans a saintly willingness to make sacrifices in order to save others - even those who are not close kin. By conventional human standards, these macaques - who have never gone to Sunday school, never heard of the Ten Commandments, never squirmed through a single junior high school civics lesson - seem exemplary in their moral grounding and their courageous resistance to evil. Among these macaques, at least in this case, heroism is the norm.

"If the circumstances were reversed, and captive humans were offered the same deal by macaque scientists, would we do as well? (Especially when there is an authority figure urging us to administer the electric shocks, we humans are disturbingly willing to cause pain - and for a reward much more paltry than food is for a starving macaque[cf. Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental Overview].) In human history there are a precious few whose memory we revere because they knowingly sacrificed themselves for others. For each of them, there are multitudes who did nothing."

Link

Stanley Milgram

Hopeful Monsters · 09-06-2003, 03:44 AM

Do you at last see the light now Magus55? - you have the morality of a macaque.

winstonjen · 09-06-2003, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TruthIsTold
Do you at last see the light now Magus55? - you have the morality of a macaque.

No, GAWD does. And it's the 13% of them too. The milk of religious 'morality' has gone off. It stinks.

crocodile deathroll · 09-06-2003, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Demigawd
But it does mention using the appendix as spare parts in replacement surgery.

God: I'll put this organ in man to kill him for 6,000 years until he learns to cut it out and use it as a sphincter.

Hi Demigawd

A little off topic now, I just found this little bit of trivia you may be interested in on the Scientific American's ask the expert

Quote:

Although scientists have long discounted the human appendix as a vestigial organ, there is a growing body of evidence indicating that the appendix does in fact have a significant function as a part of the body�s immune system. The appendix may be particularly important early in life because it achieves its greatest development shortly after birth and then regresses with age,

premjan · 09-06-2003, 07:26 AM

tonsils isn't it?

The tonsils also have this tendency to get inflamed and need removal. The tonsils are not considered vestigial, although not entirely essential.

09-06-2003, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sophie
Simultaneous creation : Man and woman at the same time.

Correct, "male and female he created them" which is neither male nor female but man with the potential to become either male or female. I think that man is the neuter form, woman the effeminate and human the masculine. Our human-ity and our woman-ity are attributes that belong to the being but are not the being itself or they could not be attributes.

crocodile deathroll · 09-06-2003, 06:00 PM

Also if man looks on god in his own image then this god would also have a rectum and as such he must shit. What other function would it serve? And if he shits he must eat; what does he eat? This implies something existed before god like a food supply of fish of crops of wheat for this anthroporphic god to exist. This is a real paradox for theists isn't it? Who planted the wheat and who bred the fish for god to eat?

CDR

Goober · 09-06-2003, 09:36 PM

It's the most retarded thing ever. God supposedly is omnipresent and exists outside of time and our physical universe, yet he looks like us. What does a being who is timeless and non-physical do with a mouth, or arms, or legs??? Is he omnipresent but needs to walk anyway?

Just the fact that anyone discusses what god looks like shows that god is physical. Seeing involves the detection of photons reflected from an object - clearly this can only happen if the object is physical, and only if the object has a well defined set of spatial coordinates, otherwise could you discuss what a being that is everywhere at once looks like?

The only conclusion you can make is that humans designed the idea of god in their image, otherwise it's just ridiculous.

09-06-2003, 07:26 AM	#66
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	appendix is similar in function to the tonsils isn't it? The tonsils also have this tendency to get inflamed and need removal. The tonsils are not considered vestigial, although not entirely essential.

09-06-2003, 06:00 PM	#68
crocodile deathroll Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Darwin Posts: 1,466	God must shit Also if man looks on god in his own image then this god would also have a rectum and as such he must shit. What other function would it serve? And if he shits he must eat; what does he eat? This implies something existed before god like a food supply of fish of crops of wheat for this anthroporphic god to exist. This is a real paradox for theists isn't it? Who planted the wheat and who bred the fish for god to eat? CDR

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-06-2003, 02:49 AM	#61
NZAmoeba Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Zealand Posts: 478	Magus, we were made disobediant? So he created us in his image, but created us flawed? that was stupid of him.... you'd think he'd know better, and you'd think he'd know the outcome of that mistake.

09-06-2003, 03:44 AM	#63
Hopeful Monsters Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: God is a Mind Loop Posts: 1,344	*Do you at last see the light now Magus55? - you have the morality of a macaque.*

09-06-2003, 09:36 PM	#69
Goober Veteran Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Adelaide, Australia Posts: 1,202	It's the most retarded thing ever. God supposedly is omnipresent and exists outside of time and our physical universe, yet he looks like us. What does a being who is timeless and non-physical do with a mouth, or arms, or legs??? Is he omnipresent but needs to walk anyway? Just the fact that anyone discusses what god looks like shows that god is physical. Seeing involves the detection of photons reflected from an object - clearly this can only happen if the object is physical, and only if the object has a well defined set of spatial coordinates, otherwise could you discuss what a being that is everywhere at once looks like? The only conclusion you can make is that humans designed the idea of god in their image, otherwise it's just ridiculous.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.