07-24-2012, 08:59 PM | #41 | |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
I don't have the right to make a prospective child as healthy as I choose? I know that a child might be prone to having delusions, but I'm not allowed to reduce that chance? Do you loathe all prospective forms of preselecting sperm/ova/fetuses? Or just those that deny your beliefs on religion? I really am curious. It would determine how far back up the chain of reasons we disagree.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
|
07-24-2012, 09:05 PM | #42 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
A "positive" mental state, btw, means what it means - enjoying the taste of a good meal, the sound of a good piece of music, having a happy thought, and loads more. If these qualia are the result of purely physical processes, are they any less real? And the physical process typing this and calling itself "me" currently assigns certain value or meaning to those qualia (like "beauty"), why wouldn't that matter? Unless you have a prejudice against matter; some form of matter bigot. ;-)
__________________
-JC |
|
07-24-2012, 09:08 PM | #43 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
I'm not aware of any branch of science that would ever even have any reason to say something like "an unexplainable phenomenon has ONLY survival benefits".
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
07-24-2012, 09:09 PM | #44 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
As that is a sci-fi idea, not a real one it has less relevance. And you will not understand my shock at the idea anyway. What you can at least understand is that corpse-counting contests hinge on definitions and are therefore counterproductive.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
|
07-24-2012, 09:15 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
My point is not that evolution did not take place. My point is that it cannot be the only thing. And no branch of science would have reason to say something like that because then it would cease to be science. The implication of such assumption however is inherant in the common appeal-to-science argument of materialism which is different from science itself.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison Last edited by jason taylor; 07-24-2012 at 09:24 PM. |
|
07-24-2012, 09:17 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Seattle
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
This was a good idea. I started to write a response to other posts, but then realized that it was pointless. Much of this thread (the part that's spinning out of control) belongs elsewhere, IMO.
__________________
Seven Kingdoms, MH (as yet unnamed), and my "pick-up" DF game war stories, characters, and other ruminations can be found here. |
07-24-2012, 09:20 PM | #47 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
And the statement: "The concept of beauty in matter is incompatible with strict materialism" is not "anti-matter bigotry". Beauty is itself an immaterial quality, however beautiful a given material object is.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
|
07-24-2012, 09:22 PM | #48 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quite right. Apparently the great god Hackard at least exists. So let us mutually apologize and go off and sulk, or not sulk which is even better.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
07-24-2012, 09:26 PM | #49 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
Quote:
On the broader of point of defining entities as persons vs non-persons, that is, sadly, not a matter of theism or atheism, but of legalism, and the nature of humans in large groups. Theological arguments for and against the personhood of women have existed for a long time and across multiple religions, but most notably the Catholics of the Middle Ages. The personhood of various races has come up from time to time to justify slavery and genocide. And today, a growing global movement has begun (with some European nations, starting in Spain) with legislation extending legal personhood to the great apes. Let's hope the secular trend of moral progress continues... "The question is not, 'Can they reason?' nor, 'Can they talk?' but rather, 'Can they suffer?'" was one of the pearls of utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham. That seems like the only good universal standard for extending moral consideration to a being. With this entirely secular and rationalist moral philosophy he was a supporter of the legal rights of women, the abolition of slavery, and one of the earliest true supporters of legal protections for nonhuman animals, at a time when none of these ideas were mainstream and in fact were quite unpopular. Kicking a dog makes it show the behaviours I associate with pain, and its nervous system seems to agree. Doing that to any human has similar results. A fetus prior to a particular developmental stage? Definitely and measurably not so much; certainly not a zygote.
__________________
-JC |
|
07-24-2012, 09:27 PM | #50 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
Re: Theology Specialization: Comparative?
I concur. :-)
__________________
-JC |
Tags |
skills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|