---

this is fucking retarded. i want to slap this guy

---

This is exactly like that annoying "Questions to Christians" thing, but a billion times less annoying. That coming from an Atheist.

Post edited at 11:33 am on Aug. 29, 2008 by ErnestoTheTrippyOne

-------
If dogs could talk, this is what he'd say.

2nd: We're here to reproduce, just like any other species. End of story.

3rd: They have been developed over hundreds of years, to keep us civilized and and so we don't kill each other.

4th: We're pack animals at heart. Look at wolves. They do the same thing. We work together. Bears will kill eachother, because they are not pack animals.

5th: There was no "signature" before hand. We have no bulls eye to hit.


-------
In a world where the broken dance
on shards of glass

1) No, I am not. "God of the gaps" occurs when we say "we don't know, so god did it." Theories regarding the emergence of life on earth were not established by saying "we don't know how this happened, so it was random." They were established via empirical observation.

2) I don't claim to know things that I cannot.

3) Appeal to consequences. The fact that one might not like the consequences of morality derived from evolutionary biopsychology is in no way a refutation of evolutionary biopsychology. I think that it's also important (in order to avoid the naturalistic fallacy) to draw a distinction between inherent moral feelings and ethics, which fulfills the prescriptive demands that the video seeks.

4) Lol. Learn how Darwinian evolution works. Natural selection does not require awareness of the evolutionary process.

5) Yes.

Well that was a waste of my time.

-------
If you have a problem with hedonism, you're probably not doing it right.

---

this is fucking retarded. i want to slap this guy

---

Post edited at 11:35 am on Aug. 29, 2008 by Forever Angel

-------
"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein
"God does play dice" - Stephen Hawking

Pectus Pectoris Memor

---

Appeal to consequences. The fact that one might not like the consequences of morality derived from evolutionary biopsychology is in no way a refutation of evolutionary biopsychology. I think that it's also important (in order to avoid the naturalistic fallacy) to draw a distinction between inherent moral feelings and ethics, which fulfills the prescriptive demands that the video seeks.

---

This is unrelated to the video, but I think this point also works for a conversation about free will in the context of the Christian sense of an afterlife. But that's unrelated, so I won't start that discussion here.

-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after

2. the second question neatly avoids the obvious counter to it; then where did god come from? if we can't just say that the universe just exists, why can theists say that god "just exists?"

3. i don't see morality in the way that he does, so i'm not really sure why i have to answer that. morality and ethics are relative.

4. read the selfish gene. morality is a manifestation of reciprocal altruism. and then of course there mutations. there's all about morality to study and explore and the bible and religion certainly don't have the answers.

5. could be probability. universe is a huge place. still doesn't explain where god came from, if he's so complex.

moreover atheistic belief system what the fuck

Post edited at 11:49 am on Aug. 29, 2008 by Praise the Lard

-------
cuz i'm feelin for him what he's feelin for me

---

Quote: from Wilder at 2:33 pm on Aug. 29, 2008

---

Appeal to consequences. The fact that one might not like the consequences of morality derived from evolutionary biopsychology is in no way a refutation of evolutionary biopsychology. I think that it's also important (in order to avoid the naturalistic fallacy) to draw a distinction between inherent moral feelings and ethics, which fulfills the prescriptive demands that the video seeks.

---

This is unrelated to the video, but I think this point also works for a conversation about free will in the context of the Christian sense of an afterlife. But that's unrelated, so I won't start that discussion here.

---

Appeals to consequence occur quite a bit in free will debates of all kinds, lol. Every time someone "rebuts" hard determinism by noting that its implications on responsibility I want to thrust my head through a wall. But yeah, other topic, other thread.

-------
If you have a problem with hedonism, you're probably not doing it right.

---

Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 12:36 pm on Aug. 29, 2008

---

Quote: from Wilder at 2:33 pm on Aug. 29, 2008

---

Appeal to consequences. The fact that one might not like the consequences of morality derived from evolutionary biopsychology is in no way a refutation of evolutionary biopsychology. I think that it's also important (in order to avoid the naturalistic fallacy) to draw a distinction between inherent moral feelings and ethics, which fulfills the prescriptive demands that the video seeks.

---

 

 This is unrelated to the video, but I think this point also works for a conversation about free will in the context of the Christian sense of an afterlife. But that's unrelated, so I won't start that discussion here.

---

Appeals to consequence occur quite a bit in free will debates of all kinds, lol. Every time someone "rebuts" hard determinism by noting that its implications on responsibility I want to thrust my head through a wall. But yeah, other topic, other thread.

---

lol butts

-------
cuz i'm feelin for him what he's feelin for me