Debates
13 Sep 11
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by TeinosukeYour emotions are nothing more than an ebb and flow of chemicals.
Why do I care? Because I'm conscious and feel emotions. Why don't asteroids care? Because they're not and don't.
I don't find that the fact that I believe the universe and the human race to be the accidental product of chance forces in any way prevents me from caring about my own happiness and fulfillment during the rest of my life, or the happiness and ...[text shortened]... have relationships with people that will matter to them and that will outlive them in turn.
Mankind seemingly has some innate inclination to believe in gods, to think they're more valuable than animals, to show favoritism toward those that look most similar to themselves, but the thinking man strives to overcome these illogical inclinations.
Since we know we're nothing more than chemicals that proceed through a combination of random physical events constrained within laws of nature, shouldn't we also strive to overcome our inclination to prefer life to death, or the prosperity of our close friends and relatives over their death. What is logical about a bunch of atoms caring about the configuration they find themselves in? If we truly want to progress, we should strive for complete indifference as to whether man survives or becomes extinct.
What does it even mean for someone to "matter to you"? That's just an emerging chemical arrangement caused by some sort of fond familiarity, but can we assign any value to something like is just a special blend of chemicals?
Originally posted by techsouthIt's staggeringly irrelevant as to what the cause of my emotions is. Why shouldn't we value an emotional bond, even if in origin it's "just" a special blend of chemicals? We value it because we value the emotion in itself, regardless of its cause. A book is just an arrangement of words on a page, but that doesn't prevent me valuing Anna Karenina about Harry Potter.
Your emotions are nothing more than an ebb and flow of chemicals.
Mankind seemingly has some innate inclination to believe in gods, to think they're more valuable than animals, to show favoritism toward those that look most similar to themselves, but the thinking man strives to overcome these illogical inclinations.
Since we know we're nothing more t arity, but can we assign any value to something like is just a special blend of chemicals?
It's not usually materialists who suggest we should strive to overcome our inclination to prefer life to death, but religious people - Zen Buddhists, for instance, or Muslim fanatics.
The thinking man strives to overcome illogical influences that appear to be destructive, such as, say, blind patriotism that causes wars, or religious sentiments that cause bigotry. The thinking man does not seek to dispense with emotions that appear to be profitable and enriching, such as compassion and love.
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by Teinosukewell said
It's staggeringly irrelevant as to what the cause of my emotions is. Why shouldn't we value an emotional bond, even if in origin it's "just" a special blend of chemicals? We value it because we value the emotion in itself, regardless of its cause. A book is just an arrangement of words on a page, but that doesn't prevent me valuing Anna Karenina about Harr ...[text shortened]... se with emotions that appear to be profitable and enriching, such as compassion and love.
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by TeinosukeBut if it brings me inner peace to start a war, why shouldn't I? If I enjoy being a bigot, why shouldn't I be that?
It's staggeringly irrelevant as to what the cause of my emotions is. Why shouldn't we value an emotional bond, even if in origin it's "just" a special blend of chemicals? We value it because we value the emotion in itself, regardless of its cause. A book is just an arrangement of words on a page, but that doesn't prevent me valuing Anna Karenina about Harr ...[text shortened]... se with emotions that appear to be profitable and enriching, such as compassion and love.
What does it hurt if a bunch of cohesive units of carbon change forms from what we call "human" to something more like worms and bacteria? Aren't they just other carbon arrangements of no more or less value?
And how do I assign even a modicum of value to your emotions? I can easily write a computer program that will output over and over the words "I love Harry Potter". I have no conclusive reason to believe that your output has any more meaning.
(In case it's not obvious, I'm playing the devils advocate here).
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by techsouthWell, if you're merely playing devil's advocate, maybe you should stop! As a reply would basically involve repetition, I think that's what I'm going to do for now...
But if it brings me inner peace to start a war, why shouldn't I? If I enjoy being a bigot, why shouldn't I be that?
What does it hurt if a bunch of cohesive units of carbon change forms from what we call "human" to something more like worms and bacteria? Aren't they just other carbon arrangements of no more or less value?
And how do I assign even a ...[text shortened]... any more meaning.
(In case it's not obvious, I'm playing the devils advocate here).
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by TeinosukeI think the question remains for those who subscribe to the cosmic accident theory. I consider myself to be playing the devil's advocate because I don't buy the cosmic accident theory, not because I think you can find meaning in a bunch of chemicals.
Well, if you're merely playing devil's advocate, maybe you should stop! As a reply would basically involve repetition, I think that's what I'm going to do for now...
16 Sep 11
Originally posted by techsouthWhy did you choose to ignore my last response then?
I think the question remains for those who subscribe to the cosmic accident theory. I consider myself to be playing the devil's advocate because I don't buy the cosmic accident theory, not because I think you can find meaning in a bunch of chemicals.