Would You Die For Atheism

[pantheory]

10 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I think dying for your principles can actually be a gain. Bk, it depends if you see life as valuable no matter what, or only a type of life. So if you think hypocritical life is worse than death, than death spares you a whole deal of suffering.

      Plus you might think of the next genneration and that prefer death overvan injust life can hel bring about just life for others.

 

I guess there could be a rationale for some, but I think life is too precious to give it up for atheism just on principles. As I have said before, I would give up my immortal soul for a six pack of beer, but IMO I wouldn't really be giving up anything, and would be gaining a lot

 

[midniterider]

You're either with Lord Athe, or you're against him. 

[Myrkhoos]

7 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

Your going way out there on this one. The OP was implying the Christian mentality of dying for christ. And asking if we would die for athiesm. And my answer is still NO. I would deny athiesm just as Peter supposedly denied christ so he wouldn't be nailed to the cross beside him. That is within the context of the OP. Asking if I would rape my mother to live isnt in context in my opinion.

 

I could just as easily give a more deranged scenario for you to answer. If a group of psychopaths was going to gang rape your children if you didn't rape your mother. What would you do?

 

See? We can go way out there but thats not the context of the OP.

Well, you pointed out a probl with the OP then. Dying for atheism is too vague bk you do not know the alternative. 

        And atheism is too vague as well. Atheism does mean lack of belief in an afterlife. It is just lack of belief in disembodied minds with great powers. I added the great powers bk god is used for a powerful disembodied mind, not your ordinary ghosts. Altough one coukd say giants are embodied minds. Etc.

       Christians denied Christ bk most thought crypto christianity was a sin worthy of hell. Not all.  And martyrdom wirth heaven. And other reasons too. 

      So the opening question is too vague. Atheism or..what? The other option should be presented. There are gangs that ask for murder in exchange for becoming a full member. As an example. So any scenario goes, then. Even the one you presented.

      And to your question. I wouldn't, because I don t trust psychopaths to actually fulfill their promise even IF I did what they say. Plus this is one of the situations where I lean towards a deontology approach. Some things you don't do, no matter the consequences. I tend to mix consequentalist, deontological and virtue ethics in my day to day decisions. 

       

[Myrkhoos]

2 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

I guess there could be a rationale for some, but I think life is too precious to give it up for atheism just on principles. As I have said before, I would give up my immortal soul for a six pack of beer, but IMO I wouldn't really be giving up anything, and would be gaining a lot

 

I think we disagree here. I don't think life is that precious, or valuable :)).

   On a serious note, nowadays I lean heavily towards antinatalism. 

[Myrkhoos]

But, if it's just go to church on sunfay morning or die, of course I would go to church on Sunday. At least for a while :))

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

16 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

Well, you pointed out a probl with the OP then. Dying for atheism is too vague bk you do not know the alternative. 

        And atheism is too vague as well. Atheism does mean lack of belief in an afterlife. It is just lack of belief in disembodied minds with great powers. I added the great powers bk god is used for a powerful disembodied mind, not your ordinary ghosts. Altough one coukd say giants are embodied minds. Etc.

       Christians denied Christ bk most thought crypto christianity was a sin worthy of hell. Not all.  And martyrdom wirth heaven. And other reasons too. 

      So the opening question is too vague. Atheism or..what? The other option should be presented. There are gangs that ask for murder in exchange for becoming a full member. As an example. So any scenario goes, then. Even the one you presented.

      And to your question. I wouldn't, because I don t trust psychopaths to actually fulfill their promise even IF I did what they say. Plus this is one of the situations where I lean towards a deontology approach. Some things you don't do, no matter the consequences. I tend to mix consequentalist, deontological and virtue ethics in my day to day decisions. 

       

 

I think when it comes to scenarios like you suggested, at this point, I would have to take the stance @mwc has taken. I really don't know what I would do until the gun was pointed at my head. 

[Myrkhoos]

1 minute ago, DarkBishop said:

 

I think when it comes to scenarios like you suggested, at this point, I would have to take the stance @mwc has taken. I really don't know what I would do until the gun was pointed at my head. 

Understood. And good point.:)

[pantheory]

22 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I think we disagree here. I don't think life is that precious, or valuable :)).

   On a serious note, nowadays I lean heavily towards antinatalism. 

 

Wow, against human procreation, or just against your own procreation? Yeah, to me, life is all that we have, and IMO you shouldn't throw away the only thing that you really have.

[Myrkhoos]

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

 

Wow, against human procreation, or just against your own procreation? Yeah, to me, life is all that we have, and IMO you shouldn't throw away the only thing that you really have.

All human procreation. The David benatar argument. Life is more suffering than pleasure, so not bringing new life in the world means less suffering. The fact that life is all we have does not mean it is valuable though. The only property you have might be a pair of socks with holes, does not make them valuable or worth keeping. Plus I don t think "we" "have" life. There is no "owner" of life. That seems more like social construction to me. Life just exists. It is not owned. There is no pantheory with a bag full of life. There is no self, there is no life, also. There are just different arrangements of atoms and energy  Going full mode naturalist here :)))

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

22 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

All human procreation. The David benatar argument. Life is more suffering than pleasure, so not bringing new life in the world means less suffering. The fact that life is all we have does not mean it is valuable though. The only property you have might be a pair of socks with holes, does not make them valuable or worth keeping. Plus I don t think "we" "have" life. There is no "owner" of life. That seems more like social construction to me. Life just exists. It is not owned. There is no pantheory with a bag full of life. There is no self, there is no life, also. There are just different arrangements of atoms and energy  Going full mode naturalist here :)))

 

Wow.... that just seems like a horrible outlook on life. I've loved raising children. Seeing them live, grow, and become adults.  Now I get to see my boys live their lives, attend their marriages, walk my daughter down the aisle one day. Share their lives and hopefully one day meet my grandchildren. Seeing them smile and laugh have been the best highlights of my life. Even though at times there was pain, grief, anger, turmoil, etc. All those experience are just a part of life. Living through those life events, finding solutions, and still making life fun is all a part of it. 

 

We are living in the most advanced Era of human existence. Sure their are wars and political bullshit. But the advancements we've made over the past two centuries is really a marvel to reflect on. 

 

But to each their own I guess. Whatever works works. 

[Myrkhoos]

46 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Wow.... that just seems like a horrible outlook on life. I've loved raising children. Seeing them live, grow, and become adults.  Now I get to see my boys live their lives, attend their marriages, walk my daughter down the aisle one day. Share their lives and hopefully one day meet my grandchildren. Seeing them smile and laugh have been the best highlights of my life. Even though at times there was pain, grief, anger, turmoil, etc. All those experience are just a part of life. Living through those life events, finding solutions, and still making life fun is all a part of it. 

 

We are living in the most advanced Era of human existence. Sure their are wars and political bullshit. But the advancements we've made over the past two centuries is really a marvel to reflect on. 

 

But to each their own I guess. Whatever works works. 

This is another discussion for another topic. But, I consider it realistic, not horrible. Bringing a life mean playing russian roulette. This is a fact. The parents of the people who went into labour camps in my own country in the fifties lost that russian roullete. You have not lost, yet. But there are still bullets in the barrel. :). Maybe your optimism just stems from NOT living in a country living under foreign occupation or domination, with frequent bouts of wars and dictatorship for hundreds of years. Here, at the meeting of the Ottoman, habsburgic and russian empire, with a dash of eastern asian hordes, things don't look so bright. There is a popular saying here. Life is hard, but at least it passes quickly. :)). Also, those advancenments do contain biological and nuclear war, massive environmental disasters and widescale wars and oppresion. The western countries, especially America, needs a war on its territory. Just to feel a little of what life feels like in most other places. :))

          PS. I do think children are very cute and many times absolutely adorable. Don t get me wrong.

      On topic. I would gladly die for something that is at least worth a little. This life is not precious, nor am I so grandiose to actually think it is. But some final sacrifice might make it more valuable than a mere snail. It also eats, sleeps and fucks. But it cannot die for religious liberty .

  

[Myrkhoos]

Buut, I do fully acknowledge that people experience life totally different from me. That is why, at the moment, I have a libertarian tendency. You can commit suicide, or have 15 children. Your choice. I just would like you think about things throroughly, one way or another.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

5 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

You have not lost, yet. But there are still bullets in the barrel. :). Maybe your optimism just stems from NOT living in a country living under foreign occupation or domination, with frequent bouts of wars and dictatorship for hundreds of years.

 

I haven't thought of it from that perspective. I am from the US and I guess we have been very protected from that for a long time. We kicked a lot of ass and have done a lot of good and bad shit to keep it that way.

 

I've never lived in your country. Wherever it is. But I have had losses. Nothing as traumatic as a war on our soil yet. Regular life shit for me I guess, son with birth defects, helping them cope with their mothers suicide, divorce, unemployment, illnesses, etc. 

 

Anyway. Doesn't matter. A lot of people even here are chosing the same path for the same reasons even here. My brother for instance. But back to the OP. 

 

Yeah no dieing for religious dogma. My bad. Sorry for the rabbit trail. 

[midniterider]

21 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

All human procreation. The David benatar argument. Life is more suffering than pleasure, so not bringing new life in the world means less suffering. The fact that life is all we have does not mean it is valuable though. The only property you have might be a pair of socks with holes, does not make them valuable or worth keeping. Plus I don t think "we" "have" life. There is no "owner" of life. That seems more like social construction to me. Life just exists. It is not owned. There is no pantheory with a bag full of life. There is no self, there is no life, also. There are just different arrangements of atoms and energy  Going full mode naturalist here :)))

 

Atoms and energy can suffer?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

21 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Maybe your optimism just stems from NOT living in a country living under foreign occupation or domination, with frequent bouts of wars and dictatorship for hundreds of years. Here, at the meeting of the Ottoman, habsburgic and russian empire, with a dash of eastern asian hordes, things don't look so bright. There is a popular saying here. Life is hard, but at least it passes quickly.

Ms. Ex-neck grew up in Ukraine and has a similar outlook.  Ms. Professor grew up in Vietnam and is the happiest person I've ever known.  I don't think your country of origin has much to do with it.  Granted, Americans are the spoiled brats of the world; I won't argue there.  But to adopt an attitude that all of life is suffering and despair is a personal choice, informed perhaps by both nature and nurture.

[Myrkhoos]

13 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Ms. Ex-neck grew up in Ukraine and has a similar outlook.  Ms. Professor grew up in Vietnam and is the happiest person I've ever known.  I don't think your country of origin has much to do with it.  Granted, Americans are the spoiled brats of the world; I won't argue there.  But to adopt an attitude that all of life is suffering and despair is a personal choice, informed perhaps by both nature and nurture.

     Of course, one cannot generalise. That is clear of any statement which has a broad base. I do think that we can do attitude it is more prevalent, on average, in the US, than in other parts of the world.

       And, I do not think ALL of life is suffering and despair. That is not my experience. I do not suffer from chronic anhedonia (inability to exp pleasure) nor do I think most people or animals do. Pleasure exists, no doubt about it. 

        The question then becomes if the good outweighs the bad. We humans tend to have an optimism bias. Search that, it's a studied thing. We generally think things are better than they are. Also, we can reflect, study history, and make at least a quasi informed choice. I do not think the good outweighs the bad. There is too much suffering. And we humans are actually more sensitive to pain than pleasure. It is thought this is for survival reasons. It is far better to jump and run at the possibility of a snake bit than just stay and enjoy the breeze.I am inclined to think we are heavily inclined towards optimism for survival reasons.

   Like many biases, it seems irrational, but very useful. Like a God that commands procreation. A group that has that might outcompete a group with a more neutral attitude towards procreation. Look at the procreation levels of atheists and heavily religious Jews in Israel as a recent empirical example. 

     On procreation there is another element. And it's a simple logical argument, not attitude. As I said, you bring a new being into the world. You have no idea of the amount of pain it could experience. Maybe sex trafficking level, maybe broken nails level. And all inbetween. You take risk on ANOTHER person's life. Without consent bk consent seems and probably is impossible. If you do not procreate you avoid any pain whatsoever. No risk at all. No loss of pleasure. Given this situation, is it moral to make that gamble? I think this is a fair question. 

[Myrkhoos]

14 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

Atoms and energy can suffer?

As an emergent property of atom interactions, yes Altough, I do hear even hydrogen atoms cry when they separate from oxygen in water experiments. They were so happy together

[Myrkhoos]

You may ask why donI continue to live then. Well, different resons, bit sometines I think I am sticking it out to see if I'm proven wrong :)).Abd maybe life IS worth it. Waiting fir new data to come in.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

11 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I think this is a fair question

It is.

 

When I was a younger man, from my mid 20s into my mid 30s, I went through a period of hopelessness, frustration, and anger.  I resented my parents for bringing me into this world, without my consent, and subjecting me to the misery I had, so far, endured.  Much of it I had brought on myself, by making really disastrous life choices; and that fueled not only the suffering to which I was subject, but also further resentment toward the "village" that had raised me without adequately preparing me for life on life's terms.  Were I not such a coward at the time, I would have chosen suicide; but, being christian still, I believed suicides went to hell.

 

My deconversion happened right in the middle of all of this.  How I survived the utter despair and disillusionment is beyond me.  How could a loving "god" see his children suffering and look upon their misery with nothing more than benign indifference?  And I knew I had it better than most of the rest of the world.  But the very idea that a loving, all-powerful god would have created this wretched and pathetic excuse for a world and then forced us all to try to survive in it, when most of us would then end up in hell, anyway, was one of the final, chilling, nails in my religious coffin.

 

I went back to college at the age of 35.  "Life" wasn't much better during those years.  I got up at 5am, took care of the family farm, put food on the table for Redneck Jr, went to class, then work, then back to class in the evenings, and came home sometimes at 11:30pm or later.  At one point, I had just enough money to either buy diapers for Jr for a week, or ramen noodles for a month, or a used textbook I needed for class.  I chose the textbook; because I thought if I could get the education, then I could give Redneck Jr a better life.  And that, for me, is one of the main reasons for having kids: I've learned from my parents' mistakes, so maybe I can give him a better childhood.  And if he has a better childhood, then maybe he'll be a better man.  And maybe if he's a better man, the world will be just a little bit better.  But, I digress.  

 

In college, I was exposed to new ideas: evolution via natural selection, the actual age of the earth, life-cycles and how they work, oviparous versus viviparous reproduction, cell division along with meiosis and mitosis...  One night I came home around midnight and went straight to Redneck Jr's crib because I hadn't seen him all day.  I picked him up and held him as I slowly rocked in an old rocking chair that had belonged to my great grandfather. 

 

As he lay there sleeping in my lap, it suddenly occurred to me just how extraordinary the chances of "me" happening actually were.  It took hundreds of my mother's eggs and millions of my father's sperm to come up with the one unique fusion of gametes that would encompass "me" and my genetic matrix.  A different sperm and there might have been a girl instead of "me."  A different egg and maybe a completely different boy with blond hair, green eyes, and a belly that didn't constantly feel the need to reach new widths. 

 

Multiply those odds by the same odds applied to each of my parents.  Had grandpa not come back from the war when he did... Had grandma found another suitor whilst grandpa was away jabbing the life out of Nazis...  Now multiply those odds for all 4 grandparents... 8 great grandparents...  And keep multiplying until you get all the way back to the first modern humans migrating out of Africa, stopping along the way to thank the Neanderthals for supplying the genes for our immune systems through interbreeding.  If just one of those prehistoric ancestors had run afoul of a sabre-toothed cat, I Wouldn't Be Here.  If just one of my great grandpas had made just one different decision (plowed the field instead of... "plowing the field") I Wouldn't Be Here.

 

The terms "astronomical" and "exponential" really are too paltry to describe the odds of "me" being alive.  Yet, here I AM.  And the fact that I am here, despite all the odds, suggests to me that the "good" does indeed outweigh the "bad."

 

I won't say this sudden epiphany changed my outlook completely overnight.  But, slowly.  Does life still suck sometimes?  Abso-fucking-lutely.  Have I contemplated suicide since then?  Yes, I have.  Because I still sometimes deal with depression and general angst.  But the fact that I am alive, against all odds, makes "my" life valuable.  Same is true for you, in my opinion.  Same is true for all life and every human being that has ever graced this mud-encrusted rock we call home (except maybe @TABA).

 

It's not about pleasure versus pain; it's not about triumph versus tribulation.  It is about living versus existing.  About enjoying and enduring.  There is beauty through the horror; and value in even the most degraded and humiliating circumstances.

[Myrkhoos]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

 

 

As he lay there sleeping in my lap, it suddenly occurred to me just how extraordinary the chances of "me" happening actually were.  It took hundreds of my mother's eggs and millions of my father's sperm to come up with the one unique fusion of gametes that would encompass "me" and my genetic matrix.  A different sperm and there might have been a girl instead of "me."  A different egg and maybe a completely different boy with blond hair, green eyes, and a belly that didn't constantly feel the need to reach new widths. 

 

Multiply those odds by the same odds applied to each of my parents.  Had grandpa not come back from the war when he did... Had grandma found another suitor whilst grandpa was away jabbing the life out of Nazis...  Now multiply those odds for all 4 grandparents... 8 great grandparents...  And keep multiplying until you get all the way back to the first modern humans migrating out of Africa, stopping along the way to thank the Neanderthals for supplying the genes for our immune systems through interbreeding.  If just one of those prehistoric ancestors had run afoul of a sabre-toothed cat, I Wouldn't Be Here.  If just one of my great grandpas had made just one different decision (plowed the field instead of... "plowing the field") I Wouldn't Be Here.

 

The terms "astronomical" and "exponential" really are too paltry to describe the odds of "me" being alive.  Yet, here I AM.

.  But the fact that I am alive, against all odds, makes "my" life valuable.  Same is true for you, in my opinion.  Same is true for all life and every human being that has ever graced this mud-encrusted rock we call home (except maybe @TABA).

 

It's not about pleasure versus pain; it's not about triumph versus tribulation.  It is about living versus existing.  About enjoying and enduring.  There is beauty through the horror; and value in even the most degraded and humiliating circumstances.

I find this line of argumentation a non sequitur. It is like a scarcity argument in economics. Because smth is rare, it is precious. 

      I understood you had an intense emotional exp. Ok. It is the same way Christian prove God. Bk they had intense emotional exp. That line of evidence is questionable at best. You can argue that value is only an emotional estimation. Ok then, we can discuss that.

     Beauty in horror and value in humiliation. Well, I thought I was back in church bk that is such a Christian thing to say. Beauty is a subjective exp so I cannot contest that. A pedophile said he found sex with boys beautiful in a doc. Value, depending how you define it, can also subjective so again. Even if I were to say I think my life is worthlrss, the mere fact that others disagree makes it impossible to say that it is objectively

     But living vs existing is just new age stuff stuff, no offense. What does that even mean? Technically speaking, everything that lives also exists. A snail lives. 

    What I observe is that living beings search for pleasure and avoid pain. So, life does seem about pain and pleasure. 

     Also you contradicted yourself. Enjoying and enduring presuppose pain and pleasure. You "enjoy" as in feel pleasure and you "endure" as in feel pain. So saying it is not about pain and pleasure but enjoying and enduring is a logical contradiction.

    Nice poetry, though

 

   

 

      

[pantheory]

17 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

I find this line of argumentation a non sequitur. It is like a scarcity argument in economics. Because smth is rare, it is precious. 

      I understood you had an intense emotional exp. Ok. It is the same way Christian prove God. Bk they had intense emotional exp. That line of evidence is questionable at best. You can argue that value is only an emotional estimation. Ok then, we can discuss that.

     Beauty in horror and value in humiliation. Well, I thought I was back in church bk that is such a Christian thing to say. Beauty is a subjective exp so I cannot contest that. A pedophile said he found sex with boys beautiful in a doc. Value, depending how you define it, can also subjective so again. Even if I were to say I think my life is worthless, the mere fact that others disagree makes it impossible to say that it is objectively

     But living vs existing is just new age stuff stuff, no offense. What does that even mean? Technically speaking, everything that lives also exists. A snail lives. 

    What I observe is that living beings search for pleasure and avoid pain. So, life does seem about pain and pleasure. 

    Nice poetry, though   

 

 

As I'm sure you know, one's philosophy of life can make all the difference. When near or past mid-life, I think it's almost impossible to change your philosophy, just as hard as breaking loose from, or changing religions. But for me, life has been great to the present. Both my mother and dad were very positive, optimistic people. Both were well educated and made good money. However, they fought a lot and got divorced when I was young -- but I was happy for them.

 

My life certainly has not been a bed of roses from the perspective of others, but from my point of view, life is the only heaven I will ever see as an atheist, so you can bet that I enjoy it to the fullest, and I often stop to help others, as well as to smell the roses -- so to speak.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

I find this line of argumentation a non sequitur. 

You have certainly proven your value as a guy who can miss the point entirely.  This is not a line of argumentation; it is simply my experience with coming from your present mentality to my current way of thinking.  Do I want, expect, or need others to feel the way I do, or have the same view, for the same reason?  Absolutely not.

 

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

It is like a scarcity argument in economics. Because smth is rare, it is precious. 

Missed the point again.  It is not the scarcity of life that makes life precious.  Quite obviously there is no scarcity of life.  Rather, it is the rarity of "my" life that makes "my" life valuable to "me."  Do I expect "my" life to be valuable to you or anyone else?  Absolutely not.  But, because I value "my" life, I also value all life.  Should you?  Your choice.

 

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

I understood you had an intense emotional exp. Ok. It is the same way Christian prove God. Bk they had intense emotional exp. That line of evidence is questionable at best.

Hey, dude, the point is over here; why are you way over there?  What I had was far from an emotional experience.  It was simply the natural progression of studying basic biological principles and then connecting those principles to my own existence.  Moreover, whether emotional or not, my experience is not an attempt to prove anything.  It simply speaks to how I came from despair to cautious optimism.

 

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

A pedophile said he found sex with boys beautiful in a doc. Value, depending how you define it, can also subjective so again.

https://iep.utm.edu/reductio/

 

Quit doing that.  Your bizarre and extreme false analogies say more about you than they do against the points being made.

 

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

But living vs existing is just new age stuff stuff, no offense. What does that even mean? Technically speaking, everything that lives also exists. A snail lives. 

Yet another point escapes your grasp.  Do trees exist with intentional purpose?  Are snails capable of adopting what Dennet describes as the "intentional stance"?  There is a difference between merely existing and living, best described by your philosophy versus mine.  You say, "life sucks but at least it's short" (my paraphrase of your earlier quote).  I say, "I plan on being the last person to die during my lifetime."  

 

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

 

[Myrkhoos]

24 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

You have certainly proven your value as a guy who can miss the point entirely.  This is not a line of argumentation; it is simply my experience with coming from your present mentality to my current way of thinking.  Do I want, expect, or need others to feel the way I do, or have the same view, for the same reason?  Absolutely not.

Aaah, first ad hominem. Nice. You presented arguments in your descriptions. Plenty. You describe causes and effects. X therefore Y. That is an argument. Basic syllogistic structure. Premise and conclusion.

Quote

 

Missed the point again.  It is not the scarcity of life that makes life precious.  Quite obviously there is no scarcity of life.  Rather, it is the rarity of "my" life that makes "my" life valuable to "me."  Do I expect "my" life to be valuable to you or anyone else?  Absolutely not.  But, because I value "my" life, I also value all life.  Should you?  Your choice.

You make an argument - rarity of my life makes my life precious. Then you refuse to acknowledge you make an argument. An argument is anything that has the form "x" therefore "y". 

Quote

 

Hey, dude, the point is over here; why are you way over there?  What I had was far from an emotional experience.  It was simply the natural progression of studying basic biological principles and then connecting those principles to my own existence.  Moreover, whether emotional or not, my experience is not an attempt to prove anything.  It simply speaks to how I came from despair to cautious optimism.

 

https://iep.utm.edu/reductio/

 

Quit doing that.  Your bizarre and extreme false analogies say more about you than they do against the points being made.

Natural progression of studying and making connections. So...arguments? Premise s or conclusions. Or....not? 

Next ad hominem. Thx. So you day there is beauty in horror, I prese nt an example, and I am engaging in reductio ad absurdum? No, I was just taking YOUR declaration to one of its natural conclusions.

 

Quote

 

Yet another point escapes your grasp.  Do trees exist with intentional purpose?  Are snails capable of adopting what Dennet describes as the "intentional stance"?  There is a difference between merely existing and living, best described by your philosophy versus mine.  You say, "life sucks but at least it's short" (my paraphrase of your earlier quote).  I say, "I plan on being the last person to die during my lifetime."  

 

You make some category errors here. Biologically, any biological entity lives. A tree lives, a snail lives. You introduce intent. That is a psychological . So life with intent? Or existence with intent is life, and without intent is not life? In what framework?And I do not know what trees feel, or snails to know if they have intent, whatever that vague notion means to you. How would you even test for that.

    So you speak with lack of conceptual clarity. Maybe that IS why I don't get what you are saying. Just maybe, it's the fault of your own writing. But believe what you want. I guess it's ok to end this here anyway. When ad hominems appear, it is a sign it is best usually to call it a day.Have a nice day

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, Myrkhoos said:

 

 

4 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

You describe causes and effects. X therefore Y. That is an argument

Quote me on one.

 

4 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

. An argument is anything that has the form "x" therefore "y". 

Again, quote me on one.

 

5 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

Natural progression of studying and making connections. So...arguments? Premise s or conclusions.

Realization is not an argument. 

 

 

[Myrkhoos]

4 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

 

Quote me on one.

 

Again, quote me on one.

 

Realization is not an argument. 

 

 

Again, have a nice day. Think what you will of my not responding anymore to this discussion.