Imagine No Religion...

WinterBorn said:
First of all, on what information do you base this claim?

And there are higher animals (dolphins, great apes ect) that have been seen facing a major predator in defense of their young. The instinct would be to flee, as they do every time other than when their young is in danger.
Click to expand...

Protecting their young is instinctual, not a conscious choice they are making because of a moral responsibility.
 
Dixie said:
Protecting their young is instinctual, not a conscious choice they are making because of a moral responsibility.
Click to expand...

Since the animals I mentioned have been shown to be able to reason, how can you make that statement?

If you assume that every action by an animal is purely instinctive, your point stands. But that is not the case. There have been numerous cases of animals grieving themselves to death after losing an owner or offspring. That is certainly not instinctive. And since they have been shown to grieve themselves to death over the death of offspring, you cannot make a blank statement that their actions protecting their young are purely instinctive.
 
WinterBorn said:
Since the animals I mentioned have been shown to be able to reason, how can you make that statement?

If you assume that every action by an animal is purely instinctive, your point stands. But that is not the case. There have been numerous cases of animals grieving themselves to death after losing an owner or offspring. That is certainly not instinctive. And since they have been shown to grieve themselves to death over the death of offspring, you cannot make a blank statement that their actions protecting their young are purely instinctive.
Click to expand...

Well, yes I can say that animals react instinctively, and not out of a moral sense of obligation to react. If you wish to believe some nonsense to the contrary, you need to show more proof than obscure instances of animals grieving themselves to death. That has nothing to do with morality, human morality, or anything we are discussing here, with regard to human spirituality. It might show that animals have emotions, I have never argued that wasn't the case, we are talking about morals and morality, not emotions.
 
Dixie said:
Well, yes I can say that animals react instinctively, and not out of a moral sense of obligation to react. If you wish to believe some nonsense to the contrary, you need to show more proof than obscure instances of animals grieving themselves to death. That has nothing to do with morality, human morality, or anything we are discussing here, with regard to human spirituality. It might show that animals have emotions, I have never argued that wasn't the case, we are talking about morals and morality, not emotions.
Click to expand...

And I only stepped in when someone mentioned that pack animals show group behavior and morality, and you responded with "you are wrong, they do not show human morality".

And my examples have far more actual proof than religion does.
 
WinterBorn said:
And I only stepped in when someone mentioned that pack animals show group behavior and morality, and you responded with "you are wrong, they do not show human morality".

And my examples have far more actual proof than religion does.
Click to expand...


Someone tried to equate pack animal behavior with human morality, and the two don't equate, but you interjected your stupidity anyway. Thanks!
 
Dixie said:
Someone tried to equate pack animal behavior with human morality, and the two don't equate, but you interjected your stupidity anyway. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I offered examples that provide evidence to back my point. You provided evidence of human morality that fit your description of animal behavior.

Thanks for playing.
 
WinterBorn said:
I offered examples that provide evidence to back my point. You provided evidence of human morality that fit your description of animal behavior.

Thanks for playing.
Click to expand...

You don't have a point, there is no evidence to support your idiocy. You gave examples of animal behavior which is instinctive, not contemplative. I gave examples of humans who made great sacrifice for morality, or out of a sense of moral obligation. Those do not fit in the same category with primal instinct found in other animals, and you've not established that connection. Now, if you just want to be a retard and think that, it's fine... people are ignorant of a LOT of things, but don't act like you've "WON" the debate here, Charlie Sheen!
 
Dixie said:
You don't have a point, there is no evidence to support your idiocy. You gave examples of animal behavior which is instinctive, not contemplative. I gave examples of humans who made great sacrifice for morality, or out of a sense of moral obligation. Those do not fit in the same category with primal instinct found in other animals, and you've not established that connection. Now, if you just want to be a retard and think that, it's fine... people are ignorant of a LOT of things, but don't act like you've "WON" the debate here, Charlie Sheen!
Click to expand...

No, you claimed that the animals acted purely on instinct. And yet their acts go against their best interest and against their survival.

And teh examples you gave fit the descriptions you gave for animals very well. Survival of their species, self-preservation ect ect ect.



You claim to be so open minded, but when someone offers a different explanation you immediately resort to your standard "you are retarded" line. No examination of the issue. I offer of any evidence or any further discussion. And no concept of anyone's point of view except your own narrow one.

I am talking about winning or losing, Dixie. I was chuckling at your insistence that my point is retarded, while your own had less actual factual backing. But I should not be surprised. It is pretty typical. Sometime we should actually discuss an issue, without the insults and trivial nonsense. That would be a refreshing change of pace.
 
WinterBorn said:
No, you claimed that the animals acted purely on instinct. And yet their acts go against their best interest and against their survival.
Click to expand...

No I claimed animals act on primal instinct and not through contemplation of moral obligation. Their acts sometimes seem to go against their best interest or individual survival, but that is not something the animal contemplates, it reacts based on instinct. You've presented NOTHING to suggest otherwise.

And teh examples you gave fit the descriptions you gave for animals very well. Survival of their species, self-preservation ect ect ect.
Click to expand...

No, again, they simply DON'T unless you twist, distort, and contort them to fit your idiotic perceptions. Mother Teresa didn't do what she did for "self-preservation" and to make such an asinine comment, is indicative of the kind of stupidity you are spewing here. MLK and Gandhi's actions were not to "protect their species", when their species is HUMAN! Again, to make such a boneheaded comment, is not worthy of a response, other than to say you are a retard.

You claim to be so open minded, but when someone offers a different explanation you immediately resort to your standard "you are retarded" line. No examination of the issue. I offer of any evidence or any further discussion. And no concept of anyone's point of view except your own narrow one.
Click to expand...

I can accept points of view which are rooted in truth or fact, but I can't accept points of view that are just plain idiotic and ignorant. Sorry...not THAT open minded!

I am talking about winning or losing, Dixie. I was chuckling at your insistence that my point is retarded, while your own had less actual factual backing. But I should not be surprised. It is pretty typical. Sometime we should actually discuss an issue, without the insults and trivial nonsense. That would be a refreshing change of pace.
Click to expand...

The factual backing is, we've been studying animals and animal behavior for years, and we know for a fact, they do not consciously make decisions based on morality or a sense of moral obligation. That is something HUMANS do, and ONLY HUMANS do! By and large, other animals operate based on primal instinct, not moral consciousness. If you want me to stop calling you retarded, stop acting retarded!
 
Topspin said:
LOFL, Mr Pagan Prophet I deal in the real
reliegion is for weaklings who miss their mommy, I'm glad you get your fear relieved by it.
My joy is in mocking adults who believe in comic books.
Click to expand...

apparently your joy is in making irrelevant posts......should we care whether you believe in God or not?......it's your choice......what puzzles me is why you feel compelled to enter into a debate and share that with us.......whether you want "proof" before you believe has nothing to do with what's being discussed.....it's like some childish "Look at me, Daddy, look at me"......
 
Lowaicue said:
No need to 'dodge' debate about religion, but certainly there is a need to avoid it. For over one thousand years Christianity (to take it as one example) has been questioned and the people who rely on it for their livelihood have invented spun response upon spun response to defend their power base. So any such debate is simply an exercise in wading through the same old claptrap.
We know how the world was created, we know how the universe came into being and we know the story of evolution that populated this earth with such variety. So where is the debate?
The earth is 4400 years old because that is what the bible says? No debate. The men who wrote and conjured together the millions of words that make the book, could have written anything and probably did, in order that their power was not seriously challenged.
Adam and Eve? No. We know, by the good offices of Hubble and Herschel from whence came the chemicals that eventually created man's fleeting existence.
God said ....(whatever). A character invented by the ignorant to answer questions made in ignorance did not say anything. How could it? It was invented by man!
So debate about religion? No. Certainly not. Those days are over and with each educated human being they fade further and further into the dim and distant past.

Now. If Dixie, Trixie, Mixie or Moxie need to believe in this stuff and it genuinely helps them cope with life's pressures and challenges then good for them. I would be the last to deny their right to believe in whatever they like. But they should not assume the right to chastise me for my knowledge. Instead join me with your eyes open.
Click to expand...

thank you for sharing the fact that you don't believe in religion......now, who gives a fuck......I didn't chastise TS for his "knowledge" or his "beliefs"...I chastised him for trying to derail a debate about morality by demanding someone prove the existence of God to him.....nobody is going to, nobody has to......if he thinks we can't discuss the issue of whether animals make moral choices without first proving to him that God exists, he's dimwitted....and if you don't find that obvious, you're as dimwitted as he is
 
WinterBorn said:
And there are animals that sacrifice themselves to save their own young.
Click to expand...

that presumes they are bright enough to know they're going to die doing it....they may fight to protect their young, they may also incorrectly expect they're going to live through it......you are attributing a conclusion to a creature that isn't bright enough to form one......
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
what do you mean by "reason".....what animal is able to reason?.....
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, dolphins and great apes are able to reason. They have shown that ability.

When faced by a predator, there are plenty of animals who know they will die if they do not get away. Whether they understand death is debateable, but not that they know they will die.
 
Pagan prophet, you fools need to be mocked. You highjack the white trailer trash politically with this poison.
 
WinterBorn said:
As I mentioned, dolphins and great apes are able to reason. They have shown that ability.

When faced by a predator, there are plenty of animals who know they will die if they do not get away. Whether they understand death is debateable, but not that they know they will die.
Click to expand...

and how do you intend to prove that a female wolf, defending her pups from a mountain lion "knows" she is going to die trying......now, if you could document say, a female mouse trying to hold off an owl to protect her young you might be closer.....

even in a situation like this video you can't tell me the buffalo herd "reasoned" that they could rescue the calf from the lions....

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top