Anthropocene

Let's also not forget to congratulate GT on his ability to call out the obvious presupposition that anchors all such arguments with the pious. It goes, essentially, like this:

Any ******* thing you can conceive or postulate. Ergo: God, Glorious and Good.
 
Look, even atheists believe in transcendent justice when they propose to tell other people how they ought to act. It is the only means by which one can propose to tell someone else how they ought to act.

Now, they might deny it formally in the argument, but in their heart they must believe.
 
Dionysus, if you want to engage the argument, then you'll actually have to take the time to read back through it and post something substantive. You'll have to commit to a position that goes beyond assertions. Assertions have their place, but they should be accompanied by at least some supporting logic. I've wasted plenty of perfectly good text on you in the past, only to have you play possum as soon as the arguments start to solidify.
 
XOVER,

You don't know what you're talking about because you haven't taken the time to read back over the thread. I invite you to do so, and then to make some meaningful contribution.
 
i always smile to myself when people with far less logical abilities and far less eloquence try to insult you Coel…..you are still my standard for consistency and erudition on these boards.
 
homo sapiens have been around for maybe 250k years on a 4.5B year old rock. To think that we can have a meaningful impact on our species' survival over the next 250k years is the height of arrogance.

Say you could, however, somewhat ensure our well-being over a shorter time period. What freedoms are you willing to take from other humans under threat of death and or imprisonment (that is after all what gives laws teeth, threat of physical harm) to ensure preservation?

What is a reasonable time period of safety you should be able to guarantee humans in exchange for their voluntarily ceding those freedoms? 1000 years? 50 years?
 
To think that we can have a meaningful impact on our species' survival over the next 250k years is the height of arrogance.

Are you saying that mans' actions won't have any impact on our ability to survive?
 
Anthropocene is fine. May our rule last as long as it takes to get us all off the planet and into outer space.

Transcendent Good/Justice sounds a lot like the Invisible Hand.

But lets talk about it closer to the metal.

We all obey at least four fundamental forces. Free will must then be an illusion, the inability to predict the future with accuracy.

We do manage to predict the future well enough to survive though, bell shaped curves of choices between short term and long term and between self and group.

Transcendent Good/Justice then must be how well we catalyze Entropy, the net result of our choices compelled by laws of force and ignorance.

To believe one individual can apprehend and comprehend Transcendent Good/Justice results only in folly, misery and genocide. How many more dictators and well intentioned slides into centralized governments will we endure? Transcendent Good/Justice can at best be experienced only by the aggregate of individuals or humanity and measured by how much Entropy we catalyze for how long. The more and longer, the greater the Transcedent Good/Justice.

We are compelled by the laws of Force towards Transcendent Good/Justice. We can't help but to try to do Good, for billions of years.
 
I assume he’s referring to the four fundamental forces of physics.

- Strong nuclear force
- Weak nuclear force
- Electromagnetism
- Gravity

The free will comment seems like a non sequitur but I might be missing the point. It could happen.
 
We all obey at least four fundamental forces.

1. Hunger
2. Sex drive
3. Need for sleep
4. Longhorn football
 
I stopped reading after this: "It's a value judgement, Coelacanth. Some of us value intact ecosystems and biodiversity." Truly relevatory. The new "white guilt", HUMAN GUILT, and succinctly expressed, I might add. Bravo! Coelacanth's question FTW, btw.
 
I stopped reading after this: "It's a value judgement, Coelacanth. Some of us value intact ecosystems and biodiversity." Truly revelatory. The new "white guilt", HUMAN GUILT, and succinctly expressed, I might add. Bravo! Coelacanth's question FTW, btw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top