Merkwurdichliebe

We should include all the preconditions and limitations for any explanation we set forth. If we did it exhaustively, it would be an immense amount of ...

Absolutely. We need a multi-varied analysis.

The big bang is a cosmological event. How are you using it to explain the source of morality? Explain yourself. If your explanation is sufficiently co...

I'm not sure what makes a cause adequate or not. What would an adequate cause look like? I do know, however, that which makes an explanation adequate ...

If you regard the big bang as the source of everything, then it is correct to consider it a necessary factor when explaining the source of anything. Y...

:up:

Thickets upon thickets.

Don't forget it is, at a primal level, like fear and sex

Like the love of wisdom, right?

Your the best...always looking out for me. Me so happy :cry:

:joke:

I agree, we should have taken a step back probably 8 pages ago.

Do it!!!...introduce the categorical imperative...you instigator you.

I think if it takes 80 pages, we should keep going.

Simpleton or Oblivion, pick a side.

Ok. I understand where you are coming from now. I must have missed when you mentioned Hume earlier. Unfortunately, Hume concluded that our emotions ar...

That is how love is in the sense of eros. But at the level of philia, storge, or agape, such an explanation does not only seem inadequate, but also so...

:rofl:

Running water never goes stale.

@"Edward"

Can you give me a link or reference to any study done in neurobiology that shows how emotion is the source of morality?

I think it's clear how we're using the term "source" - in a very ordinary and mundane sense. No need to confuse things by turning it into some cryptic...

I'm not talking about earth science. I'm making an analogy to the source of morals, and it works. You'll have to vomit up some better rhetoric than th...

You aren't a neurobiologist. How about citing an actual neorobiological study. You can even paraphrase it. And what does this have to do with the sour...

Why don't they present evidence from neurobiology like I done did?

I can't believe you are rehashing the old empiricist-rationalist debate.

You bring it out of me. :wink:

Take a river. It's source is the snow from a mountain top. Snow has its source in ice precipitation, which has its source in cloud condensation, and s...

Ok, then let me change my judgment, I believe it is a ethical right to murder and rape. Still no emotion.

More like you are neglecting the present moment.

Prove it.

Electrons and neutrons are very scientific . But, tables and chairs are certainly more practical

I agree, and neurobiology is a great place to start, but not to end.

Then how is it that I can have no emotion concerning murder and rape, but nevertheless judge it to be morally wrong?

Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves, we still need to lock down what neurobiology can say about the source of morals. No need to complicate it by...

Why would they care about being called God hater? For them, God represents a delusion and a lie, and I think its perfectly reasonable to hate deluded ...

:grin: Forgive my immaturity, I was using non-atheist because I thought it was antagonistic sounding and might instigate a little digression between s...

A non-neurobiological explanation for the source of morals would include historical or societal explanations that go far beyond the scope of neurobiol...

Love thine enemy.

Indeed, Socratic ignorance is the key to approaching this topic.

I don't think it's possible. How do we not know it's just a delusion. I know I was hungry this morning. Am I just delusional?

"Your clan"? Who's that? And if you want reasonable ground as evidence, of course you are asking for proof.

Indeed. And I am saying the atheist cannot do anything but understand God as an abstraction, and the more they approach it conceptually, the furth the...

Yes, true. And he probably has reasonable ground for his belief, just no positive proof. Have you two settled the question of whether or not you can k...

However, there is a way for @"EnPassant" to distinguish between his faith and his belief, and that makes all the difference.

But if we only discuss it as an effect of neurobiology, we will never adequately understand the source of morals.

I like the Plato reference. I think God informs every rational creature by directly relating to each one individually. For Non-atheists to look for di...

In the atheist sense, knowing God exists is as ridiculous as knowing your ethical principles exist. Even if you attempted to prove you held to certain...

It is direct evidence only for the witness. To another person, that witness would actually need to be God itself if he were to factor as direct eviden...

Ok, sorry for my mistake.