Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So dualism. If that's your call then so be it. It went out the window with those you mentioned in the period in which they lived. But if you want to stick with it, then describe to me how you think it works.
Hey, I have my limits, my man. No way am I going to spend my valuable time slowly sniffing tea on the offchance that I might get to like it.
[Completely unimportant aside]
What he doesn't believe in has no influence on what you think should be done.
Darn tootin'. No-one (including Sapolsky as you noted) said it was easy. In fact, it's very hard indeed.
It is simple. Our spiritual self, if you will, interacts with our physical self. The two are interlinked. The spiritual contains moral standards separate from the standards of society, evolution, and upbringing. We have free will to chose on which we make our choices. The biological and social standards may agree or disagree with the spiritual. However, we have the free will to chose. My mother, when I was little, may tell me to tell the caller on the phone that she is not home. I have the choice of telling the truth and receiving the consequences or lie as my mother wished. The choice is free with the consequences attached.
And I'm now literally drinking a Penderyn, a Welsh whisky from near where I grew up. Matured in Oloroso sherry casks. Not bad at all...not bad at all....
I don't think I've ever had a Welsh whisk[e]y. I'll keep an eye out for one. (I've had a bunch aged in Oloroso; good stuff.)
You sound seemingly certain about that. I, however, don't share that certainty, for various critical reasons.
The things upon which others —philosophers all, haha!— differ, and whether or not in their eyes @Bradskii would be right, is irrelevant to the point. Universal acceptance is no measure of fact.
No evidence of what—his off-topic claims, or their relevance to the subject of the OP?
Fine, have fun with that, but I think you are missing the point. I think you are expanding things to fix your idea. Materialism says that here is nothing but the material world. The philosophers were smarter than you . I, and Bradskii combined. Horrifying is the death of millions of people and the suppression of full lives. My thoughts on the relationship of mankind to the universe are related to the will of God, so you can talk to Him about that.
Lol, in one South American country's dictatorship, the country did very well, (and the dictator did even better). He pass and enforced laws that, for example, a first time offender thief would have his hand cut off at the wrist. That worked pretty well, but if he did it again, they cut off his other hand. Life for life. Eye for eye. A rapist would lose something else, and wasn't likely to repeat the crime. A child could carry a paper bag full of money to the bank, and everyone would stay distant to avoid getting charged and losing something. If the child came too near, the person would do all they possibly could to help that child to his destination safe.
Where do you get the notion of "full lives", as though that was of value in and of itself? It is said that back before Noah people lived several hundreds of years. Why would God start ending lives at 80 now? Is that not horrifying? Why not? Is it cruel and unusual for a child to die at birth? Why not? What do you think this life is for—us?
Exactly. Infinite materialism no less.
There is the point you are making, but I also don't think a lot of people fully understand what God of the OT was trying to do in the OT either, before resorting to/submitting to the last plan that he probably didn't think too much about originally, etc.
Now you're making false dilemmas? There are plenty of ontologies that aren't dualism or materialism. Though if the choice is between being a cobbled together homunculus or an irreducible self, the irreducible self wins. If it's mind or matter, mind wins. Idealism is more likely than materialism, but there are a litany of other options on the table.
