RE: Why Secular Morality is Superior
June 12, 2013 at 6:35 pm
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2013 at 6:45 pm by Simon Moon.)
(September 11, 2012 at 2:48 pm)elunico13 Wrote: The atheist is inconsistent when he/she doesn't randomly kill anyone they don't like.
Incorrect.
Humans evolved in groups of 50-150 people where attributes like: kin selection, altruism, cooperation, empathy were necessary for our survival. Humans are social animals. Our survival as a species depended on the above traits.
Our closest cousins, bonobo chimps, exhibit behaviors that could only be described as morality. They: share food even when in short supply, they protect weaker members of their group even if it puts them in danger, they adopt orphaned babies even if it mean a greater burden, they seem to mourn dead members, they punish violent members by ejecting them from the group (to an almost certain death).
Bonobos don't kill anyone randomly they don't like. Why not? What prevents them?
Quote:James Holmes was consistent with the premises of evolution in colorado and arrived at a valid conclusion based on the logic of evolution. Not a sound conclusion though.
James Holmes is mentally ill. He did not kill because he was following "the premises of evolution in colorado and arrived at a valid conclusion based on the logic of evolution". If you believe that is the case, you have little or no understanding of evolution.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
