(July 10, 2016 at 8:01 am)purplepurpose Wrote:(July 10, 2016 at 7:42 am)madog Wrote: But that just emphasizes the bad design .... the "(pain)" comes after .... If I really wanted something from the flames and the "pain" came after I might go ahead and try and get it regardless of the "pain" to come later .... But to put my hand in when the pain is immediate is a different matter ....
If there was immediate pain on drugs and murder, than you wouldnt be able to those things, which would also cripple your free will to become evil.
So you think free will is the choice to do evil? Pretty fucked up design where you program something so it won't harm itself but can harm others.
So your argument is that a design that has safe guards to dissuade self harm is free will and a design that has safeguards to dissuade harming others isn't free will?
I would call that evolution, harming yourself could limit the ability to pass on your genes, harming someone else could increase your ability to pass on your genes ....
Religion is the top shelf of the supernatural supermarket ... Madog