RE: If God sent your child to Hell.
May 26, 2015 at 3:47 pm
(This post was last modified: May 26, 2015 at 3:49 pm by Aroura.)
So, by your logic a rock does not exist because it does not have free-will. That's what I'm getting from this. Only free-will causes existence. That's the dumbest argument for free-will I've ever heard. But a rock isn't alive, so I guess you'll go there.
What about a jellyfish? We can agree that it is alive, I hope? Yet it has no brain, does it posess free-will? What is the cause of free-will, then? Do only humans have it, not say, dogs and cats, corals or whales? How about Virus's? If god gave free will only to humans, then how do these other creatures function? Can a bear chose to eat a and or some honey? If any of these creature do not possess free-will, then free-will and consciousness are not related, nor are free-will and life, nor are free-will and existence. If all of them do possess free-will, then what sets humans apart from a virus, since you equate free-will with consciousness?
As to the whole moral argument, you are just going back to the old "morals must be absolute or they mean nothing" chestnut, and then basing a bunch of claims off of that faulty argument. Morals are subjective, and we can invent them based on what we feel causes most harm.
First, prove morals are absolute. Then we can talk more about the rest of your assumptions from that claim.
If we are indeed just meat robots, its still does not follow that we could not have consciousness, or that we then wouldn't exist. Serious case of Reductio ad absurdum there.
What about a jellyfish? We can agree that it is alive, I hope? Yet it has no brain, does it posess free-will? What is the cause of free-will, then? Do only humans have it, not say, dogs and cats, corals or whales? How about Virus's? If god gave free will only to humans, then how do these other creatures function? Can a bear chose to eat a and or some honey? If any of these creature do not possess free-will, then free-will and consciousness are not related, nor are free-will and life, nor are free-will and existence. If all of them do possess free-will, then what sets humans apart from a virus, since you equate free-will with consciousness?
As to the whole moral argument, you are just going back to the old "morals must be absolute or they mean nothing" chestnut, and then basing a bunch of claims off of that faulty argument. Morals are subjective, and we can invent them based on what we feel causes most harm.
First, prove morals are absolute. Then we can talk more about the rest of your assumptions from that claim.
If we are indeed just meat robots, its still does not follow that we could not have consciousness, or that we then wouldn't exist. Serious case of Reductio ad absurdum there.
“Eternity is a terrible thought. I mean, where's it going to end?”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead