Why "mysterious ways" don't matter.

[Baqal]

@Heywood
-If you ask a scientist what a singularity is they will tell you its a mathematical phenomenon based upon the absentia of a physical theorem for quantum gravitation, and not a real physical actuality. In other words...they will tell you they don't really know what it is. "Singularity" is just a phrase/word for ignorance.....just like "God works in mysterious ways".
No, it is not ignorance, it is an open admission that they currently do not possess enough knowledge to define it. What is it that they are ignoring by acknowledging that there is a singularity in the middle of a black hole? It is a hypothesis, not a fact. "God works in mysterious ways" is something I do not view as ignorance, but as a pitiful excuse for a lot of cruel and illogical things God has done.

[Jenny A]

@Heywood
-We don't really know what is at the center of a black hole so we say its a singularity.
Scientists consider that to be true because that is a statement that has not been proven wrong yet. Show them evidence that there isn't a singularity in the center of a black hole and you will convince them to change their minds.

If you ask a scientist what a singularity is they will tell you its a mathematical phenomenon based upon the absentia of a physical theorem for quantum gravitation, and not a real physical actuality. In other words...they will tell you they don't really know what it is. "Singularity" is just a phrase/word for ignorance.....just like "God works in mysterious ways".

Not quite. Singularity refers to not knowing because of lack of evidence. "God works in mysterious ways" generally refers not just to things we can't explain, but to things that absolutely contradict what is otherwise said about god, i.e. god is all loving and all powerful, but children are dying due to hurricanes. It's as if we went on believing in gravity despite things falling up randomly about a third of the time as "gravity's mysterious ways," rather than realizing that there was something fundamentally wrong with the theory of gravity.

[pocaracas]

And how did humanity reach such a declaration?
Did it pop into the mind of some enlightened person, one day?
Was there a vote on the matter?
how?

After all the atrocities, wars and injustices committed, not only in WWII but also before it, since the prehistoric period, Man can reach an agreement on our fundamental values. We are talking about a minimum everybody is inclined to defend. Only a small (and I mean REALLY small) minority of people will say torture, murder and slavery are morally correct. And I believe if we take away religion and public opinions influenced by religious thoughts, a bigger number of people would defend human rights and equality.

They didn't show up by magic, after historical and cultural occurrences some values were shown to be more important to support and preserve. Our values have an explanation, they are always a product of sociological, historical, religious (some), political, cultural and other kind of events who have shaped mankind's world view regarding morality.

I hope I helped explaining it

Yep... we like to think that's the culmination of our journey to unveil the ultimate guideline on human behavior.... is it done for good? Can it be amended and become even better?

It is possible that the holy books of old held in them such a culmination, albeit stuck at a time, now, too far away for us to properly identify with. But that's not stopping some people from following such guidelines and living their lives under them... They still work, under some constraints which can be found in most western countries. Why change?

If you believe there's a god and that there are rules bought forth by that god, then you will find that you are easily compelled to follow those rules.
If the rules come from a committee, meh... even if you agree with them.... rules are meant to be broken.

I say... let the deluded folk keep their delusions, they're less harmful under them.

The problem remains: people believe in the existence of some god. Fix this, and you'll have fixed the following of secular morality.

[Heywood]

If you ask a scientist what a singularity is they will tell you its a mathematical phenomenon based upon the absentia of a physical theorem for quantum gravitation, and not a real physical actuality. In other words...they will tell you they don't really know what it is. "Singularity" is just a phrase/word for ignorance.....just like "God works in mysterious ways".

Not quite. Singularity refers to not knowing because of lack of evidence. "God works in mysterious ways" generally refers not just to things we can't explain, but to things that absolutely contradict what is otherwise said about god, i.e. god is all loving and all powerful, but children are dying due to hurricanes. It's as if we went on believing in gravity despite things falling up randomly about a third of the time as "gravity's mysterious ways," rather than realizing that there was something fundamentally wrong with the theory of gravity.

Wrong Jenny, A singularity is evidence your theory is incapable of describing that very thing you are calling a singularity. Scientist are incapable of telling us what is at the center of a black hole.....so they call it a singularity. Bible thumpers are incapable of explaining all of God's actions....so they say His ways are mysterious. Both explanations really amount to "I don't know".

[pocaracas]

Not quite. Singularity refers to not knowing because of lack of evidence. "God works in mysterious ways" generally refers not just to things we can't explain, but to things that absolutely contradict what is otherwise said about god, i.e. god is all loving and all powerful, but children are dying due to hurricanes. It's as if we went on believing in gravity despite things falling up randomly about a third of the time as "gravity's mysterious ways," rather than realizing that there was something fundamentally wrong with the theory of gravity.

Wrong Jenny, A singularity is evidence your theory is incapable of describing that very thing you are calling a singularity. Scientist are incapable of telling us what is at the center of a black hole.....so they call it a singularity. Bible thumpers are incapable of explaining all of God's actions....so they say His ways are mysterious. Both explanations really amount to "I don't know".

And yet, one of them can, in theory, be discovered... the gap in knowledge can be plugged.
For the other hypothesis, it can never be discovered by any living human being, unless he becomes a prophet. Now, how to distinguish a prophet from a lunatic?

[Baqal]

@Heywood
-Scientist are incapable of telling us what is at the center of a black hole.....so they call it a singularity.
Which seems reasonable, since we can tell that black holes have a strong pulling force, and there is a hypothesis that the force is strongest in a point that seems to be located somewhere in the middle of a black hole. Pardon me, I fail to see any ignorance there.

[Jenny A]

Not quite. Singularity refers to not knowing because of lack of evidence. "God works in mysterious ways" generally refers not just to things we can't explain, but to things that absolutely contradict what is otherwise said about god, i.e. god is all loving and all powerful, but children are dying due to hurricanes. It's as if we went on believing in gravity despite things falling up randomly about a third of the time as "gravity's mysterious ways," rather than realizing that there was something fundamentally wrong with the theory of gravity.

Wrong Jenny, A singularity is evidence your theory is incapable of describing that very thing you are calling a singularity. Scientist are incapable of telling us what is at the center of a black hole.....so they call it a singularity. Bible thumpers are incapable of explaining all of God's actions....so they say His ways are mysterious. Both explanations really amount to "I don't know".

No the difference is simple. Christians have a hypothesis of what god is. God is all loving and all powerful, right? And when that hypothesis is contradicted, they say "god's ways are mysterious." What they should say is, wait, maybe god either isn't all loving or isn't all powerful.

We don't know what is in a black hole, but we do have theories. Any theory that doesn't match the facts we do know must be thrown in the scrap heap. And we do throw them in the scrap heap.

God's mysterious ways is a way of ignoring contradictions in what is said about god, not just labeling ignorance.

[Minimalist]

If you ask a scientist what a singularity is they will tell you its a mathematical phenomenon based upon the absentia of a physical theorem for quantum gravitation, and not a real physical actuality. In other words...they will tell you they don't really know what it is. "Singularity" is just a phrase/word for ignorance.....just like "God works in mysterious ways".

The difference between a scientist and you, Woodie, is that they are honest when they say they don't know. They then use that as a motivator to continue searching for answers.

You wrap yourself in your god shit and pretend that is an answer.

It isn't. 'God' is an excuse to sit on your ass and think you know shit you don't.

[Jenny A]

If then, objective moral values and duties exist, the question is what is the foundation and could evolution have produced it?

I'll start with an example. Most mammalian mothers rear their young. Feeding and protecting their young is a moral value, wouldn't you say? It's favored by natural selection because mothers who make sure their young survive are more likely to have their genes passed on to the next generation. Some mammals and most birds have gone further and the sir as well as the dam helps raise young. This principle can carry out into whole troops of related animals. ---- But it's not the only strategy. Most reptiles and insects simply produce many, many eggs and let the shear numbers do the parenting work for them. Are the reptiles immoral?

In other words morality come from behaviors that favor more viable off-spring. Raising off spring is obvious. But mutual protection from other species, not killing each other off so no one survives and so on are all moral behaviors with an evolutionary basis.

People are a little different because we've added reason to instinct. As a survival strategy that seems to be working pretty well.

If we had evolved differently with slight modifications to our brain or instinctive behavior, would these values and duties be different?

Yes. Polar bear mothers for example, raise their young. But male polar bears are the number one predator of polar bear cubs. That's rather different morality ain't it?

Stated a different way, if some current primate group's cognitive ability evolves enough to begin behaving in a civilization--co-existing with us, would you say that they would have a different set of moral values and duties or would ours apply? If different, why?

Hard to say. Our basic instincts aren't all that much different from chimps now. However, national morality, that is morality between nations operates rather differently than it does between individuals within a nation. How we would treat an intelligent but non-human race, is an interesting question.

[SteveII]

If our morality came from our evolution and our experiences AND if we had evolved differently (or another intelligence evolved) and we could have a difference set of moral values and duties, doesn't that lead to espousing speciesism?