Group prayer on Skype on behalf of our Christian members

[Anomalocaris]

Just because he wouldn't say that they were a moral being doesn't mean that we can't look at the same evidence but conclude they are moral beings by simply defining morality differently.

I'm sure your no credential having self can conclude anything you want... Why does anyone have to take you seriously though?

Because people with real knowledge of science can evaluate whether he knows something of what he is talking about.

That is unlike you, who thinks Bible is adaquate substitute for real knowledge of, well, anything, and as a result struts about with an moronic attitude like a baffoon as if time wasted with your bible qualifies you to be a worthy participant in discussion about, well, anything.

[Edwardo Piet]

Just because he wouldn't say that they were a moral being doesn't mean that we can't look at the same evidence but conclude they are moral beings by simply defining morality differently.

I'm sure your no credential having self can conclude anything you want... Why does anyone have to take you seriously though?

I don't care at all how seriously anyone takes me I care entirely about what is accurate and correct. Who cares what an authority says, you should try thinking for yourself for once. I believe things that make logical sense to me. I don't delegate my brain to somebody else.

---

*emphasis mine*

Really?

Then how do you explain the behavior of certain religious priests?

The ones who rape and molest you mean? They're awful.

I am aware that you are utterly terrible at logic... but the fact that many immoral people who are so immoral that they need to believe in hell to deter themselves from doing awful things doesn't mean that there aren't people who go ahead and do those things anyway.

[Huggy Bear]

[Edwardo Piet]

[Kitan Etos]

Suck it motherfucker. Goodnight.

I've had better offers. Sweet dreams, Empathetic Prince.

[I_am_not_mafia]

[robvalue]

Finding hard and fast definitions of psychopathy and sociopathy is difficult. It seems to vary according to the context as well as the writer.

My wife is reading a book in which a psychologist analyses school shooters, and he says that psycopaths lack empathy, but aren't necessarily sadists. It's when you get the combination of psycopathy and sadism that you have a really dangerous person on your hands.

However, the proportion of school shooters who are psycopaths is actually quite low. Virtually all of them have some kind of mental illness.

[Amarok]

[robvalue]

Animals clearly do have concepts of right and wrong. They respond to each other depending on their behaviour in social groups. If one of them does something the others think is wrong, they will often "tell them off", or stop them by force, whatever is necessary. On the other hand, "good" behaviour is rewarded by reciprocation.

The fact that the animals can't talk about all this like us in such specific terms, can't write it down and don't attribute all this to the magic of some unseen being makes it no less real.

I think the problem some people have is explaining why humans care about each other. Instead of finding out (and we have very satisfactory answers), they insert "magic". This is pretty silly also because clearly each human crafts their own morality. This runs contrary to the idea of some sort of imbued standard.

[Amarok]