It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Yeah-Alright
"Self-righteous morality is cunning hypocrisy. The only virtue is reckless love." - Deepak Chopra
"Self righteousness is a mask for hypocrisy and self importance." -- Carlos Castaneda
Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
Why? "Solid future"?
solid future. as in, the future is just as solid a place as the present. so is the past. they are solid physical places. the 4th dimension is the bridge between them.
Glad you finally admit the contradiction, but have you shown a way where they don't have to? Hardly.
they only appear to contradict. what is so hard to understand? humans have a choice, but each of us always would have chosen to do what we have done, and will do. so there is only one timeline, and choice still manifests itself.
aquinas didn't think to consider anything less than absolute free will.
plato's view on free will was that the body was "victim to causation" but the soul enjoyed free will, which doesn't make a huge amount of sense because does not the soul control the body?
age has no effect on the validity of an argument. it can neither affirm nor discredit.
the future is just as solid a place as the present
what is so hard to understand? humans have a choice, but each of us always would have chosen to do what we have done, and will do. so there is only one timeline, and choice still manifests itself
each of us always would have chosen to do what we have done
aquinas didn't think to consider anything less than absolute free will.
plato's view on free will was that the body was "victim to causation" but the soul enjoyed free will, which doesn't make a huge amount of sense because does not the soul control the body?
age has no effect on the validity of an argument. it can neither affirm nor discredit.
Originally posted by ImAwareSC
Morals or not, it seems as if it strikes one as a set of rules on how to act.
If I for example take pleasure from hurting someone, does this make me a bad person?
If so, by what laid set of rules?
It doesn't feel that way to me, and if it feels right or normal to act that way, who is to say it's wrong...the greater populace or are we simply expected to act this way?
If you want to argue that way too many individuals fake morality, or are only moral when it is convenient, well you will get no argument from me.
You have lots of ideas, and at minimum, you might consider putting a thread together to better get your points across.
You have made lots of declarations, from the beginning, and finally one bold assertion after another, without a prayer of "proving" anything, but alas, this is the kind of thing it is, I suppose.
When you get a chance, be sure to check in with your local university's philosophy department, and notify them of your breakthrough. And while you're at it, if they have a physics program, let the professors know about your most serious dogma, "there is only one timeline". Be sure to have your PhD credentials handy.
Complete rubbish, forgive me, but you have already confessed to the fact that an "absolute" free will pertains to non-finite beings. Try again.
Morals = Not Real
Originally posted by Balkan
Agreed. People think we are born with a sense of right and wrong, and I disagree.
Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by boncho
Personal standards are the same thing as morals. So yes you do have morals.
end of thread