Human Dignity?

[Tassman]

So the laws of nature purposed that we as a species should survive?

We as a species, instinctively exhibit purposefulness to survive, and all living creatures have the same evolved instincts.

If you don't like the word accident, use "chance." It is by chance that we even developed as we did, or even survived as a species in the first place.

Natural Selection has determined who and what we are, as with all living creatures.

Yes, but it is only by chance that we have this instinct. Nature had no purpose or intent for the human species, and that certainly does not mean that we have inherent worth.

[shunyadragon]

What are you taking about? Did we have to evolve the way we did,

Have to??? Odd hypothetical question. The fact is we did evolve the way we are.

or evolve at all - yes or no?

Yes

In any case, that still does not get you to inherent human worth.

You cannot demonstrate nor falsify the question that it did not.

[seer]

Have to??? Odd hypothetical question. The fact is we did evolve the way we are.

No Shuny, you know the answer. A thousand other things could logically have happened, or not happened, to change the course of our development or even end it. We just got lucky to get this far.

Yes

Prove that. Why did we have to evolve as we did or evolve at all? You are not making sense.

You cannot demonstrate nor falsify the question that it did not.

OK, then what gave human beings inherent worth? The laws of nature that created us? How? If you can not offer a plausible source for intrinsic human worth then I have no good reason to assume that it is possible in a materialistic universe.

[seer]

We as a species, instinctively exhibit purposefulness to survive, and all living creatures have the same evolved instincts.

That is not what I asked Tass: did the laws of nature "purpose" that we should survive. Or did we just get lucky?

Natural Selection has determined who and what we are, as with all living creatures.

Right, and logically natural selection, with random mutations, could have created us differently, or not at all. Or we could have been destroyed by an asteroid. So we got lucky.

That is not inherent worth Tass, and I think you have every right to make believe that you have value.

[shunyadragon]

No Shuny, you know the answer.

No, I do not know in any absolute sense.

A thousand other things could logically have happened, or not happened, to change the course of our development or even end it. We just got lucky to get this far.

The course of evolution is not based on what can logically happen. Natural Law determines what will happen within the limits of Natural Law. It is hypothetical how many outcomes of evolution there are possible, neither of us 'know' what is possible here.

Prove that. Why did we have to evolve as we did or evolve at all? You are not making sense.

Your deliberate voluntary ignorance of science is rearing its ugly head as if citing AIG arguments. Science does not 'prove' anything. The science of evolution is falsified beyond a reasonable doubt. No other alternative has passed muster in science, nor any objective evidence to the contrary. This also applies to the evolution of consciousness, self-awareness, and of course, 'dignity.' There is no objective evidence that there is any other 'source' or alternate explanation only conjecture based on religious belief.

OK, then what gave human beings inherent worth?

The evolution of intelligence and social cooperative behavior for the survival of a mammalian species with a long gestation period and slow maturing of the young requiring intensive nurturing and a family structure. We have no objective verifiable evidence for any alternative explanation.

The laws of nature that created us? How?

Natural Laws do not create.

If you can not offer a plausible source for intrinsic human worth then I have no good reason to assume that it is possible in a materialistic universe.

You reject science with a 'wave of the hand' and require science to prove things. This does not work in constructive communication.

Bold - You reject anything can happen in what you call a materialist universe. Science does not make any claim nor present any theory nor hypothesis that our physical existence is only the result of materialist processes.

[seer]

The course of evolution is not based on what can logically happen. Natural Law determines what will happen within the limits of Natural Law. It is hypothetical how many outcomes of evolution there are possible, neither of us 'know' what is possible here.

If there are possible outcomes then it is possible that we could have developed differently or not at all. We got lucky, unlike the dinosaurs.

The evolution of intelligence and social cooperative behavior for the survival of a mammalian species with a long gestation period and slow maturing of the young requiring intensive nurturing and a family structure. We have no objective verifiable evidence for any alternative explanation.

How does that give us inherent worth?

Natural Laws do not create.

Then what does?

You reject science with a 'wave of the hand' and require science to prove things. This does not work in constructive communication.

Bold - You reject anything can happen in what you call a materialist universe. Science does not make any claim nor present any theory nor hypothesis that our physical existence is only the result of materialist processes.

You still have not made a case for inherent human value.

[shunyadragon]

If there are possible outcomes then it is possible that we could have developed differently or not at all. We got lucky, unlike the dinosaurs.

How does that give us inherent worth?

Then what does?

You still have not made a case for inherent human value.

You have failed to make a case for the assertion of the thread. It is the responsibility of the one who makes the assertion to make the case, demonstrate or falsify your claim with evidence.

[Tassman]

That is not what I asked Tass: did the laws of nature "purpose" that we should survive. Or did we just get lucky?

Right, and logically natural selection, with random mutations, could have created us differently, or not at all. Or we could have been destroyed by an asteroid. So we got lucky.

That is not inherent worth Tass, and I think you have every right to make believe that you have value.

think you have that right. Natural selection has determined that as a social species we have evolved community-orientated values and characteristics, which are shared by all humans and other social animals such as the great apes.

[seer]

You have failed to make a case for the assertion of the thread. It is the responsibility of the one who makes the assertion to make the case, demonstrate or falsify your claim with evidence.

You are fibbing again Shuny, I made no such assertion - go back to my OP, and what I asked: Logically, and inherently, do humans have more dignity than animals?

Obviously you can not show that humans have more inherent dignity than animals, or inherent dignity at all.

[seer]

So we got lucky, unlike the dinosaurs, well at least so far.

Many scientists suggest that the 6th great mass sixth extinction is well underway, thanks to the ignorant climate-change deniers.

Just doing what Natural Selection has determined us to do.

think you have that right. Natural selection has determined that as a social species we have evolved community-orientated values and characteristics, which are shared by all humans and other social animals such as the great apes.

I'm not following you Tass - do you believe that humans have inherent worth or not?

[shunyadragon]

You are fibbing again Shuny, I made no such assertion - go back to my OP, and what I asked: Logically, and inherently, do humans have more dignity than animals?

Obviously you can not show that humans have more inherent dignity than animals, or inherent dignity at all.

No you are fibbing seer. The Bold above is the basis of your assertion, back it up. Demanding to prove, falsify the negative is a fallacy. You cannot hide behind bad logic.

[seer]

No you are fibbing seer. The Bold above is the basis of your assertion, back it up. Demanding to prove, falsify the negative is a fallacy. You cannot hide behind bad logic.

Shuny, I never claimed that it would be impossible, I made no such assertion. But if you think otherwise show that humans have more inherent dignity than animals, or inherent dignity at all. I can see no natural explanation for inherent human worth than for any other creature. Just admit that you have no argument.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, I never claimed that it would be impossible, I made no such assertion.

Than it is possibly and you have not presented any argument otherwise.

But if you think otherwise show that humans have more inherent dignity than animals, or inherent dignity at all.

What I think also is rather meaningless. Dignity is an apparent attribute of self-awareness, and self-awareness is an attribute of humans and some primates possibly an inherent attribute of evolution. You have not presented a coherent argument that would indicate that there is any other possible source by the evidence.

I can see no natural explanation for inherent human worth than for any other creature.

Here is the problem. What you think or see is is no a coherent argument either way.

Just admit that you have no argument.

No, because you do not have a coherent to begin an argument.

[seer]

What I think also is rather meaningless. Dignity is an apparent attribute of self-awareness, and self-awareness is an attribute of humans and some primates possibly an inherent attribute of evolution. You have not presented a coherent argument that would indicate that there is any other possible source by the evidence.

Then how is inherent dignity possibly an inherent attribute? Eye color, self-awareness, fur, feet are inherent physical qualities. Dignity or worth is an abstract concept. How do the laws of nature endow us with an abstract?

Here is the problem. What you think or see is is no a coherent argument either way.

Sure there is, unless you can make an argument that nature can create us with an inherent non-physical, abstract quality

[shunyadragon]

Then how is inherent dignity possibly an inherent attribute? Eye color, self-awareness, fur, feet are inherent physical qualities. Dignity or worth is an abstract concept. How do the laws of nature endow us with an abstract?

Dignity is and attribute of human identity the same as self-awareness and an abstract concept. Self-awareness is not a physical quality like eye color, fur and feet.

Sure there is, unless you can make an argument that nature can create us with an inherent non-physical, abstract quality

There is not an argument from the perspective of science that nature can create anything including us.