Determinism And Rationality.

[JimL]

It is still all mechanical just more complex - caring, or not caring do not rationally acquire praise or blame, any more than indigestion.

Then there'd be no need of such complexity.

[seer]

So if caring comes from God, then it's a beautiful thing, but if it came about by naturalistic processes, it's disgusting.

Interesting.

No, it doesn't come from God per se, it is based on our free volition. Not merely the result of determined biological programming. And worthy of praise.

[seer]

Then there'd be no need of such complexity.

????

[Stoic]

No, it doesn't come from God per se, it is based on our free volition. Not merely the result of determined biological programming. And worthy of praise.

I would say it's worthy of praise even if it's "merely" the result of determined biological programming. YMMV.

[seer]

I would say it's worthy of praise even if it's "merely" the result of determined biological programming. YMMV.

So if an automaton went around feeding the poor, you would praise the robot? Why?

[Stoic]

So if an automaton went around feeding the poor, you would praise the robot? Why?

If praising the robot benefited it, and caused it and other robots to be more predisposed to go around feeding the poor, why not?

[seer]

If praising the robot benefited it, and caused it and other robots to be more predisposed to go around feeding the poor, why not?

Sounds like your robots have free will. Interesting.

[Stoic]

Sounds like your robots have free will. Interesting.

Depends on how you define free will.

[Tassman]

we have no idea if animal self awareness is anything like ours or what it really is...

Not so. We have a very good idea,

I never said animals don't have a degree of consciousness or intelligence, but it is not like ours in kind or degree since ours is supernatural.

As your religion teaches.

So funny that you have the gall to instruct a practicing Baha'i like shuny what he is supposed to believe.

[seer]

Depends on how you define free will.

The ability to do otherwise...

[MaxVel]

So funny that you have the gall to instruct a practicing Baha'i like shuny what he is supposed to believe.

Yet here you are, having spent years on this board telling Christians what they are 'supposed to believe'.


Baha'ism has certain core beliefs. If Shunya is a Baha'i then he should hold those beliefs, or have a substantial explanation why he doesn't, yet is still a Baha'i. Nothing wrong with Seer asking about that. It is a discussion board, after all.

[shunyadragon]

The ability to do otherwise...

Too much of a generalization of the problematic human will.

[shunyadragon]

Yet here you are, having spent years on this board telling Christians what they are 'supposed to believe'.


Baha'ism has certain core beliefs. If Shunya is a Baha'i then he should hold those beliefs, or have a substantial explanation why he doesn't, yet is still a Baha'i. Nothing wrong with Seer asking about that. It is a discussion board, after all.

Yes, seer has a right to asking these questions, but Seer has a history of google searching selectively citing Baha'i writings to justify his agenda. Scripture should consider as a whole and not selective justification.

He believes in the literal interpretation of religious writings is one believes in the scripture, which is his belief in the Bible.

[MaxVel]

Yes, seer has a right to asking these questions,

but Seer has a history of google searching selectively citing Baha'i writings to justify his agenda.

That's your standard boilerplate whenever someone brings up some source or evidence that puts into question your claims. I don't believe you. You resort to a personal attack (a logical fallacy as well) instead of dealing with the data. This is a recurring pattern with you, and damages your.... (cough).... credibility.

Scripture should consider as a whole and not selective justification.

He believes in the literal interpretation of religious writings is one believes in the scripture, which is his belief in the Bible.

You seem to be trying to say something about Seer's approach to interpreting the Bible which I doubt is correct. Of course I could be misreading you, but the last sentence above is gibberish.

[seer]

Yes, seer has a right to asking these questions, but Seer has a history of google searching selectively citing Baha'i writings to justify his agenda. Scripture should consider as a whole and not selective justification.

He believes in the literal interpretation of religious writings is one believes in the scripture, which is his belief in the Bible.

I told you this before Shuny, back in 90s I had a friend who was Bahai, I read a number of your books, that is why I know what to look for. Much of it actually agrees with Christian theology. The Bahai view on the rational soul is dead on as far as I'm concerned. To bad you have to reject the plain teachings of your own faith. And there was nothing selective about what I quoted about the soul - that is what your religion teaches, and I linked it so you can read it in context.