401. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54243 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 5:42 am

Gordon,

I did answer your question, you didn't read it. The statement about innocents is a specific definition that can be considered.

If you want a broader definition: belief in good & evil, right & wrong.

402. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54240 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 5:34 am

Benway,

To say that there is 'good' (morality) because it sustains society, and sustaining society is good, is a vicious circle.

It's like saying that God exists because it's in the bible, and the bible is true because it's the word of God!

403. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54228 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 4:36 am

you are religious then.

404. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54223 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 4:26 am

The statement I posed.

(The fact that morality does change and is different in different times & places indicates its falsity - just like the different religions prove their falsity.)

405. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54220 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 4:19 am

A future place in the universe would probably be more attainable through having more wars as technology (especially missile technology) would develop more rapidly (in an arms race).

Compassion, pacificism could annihilate a species.

But can you prove morality, if not why do you believe it? You may as well believe in Islam or Hinduism without proof.

406. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54217 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 3:56 am

If morality is not a faith, answer this:

--Prove that the statement, "Killing innocent people is wrong", is a fact--

Prove it.


(And do not say that it makes people happier not being killed, as religion also makes people happier - happiness, pleasure or pain does not make something true, as Dawkins repeatedly points out.)

407. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54216 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 3:47 am

Gordon,

Of course altruism is good for survival, but so is aggression, depending on cirumstances.

Bonobos and apes are also aggressive. I didn't write that -having- altruism means you're essentially Christian, but rather -valuing- it.

Love, companionship, pity, etc. all are values helping especially the weak. Christianity stems from a weak slave group (under the Romans). It's a sentimentalist creed. We should be careful to not fall into their world-view, I would say.

(Obviously Christianity developed into a powerful creed post-Constantine, but this powerful creed exploits people's weaknesses.)

408. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54208 by Henri Bergson on July 6, 2007 at 3:17 am

This makes little difference to the ethical origin: there is also a biological basis for aggression - why do we value altruism and not aggression?

Many thinkers have thought compassion a weakness of mind, including Plato and many Romans.

Compassion is ultimately a Christian value: Christianity was always seen as a sentimentalist religion from its very conception.

I think many so-called atheists have subconsciously inherited this sentimental, Christian world-view but wish to ground it in science.

Of course I am an atheist, but a true atheist: one who rejects morality as a faith just as religion. You cannot 'prove' morality.

You can perhaps prove altruism (as the article suggests), but why is altruism good and not a weakness? That requires faith.

Western atheists are still predominantly secular Christians.

409. Postmodernism Disrobed

Comment #53032 by Henri Bergson on June 29, 2007 at 3:35 am

It's interesting that Deleuze was strongly influenced by, and wrote about, the French philosopher Henri Bergson (no relation).

Bergson wrote very clearly and lucidly about a type of metaphysics (super empiricism) and actually criticised those who didn't as pretenders.

410. Vatican cardinal calls on Catholics to stop funding Amnesty

Comment #50096 by Henri Bergson on June 15, 2007 at 3:11 am

This is pure comedy: two delusional institutions fighting each other for the moral high ground!

Amnesty's beliefs, just like Catholicism, cannot be proved or verified. They are both faiths. Amnesty is not allowed - by the courts of Britain - charity status as it is considered a political creed.

411. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49601 by Henri Bergson on June 12, 2007 at 2:19 pm

I will break you.

412. The planet hunters

Comment #47240 by Henri Bergson on June 3, 2007 at 5:01 pm

Thanks for your highly important opinion mind rebel.
It's nothing to do with UFOs though.

413. Photos of The God Delusion Event in Second Life

Comment #46781 by Henri Bergson on June 1, 2007 at 2:48 pm

Of course for the people of Second Life, there really is a creator and no evolution.

So no wonder Dawkins is in a church-looking building: he's the deluded one in this artificial world!

414. Comic in US 'hate speech' row

Comment #44661 by Henri Bergson on May 25, 2007 at 6:43 am

It's because Californian liberals are as brainwashed as their right-wing evangelical US counterparts.

I met a Californian 'academic' who seriously believed and advocated the view that Jesus was a black lesbian.

415. Despite what the scholars say, God isn't dead yet

Comment #43881 by Henri Bergson on May 23, 2007 at 3:22 am

What's wrong with eugenics?

It's just caring for the human health of the future, just as environmentalism cares for the healthy environment of the future.

416. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43427 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 11:18 am

Sorry if I sound arrogant, but the argument I make (and it is not mine) is important and seldomly addressed. Possibly because it is not understood.

I refer to the argument made by the German philosopher, Nietzsche; as well as many others.

417. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43413 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 10:18 am

I read that book as a child. I moved on Luthien, along with Dawkins himself. I suggest you do as well.

418. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43399 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 9:21 am

Serious thinkers do not rely on TV documentaries for their knowledge.
Even Dawkins writes (in the God Delusion) that a covertly greedy individual has evolutionary advantages. But all of that it beside the point I previously made; please try to understand.

Coughlan:
Det var inte vad jag menade, precis. Men jag tror ochså vad du säger om religion.

419. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43390 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 8:47 am

Reductio ad Trollum
– a novel way of avoiding admission of defeat in an argument.

The points I made are serious. In sum, altruism is undoubtedly an evolved trait. Indeed it can be useful for gene proliferation. But 'immorality' can also be very useful (e.g. greed). Therefore to value morality over immorality cannot be explained by evolution itself. To do so requires a prior value schema.

420. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43377 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 8:04 am

Luthien:
That a 'common goal' should be 'good' is your fantasy. Read something intelligent and we'll be able to continue this debate.

421. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43342 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 6:33 am

Luthien:

A 'cold' response is just as quick as an emotional one, if not faster as it bypassses the necessity for emotion.

Aggression is also an evolved response. Therefore to say that altruism is 'better' than aggression is to make a presupposed value judgement.

It is a shame that us atheists do not recognise the subliminal religious ethics that underlie our thought.

422. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43269 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 3:19 am

Luthien:

That does not explain why, say, sympathy is good for someone unknown to you.

You miss the point. This research bases itself on Christian morality ('slave morality').

423. Scientists Draw Link Between Morality And Brain's Wiring

Comment #43253 by Henri Bergson on May 21, 2007 at 2:48 am

What simple-minded research. Of course 'moral' decision are based on emotions, to a certain extent. But the question is, why do we value such emotions as 'good' in the first place? Why not say that such emotion-based decisions are a form of mental weakness (as thought Plato, the Imperial Romans, and Nietzsche, amongst others), and that 'cold'/emotionless decisions are a sign of strength – that one can control one's emotions?

In other words, to 'prove' this morality presupposes another morality behind it. So it proves absolutely nothing.

424. The Creation Museum: Prepare to believe

Comment #41003 by Henri Bergson on May 15, 2007 at 10:12 am

There should be a continual protest outside this offence to the human intellect.

It should be organised, otherwise children may not even realise it is controversial.

Or destroy it... (in a legal way)

425. Furor over author Ayaan Hirsi Ali's visit stirs debate on religious freedom

Comment #40527 by Henri Bergson on May 14, 2007 at 12:09 pm

Stupidity?:

'"She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death," said ElBayly'
...

'"It's a very merciful religion if you try to understand it." said ElBayly'.

----

We should not respect or tolerate this faith. It is both absurdly stupid and increasingly lethal. Just as a soft approach would have been catastrophic against Nazism, so a soft approach to Islam will be catastrophic.

The weak should not be allowed to bring us all down.

426. Dogma

Comment #40402 by Henri Bergson on May 14, 2007 at 8:37 am

is this Coughlin guy a primary school teacher? Why do you include such patronising stuff?

427. A Bunch of Monkeys

Comment #38393 by Henri Bergson on May 8, 2007 at 1:13 am

And it's pronounced "Nee-chu," not "Nee-chee"! Get an education.

428. A Bunch of Monkeys

Comment #38392 by Henri Bergson on May 8, 2007 at 1:11 am

Humans are certainly not the only animals that hate each other – lefty.

429. Atheists split on how to not believe

Comment #33923 by Henri Bergson on April 22, 2007 at 5:29 pm

Humanism = Secular Christianity

"If you renounce God, you thereby renounce Christian morality." – Nietzsche

430. Iran Exonerates Six Who Killed in Islam's Name

Comment #33244 by Henri Bergson on April 19, 2007 at 5:05 pm

Nuke 'em

431. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28021 by Henri Bergson on March 27, 2007 at 3:40 pm

If by 'union with God', the Pope means something like Kant's noumena, or the experience Aldous Huxley had after taking the cactus drug Mescalin, then maybe he's onto something.

It's all a matter of definition. Language creates more illusions than Catholicism.

432. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28019 by Henri Bergson on March 27, 2007 at 3:36 pm

That's not the point the article conveys. the point is the title, obviously.

I'm waiting for you – I'm already in hell (London).

433. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28015 by Henri Bergson on March 27, 2007 at 3:29 pm

Teapot:

The article is entitled, 'Hell is real & eternal: Pope'. But then it reads that he does not mean real, really. So what's the point of the article!

434. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28007 by Henri Bergson on March 27, 2007 at 2:59 pm

Snap!

435. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28001 by Henri Bergson on March 27, 2007 at 2:52 pm

"Hell is a place where sinners really do burn in an everlasting fire, and not just a religious symbol"

"hell is a "state of eternal separation from God", to be understood "symbolically rather than physically"

What a contradictory article! Which one is it?? Hell literally or symbolically? I read elsewhere it is the latter.

Sometimes atheists are just as stupid as theists.

436. The Moral Necessity of Atheism

Comment #27536 by Henri Bergson on March 25, 2007 at 7:43 am

Hitchens comment on Nietzsche is not accurate.

When Nietzsche writes that Christianity is for slaves, he means it metaphorically (although it originated from Jewish slaves of course). Therefore the fact that slave handlers were Christian does not disprove the theory.

Rather, to be concise, Christianity is for the weak, slave-like, sheepish mind. Nothing revolutionary there, but it cannot be argued against. Nietzsche aso follows Seneca with his famous quotation that,
"Religion for the common person is true, for the wise, false; and for the rulers, useful."

That's the 'will to power', in one aspect.

437. Did You Know? Shift Happens - Globalization, Information Age

Comment #25557 by Henri Bergson on March 14, 2007 at 4:47 am

Nonsense. People do not even understand the mind yet, let alone are therefore able to predict its overcoming.

T2 was not produced by Nostradamus.

438. British Book Awards shortlists 2007

Comment #24817 by Henri Bergson on March 8, 2007 at 6:05 pm

Lady GG:

Nietzsche takes atheism one step further than Dawkins.

I recommend 'On the Genealogy of Morality', 'Beyond Good & Evil', and 'the Anti-Christ'.

Although Dawkins is good, and great especially for the (somewhat) uneducated Americans, his thought is child's play in comparison.

439. British Book Awards shortlists 2007

Comment #24769 by Henri Bergson on March 8, 2007 at 12:20 pm

Dawkins deserves to win, but I think Denoir above has a point. Dawkins does not compare to a writer like Nietzsche – the real anti-christ.

440. Was there ever dog that praised his fleas?

Comment #24027 by Henri Bergson on March 4, 2007 at 11:07 am

Such defensiveness betrays that real damage has been done. Well done Dawkins!

441. The Dawkins Confusion: Naturalism ad absurdum

Comment #23682 by Henri Bergson on March 2, 2007 at 3:46 am

Methinks thou dost protest too much...

Kant refuted these arguments 200 years ago - and he was (supposedly) a Christian!

It is unbelievable Plantniga still holds onto the ontological argument.

442. Is God a Delusion? Atheism and the Meaning of Life

Comment #21975 by Henri Bergson on February 12, 2007 at 2:46 am

McGrath states, "No-one has ever seen a virus of the mind." Well, firstly virus is used here metaphorically (no-one has seen the 'virus' of terrorism); secondly , one can see the manifestations of this metaphorical virus as one can see the manifestation of a biological virus (looking ill): the church.

Furthermore, McGrath's overlong, proud refutation of Dawkins' minor point that belief in Santa is analogous to belief in God – that we do not begin believing in Santa as adults, misses the point. The point being that there is as much proof for Santa as there is for God – believing in the latter at an older age simply betrays a psychological or intellectual flaw. People with neither, have done with both Santa and God at an early stage.

McGrath is a theologian, not a philosopher.