Go with your head or go with your heart.

[Isoverity]

"This is quite a nice short video about dishonesty and the feeling of taking from a person vs taking from a place."

That's interesting but not really about people have a conscience at birth. People can and do lose their conscience. Its not really a fixed laundry list but a knowing that can have a specific meaning in a moment. In one moment it can be wrong to kill - it another moment it can be wrong not to kill (to save innocent lives etc). The video still has good points about rationalization. The part on theft reminded me of liberals taxing people to death lol.

" Where do you think this soul comes from, or how do you think it comes into existence? I'm a bit of a rationalist in this, rather than a psychic, and I think those feelings can come quite naturally from the right or wrong atoms or electric connections in the brain."

If conscience was just about molecules and atoms then animals would have a conscience but they don't. They don't have choices about what they are either. Cats and dogs wake up and go be cats and dogs without analyzing and getting all conflicted lol. People on the other hand are quite tortured and that holds true over periods in history, races, religions etc. - its universal to the human condition. Humans are the only conveyors of good or evil. Cats cant people evil and people can. Evil and goodness both have a source and people are inclined to one or another by degrees. I absolutely believe people are born with a divine spark. Many lose this as they get older and give in more. As I said nobody really has to be taught not to be a cannibal. Its just does not normally occur to people to eat other people. That comes from being degraded in a culture where conscience is bred out of people via all kinds of shocks and debasements. A real cannibals feels guilty for not eating people. The polarity of their souls are reversed.

Ultimately people put faith in something that they cant prove despite claims about being "scientific". There has never been a "chemical imbalance" proven but millions of people take meds anyway thinking they are following science when they are following scientism. On the other hand you can walk up to anyone rational and punch them in the nose unexpectedly and they will all know that was wrong without needing a study to prove it.

[Dreaming.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

That's interesting but not really about people have a conscience at birth.

Well.. Yeah, obviously not. That's why I said "This is quite a nice short video about dishonesty and the feeling of taking from a person vs taking from a place (even if it affects the person)". It was more a follow-on from my points about the fact that I disagree with the idea that people are born knowing that it's wrong to steal; it depends on context and personification of the victim, which was addressed in the video. Make sense now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

If conscience was just about molecules and atoms then animals would have a conscience but they don't.

That's the same logic as saying "if tails were made of molecules and atoms then humans would have them but we don't" - just because we're made of the same things doesn't mean the formula can't lead to different results. Cake and pizza both start with flour and eggs but they're pretty different consumables.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isoverity

Ultimately people put faith in something that they cant prove despite claims about being "scientific". There has never been a "chemical imbalance" proven but millions of people take meds anyway thinking they are following science when they are following scientism. On the other hand you can walk up to anyone rational and punch them in the nose unexpectedly and they will all know that was wrong without needing a study to prove it.

TBF, I'd rather put faith in something that is actually testable, rather than a belief in something unproven and unqualifiable. "I believe in this?" "oh really - why?" "because I do" is often a rather circular and - frankly - frustrating argument.

[Isoverity]

Alright now don't go crazy with the multiquote - its a thread-killer lol

Cake and pizza are differnt - but neither have a conscience. Tails also have no life of their own. Apples to oranges.

There is no way people could exist by only acting on what is scientifically proven. Science is actually quite limited and all the best scientists know that. Does your bf "prove" he loves you scientifically? Do you "prove" you love him scientifically? What is your data and how do you index it? One third to fifty percent of scientific studies prove out to be wrong. How do you decide which ones to follow or not? People really shouldn't need a study to tell them good and evil exists. Scientific studies are actually quite discrete and limited. Science and theology actually compliment each. There are religious arguments that are not only quite unscientific but violate common sense and deserve to be rejected on that count. However lots of things enhance each other. Einstein and many other famous scientists knew that

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” Einstein

[Buttons.]

^ I like that quote.