• Ronno@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 hours ago

    There are plenty examples of religious leaders raping and killing children and other offenses. But I guess they are above it all then?

  • Maeve@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I think zealot answered that. It seems that people who can’t manage themselves and their worst impulse want to manage others.

    • reiterationstation@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Grimes and musk believe the AI is God. So there’s a good chance context is missing here on purpose because she’s aware enough to not go full crazy.

      Bring back God = build the AI.

      • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        they don’t believe in god, so there’s no belief in AI.

        let me sum it up for you in a few words imagine they are the thoughts of our oppressors.

        I am a god.

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The archetypes, best, worst and middling, are those parts of ourselves, so I can kind of see that. I’m fairly sure that’s not what they mean by it, but I could be wrong. People can agree on basic premise and have wildly varying ideas of the implications, such as regular people who hi to church, temple and mosque and basically try to be decent to everyone, and those who wield religion like a cudgel.

        Eta, just saying I’m fairly sure i don’t agree their implications, maybe not the actual premise. I realize it was murky.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      This is the fact that is so often overlooked because its too goddamn inconvenient for them to acknowledge.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think her argument was that religion offered an easy way to make moral choices.

  • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    There was just a case where a woman gave birth to a baby in the woods, left it there and left for a vacation. If it weren’t for the family dog desperately trying to save the baby and getting noticed by a stranger, nobody would have ever known as even the rest of the family was defensive of the woman.

    This shows morality is not only not an exclusively trait but not even an exclusively human trait.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I am not sure that I agree that the dog’s behavior necessarily demonstrates “morality.” You might be anthropomorphizing a bit. I am not a biologist or anything, so I could be way off base… But is it not possible that the dog was acting on instincts to protect newborn offspring? Similar to when animals “adopt” babies from other species as their own?

      Morality implies that the dog did a thing because it’s “the right thing to do,” when in reality, it might have just been a self-preservation instinct kicking in. Dog sees newborn that’s clearly the offspring of the being that takes care of it, dog tries to preserve that newborn’s life in order to keep the gravy train going.

      Just my (again, non-expert) thoughts.

      • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Zealots judging by the news coming out of america do not care about such trivial details as “facts”, “medical science” and “behavioral science”. It is unnecessary for them to take that into consideration.

      • qyron@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        You can remove the argument from morality safely from your answer just by stating the dog acted upon instinct, based off the notion dogs are pack animals, that have a closely knit symbiotic relatioship with human, which can be used to in favour of the dog finding a newborn activated the instinct of preserving their pack.

        The way you approached the subject can be easily side tracked through arguing you are atributting self interest to the animals actions, as in, it keeps the newborn alive, thus, their own preservation is assured.

        If acting on true self interest, the dog should have allowed the newborn to die.

        Side note: who discards a newborn in such calous way? How unbalanced is the person?

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          If acting on true self interest, the dog should have allowed the newborn to die.

          That’s not necessarily true. No more human offspring means no more symbiotic relationship.

          • qyron@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 minutes ago

            No offspring, closer symbiotic relationship, with more resources available.

  • zib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    2 days ago

    If fear of divine retribution is your only reason for being a good person, then you are not a good person.

  • AidsKitty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Welcome to the rise and celebration of immortality. Pornstars, OF, open drug markets\junkies, and general San Fransisco culture.

    • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      18 hours ago

      All of those things are only problematic in excess, and are mostly excessive because of capitalism. Theres nothing immoral about sex or drugs.

      • AidsKitty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        16 hours ago

        There is definitely something immoral about open air drug markets, junkies lying in the streets, glorification of sex workers and prostitution, and blaming it on “capitalism” is an easy way to not accept responsibility for your societal shortcomings.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Religion provided people with a sense of community. Without it, they’ve been finding community on the internet which has resulted in people believing in all kinds of strange things. Significantly stranger than there being a metaphysical consciousness in the universe.

    Religion, while not perfect, often tries to encourage people to be better. Of course religion can be corrupted by politics at times, and we’re certainly in one of those times. But the general concept of people coming together and encouraging each other to be better isn’t a bad thing.

    Internet groups are worse than religion, many of them are devoted towards hating an enemy and unlike religion, make no effort to encourage people to better themselves. Religion can often fail at this goal, but most internet groups make no attempt to be better than a failed religion. Case in point: [email protected]

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Grace for one, not the other. I see.

      Switch religion for internet groups in your comment and you’ll be baffled at your hypocrisy.

  • j4k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Shame and peer pressure are outsourcing ethics and never independently developing character.