This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

VJocys's Profile

VJocys's Avatar Joined about 7 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by VJocys

More Discussions by VJocys

Latest Comments by VJocys

Go to: Cheap plaster saint

Go to: Turek vs. Hitchens Debate: Does God Exist?

VJocys's Avatar Jump to comment 701 by VJocys

If humans is "just a bunch of chemicals", then movie Star Wars is "just a bunch of pixels" :).

Morale is result of social Evolution. Needs of living beings are greater than possibilities. Therefore to reach goals, living beings sometimes need not just to improve themselves, to create better tools, but to create groups and cooperate too (individuals in groups can afford themselves to specialize – and this brings industrial revolution). Living beings, which learned to cooperate and created rules of interaction - increased their abilities to survive and outrivaled living beings, which did not coordinate their actions between each other and fought with each other. It is important, that no one will destroy reached results, therefore living beings created rules, how to avoid destruction. You can fail to defend city, if part of the brick wall around the city will be weak and can be destroyed by enemy, – therefore groups created rules... forcing to repair and support weak members-links of society, to avoid failing through them – usually it is cheaper to repair, than destroy and build new from scratch. Rules (limitations) were created during thinking about how OTHERS must behave with CREATOR of rules (creators of rules usually do not have intentions to limit themselves – they have intentions to limit others). Every creator thought that OTHERS must behave well with him and that OTHERS must not steal or kill him. In process of creating, CREATOR think about his own welfare in society.

Therefore every society has higher moral rules, than average morality of society (morality rises from selfishness). Believers do not understand that, therefore they think that to create higher morality, than society’s average... higher being (God) is needed. Even killers and thieves don’t want to allow to others to steal and kill, because it is threat to them – if everyone around will be allowed to kill or rob you – you will have less chances to survive. Every creator would like to allow to himself everything... but... usually he is controlled by others around him... as he trying to control others himself.

HIGH morality is actions, which give PROFIT to beings who rate situation. The more PROFIT gives member of society, the more he is valuable and placed by society to higher social level (and his morality is rated as HIGH).

LOW morality is actions, which gives LOSSES to beings who rate situation. The more LOSSES gives member of society, the less he is valuable and placed by society to lower social level (and his morality is rated as LOW).

Morality is subjective and depends on amount of PROFIT-LOSSES brought to rater. Therefore... what is moral for one person or group... can be immoral to other person or group. For example: to kill a Jew and take his possessions for Nazi and his Fatherland was moral thing, but the same action was immoral for Jew and Jews.

It is people who create morality, not religions. Each religion just add to morality requirement to preserve itself and worship its God (in reality... through worshiping God... to support his “representatives on Earth” – priests. Priests are trying to avoid view that they are TAKERS (rating of TAKERS are low in society and have disadvantages). Therefore they creating psychological trick and trying to TAKE indirectly ...through God. Besides, priests are trying to portrait themselves as usefully (society usually pay for usefulness), therefore they have no shame in claiming authorship of morality and other inventions, which belong not to priests or religion. Japanese are not Christians, but they have morality too... it shows, that Christianity is not necessary for morality in society. Even animals sometimes behave moral (of course, their morality is low as their intellect) – for example: care for each other. Are these animals Christians and read Bible every Sunday?

----------------------

Example with “clock in sand” does not prove God, because clock is created by humans. You cannot prove immaterial beings by presenting MATERIAL creations, created by MATERIAL beings. But it proves, that creation possibilities lays in mater itself and God is not required to create such things as clocks (humans are part of mater). I think, to prove immaterial God, believers must present adequate examples in witch some immaterial creator created material thing (and this example must be accepted by official science). I don’t know, what kind of example it can be,... maybe some material thing created by elves, tooth fairy or maybe Santa Claus – he is pretty invisible - like God. For example:

"Some kid walked near Christmas tree and saw box with toy car inside. He understood, that this box could not appear by random chance (and especially from nothing)... therefore it must be creator - of course... it is Santa Claus." - Voilà... existence of Santa Claus proved.

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 19:03:00 UTC | #263755

Go to: Turek vs. Hitchens Debate: Does God Exist?

VJocys's Avatar Jump to comment 695 by VJocys

"How the Universe exploded in to being out of NOTHING?"

As I understand science DOES NOT SAY (!), that Universe exploded in to being out of NOTHING (this stupid claim, invented by believers, has nothing to do with science and sometimes remain without proper respond). Science (main rule of mater/energy conservation) says exactly the opposite - SOMETHING can not appear from NOTHING or disappear to NOTHING (there is just change of forms – and that "something" is not God). "Big Bang" was just event, when Universe developed from one form to another... to form which we see and know TODAY. There is no answer to question HOW Universe exploded in to being out of NOTHING, because core of this QUESTION-CLAIM is ABSURD and WRONG. It is like asking popular religious question of the past (inspired by the Bible)... Where are four corners of the Earth, which were shaken by God in the Bible? We know now, that Earth is round and HAVE NO such corners. It seems, that believers with understanding of “Big Bang” is far away from today’s science, as they were with understanding about form of the Earth.

Bible:Job:26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
Bible:Job:38:13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?


How morality (rules of behaviour in collective) forms in society without religion and God also known thing today (and was known before)... not for believers, maybe, as I see. Their knowledge and logic is too weak to understand such things – they need miracles for that :).

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:03:00 UTC | #263349

Go to: The brain in love

VJocys's Avatar Jump to comment 48 by VJocys

"gcdavis: I am afraid you have lost me there! Sorry to be rude but that sounds like a bad translation from the packaging of a Japanese pharmaceutical product."

"SUFFERING comes from losing beloved-cornucopia or when beloved-cornucopia rejects loving person, his dreams-needs or when loving person just thinks about that."

Is it better? Of course there are more reasons for different feelings, but I tried to be short.

"Love is..."

And (whole) elephant is (just) his tail :).

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:48:00 UTC | #203983

Go to: The brain in love

VJocys's Avatar Jump to comment 41 by VJocys

Benefit is main goal of people - when we gain something, we feel good. Who feel good form losses and pain - run into death more quickly and therefore always is minority. We fall in love with people who can GIVE and SUPPORT, fulfil our desires-needs ...or we just think that they can do this. People can experience different feelings even from imaginary situations, because they can't separate precisely real from imaginary in their brains (entertainment - movies, music, books, and etc. business is based on that). People can feel REAL horror or pleasure from IMAGINARY scenario-situations (for example by watching horror or romantic movies). Therefore people use FANTASIES to generate different REAL feelings. In such way they compensate sadness with joy or vice versa.

LOVE is almost similar to LIKE, just more expanded. It is easy to love person who GIVES and fulfil our desires-needs ...or we just thing that he can give (we dream, like watch movie). Much harder is to be loved - you must HAVE something to GIVE (people will like-love you, if you will GIVE them, what they need). Just because someone loves-likes you for what you HAVE and GIVE ...that doesn't mean that this person will give you the same amount in return or he will not love someone else - if he will find other GIVER, he will like-love him too. Pleasant emotions in our head, which we feel from RECEIVING, are not exchangeable valuable - it is just emotional reaction-response from TAKING or thinking about that. Love includes feelings, which seem to contradict each other sometimes and so disturb understanding, what love is, for some people:

PLEASURE. We feel pleasant feelings, when fulfillers of our needs fulfil our needs (we RECEIVE) or we just think how fulfillers of our needs fulfil our needs by constructing virtual-imaginary situations in our brains.

INFERIORITY complex and RESPECT to beloved. Because beloved usually is implied as a GIVER, loving person feels as a TAKER. Beloved usually has, what loving person doesn't and need. People, who HAVE and GIVE, is in higher social level-stage, than people who TAKE (or doesn't have). Therefore, when people fall in love, they feel shy in front of their beloved, because they can feel themselves belonging to lower social level-stage in compare with beloved. Inferiority complex can be bigger in first stages of love-relationships, because at the start people present just best sides of themselves and in such way create idealized-perverted image to each other - they look and considered better than actually are and deserve.

SHYNESS-MODESTY involuntarily or consciously is used to pretend that you are not TAKER - for not to scare-off beloved object.

ATTACHMENT. It is not hard to attach to person, who you see as fulfiller of your desires-needs.

SUFFERING comes from losing beloved-cornucopia or when beloved-cornucopia rejects loving person, his dreams-needs or when loving person just thinks about that. TENSION - from thinking about what to do to avoid that. Losing (your cornucopia) is unpleasant. Usually we fall in love with person who can GIVE. Majority of people want to TAKE - not GIVE, therefore usually there is misalignment-discrepancy in love situations.

FEAR and TENSION. The bigger cornucopia in minds or reality beloved is, the bigger is responsibility to deal with him (because bigger loses can be by losing beloved-cornucopia). Therefore people FEAR to lose their beloved-cornucopia because of force majeur or by acting mistakenly and TENSION by intensive thinking, how to act to avoid that ...especially when standing near beloved person.

SACRIFICE comes from defending your cornucopia-beloved and giving something in return (what you have and your beloved need from you or someone else), because otherwise you can lose your cornucopia.

Love between RICH, SMART AND BEAUTIFUL and POOR, STUPID AND UGLY is rare - such love is popular mostly in movies and intended to arouse REAL pleasant feelings from IMAGINARY scenarios in TAKERS - give them hope, that by having NOTHING you can be loved and access cornucopia-EVERYTHING what you want - id est make profitable deal.

There are many bullshit about love, created to cover selfishness, because nobody wants to feel or to be viewable as selfish - it is not useful, because society does not like and reject selfish people.

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:27:00 UTC | #203908

More Comments by VJocys