Does morality work without a deity?

[Valka D'Ur]

Knowledge offered by physical science can be correct but not complete...

Of course it can be correct but not complete. That's because there is more to discover, not because the scientists haven't prayed enough or read their bibles.

 

[Perfection]

The study of non-physical phenomena is going to be much more laborious thing to do becouse of its subjectivity yet I think humanity is eventually going to be on the track doing just that.

What exactly are non-physical phenomena requiring study?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Of course it can be correct but not complete. That's because there is more to discover, not because the scientists haven't prayed enough or read their bibles.

I am not a religious man but I practise spirituality for good number of years and my experience is that there is much to be discovered through introspective actions such as prayer and meditation. This may be quite impossible believe but the spiritual traditions hold that our inner being - our inner existence is vaster then the physical universe. Just like in case of physical brain we have access only to limited fragment of our capacity.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

What exactly are non-physical phenomena requiring study?

Since we are most evolved part of nature we have to study man - his psychic, mental and overmental capacity. Psychology is apparently the proper branch of science to do this but so far it has been dealing only with physical sides or physicaly related issues. If you study mental phenomena in its own right you going to get deeper insights and more practical results.

 

[warpus]

I agree with you but consider this: even if I was a scientist I may not be able to come up with this kind of hypothesis at present to the open risking my carrier.

You don't have a career (yet, in science); work out a testable and falsifiable scientific theory, and test it yourself. Don't publish your findings until your tests are conclusive and you can show that your theory is sound.

 

[FredLC]

Hmmm... This thread went waaaay off topic despite honest effort to avoid it.

I'm not entirely unsympathetic to Mechanicalsalvation's views.

There's definitely a learning aspect to evolution. Through the relentlessly dumb and inefficient method of natural selection data about the world is incorporated into the DNA of organisms. In a sense we may consider evolution to have some semblance of intelligence. But we must remind ourselves that this interpretation evolution lacks foresight. It cannot see a disaster or oppurtunity coming and work to prepare.

I see what you mean, but I would not accept the use of the term "intelligence" here. Not because it isn't an apt poetic description of this simulacrum of purpose, but because there is too much political baggage. It causes confusion and is ripe for abuse.

Regards .

 

[Perfection]

Since we are most evolved part of nature we have to study man - his psychic, mental and overmental capacity. Psychology is apparently the proper branch of science to do this but so far it has been dealing only with physical sides or physicaly related issues. If you study mental phenomena in its own right you going to get deeper insights and more practical results.

Can you provide an examples of a deeper insights and practical results generated?

One thing to note is psychology and cognitive science often draw from philosophy and computer science which while compatible with a physicalist viewpoint do not talk directly about physics.

I see what you mean, but I would not accept the use of the term "intelligence" here. Not because it isn't an apt poetic description of this simulacrum of purpose, but because there is too much political baggage. It causes confusion and is ripe for abuse.

Regards .

Sure, I'm just acknowledging that the view isn't completely off base. Acknowledging and respecting the views of those who differ sometimes inspires reciprocity.