Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19769924 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- <p>Today we will test the strength of atheise and its views on morality and put a full stop to this question, perhaps an exclamation point, se let's start: yes morality has biologicel, neural and social manifestations, indeed Altruism, compassion and justice help human groups survive better, of course the brain is the object of moral consciousness and logic, Sacrifice and empathy are manifested in the functioning of mirror neurons, and brain damage can affect the morality of behavior, yes all people have basic moral instincts that manifest at an early age and exist from birth, yes human noral behavior can be formed and deformed in relationships and so humanity develops in the understanding of universal morality, but in each of these hypotheses there is a big hole, from which it pulls with the cold of death, yes altruisn can be beneficial, and it my DNA counts what is more beneficial to live at the expense of, and if someone thinks that it is better not to save the life of their child, who is to blane for this, Genes? Yes, dopamine is pleasant, but what to do with those, except that it brings pleasure to commit violence? or to mack others? IF THE difference betecen Hitler and Jesus is Nero's patterns, then how can you judge a chemical process? This is the same as judging the process of digestion, if morality is chemistry, then you drank nedicine and you are already moral, or if soscone breas a pill that will bring pleasure for a crine? Sociological hypotheses are that society forms morality, and what if society docides to change the standards of morality? In the Third Reich, this is how it ses, first they passed laws and then they built Constabulary, at the Rurber trial, the Nazis said, as the Russians say now, "We did everything according to the law. If Morality is social consent, who is the Judge of society, international low, and what is it based on which is the basis for the statement: "This is a crime against humanity and humanity all charters, cons constitutions and internetsonal tribunals, proceed from the premise that there is Universal Morality. Representatives of Moral Relativisn repeat as a mantra "different cultures have different morals". But in fact those scientists and skeptics who believe that morality is a product of culture, recognize that in different cultures there were prohibitions on killing their own, a special attitude towards fatherhood, notherhood, and children, an understanding of what justice is. Skeptics also recognize that in different cultures there are Intuitive principles of morality, for example, Care VS Harm, Truth and Justice vs Lies and Injustice, Loyalty VS Betrayal, Freedon VS Oppression and so on. Atheists and evolutionists recognize the existence of universal morality, the question of its origin, an attempt to explain it materialistically, is similar to the attempt of the blind, who They want to explain what an elephant is, everyone is holding on to their own but they don't see the whole. None of these hypotheses answers the question, why is good a duty? And evil a fault? And conscience must distinguish then, and if it doesn't do it, it doesn't cancel responsibility. responsibility. The answer to all this is a metaphysical explanation, That Morality is a discovery, And the instrument of its understanding is Conscience, which is repelled from the moral ideal, that is, the Lord God. There is no point in distinguishing moralsty if there is no sense and responsibility in this. There is siso the deception of the substitute. which assumes that we can use morality without God, but there is a prables, for example, we can replace sugar with a substitute that gives a feeling of sweetness, but the criterion of an objective sweet taste is actually Sugar. If morality is a social construction, and good and evil are feelings, then why do we react in this way? It's not fair, and I just have such feelings of injustice, and he has such a culture of neurons? Philosopher Alvin Platniger stated that not only morality, but also trust in human reason is an illusion. Because when atheists use logic against the existence of God, atheists prove that he esists. And morality is personal and depends on the personality, that is, God.</p>