Evolutionary Purpose of Morality

[Wootah]

I think I worked it out.

The evolution purpose of morality is to forget the evil we have done and do.

No one can cope with the horror show of biology and human history. We are all descended for murderers, etc.

So in response morality evolved to help with an illusion that we are the good guys.

Does anyone want to debate my notion on the evolution of morality?

-----
Edited by otseng

[Clownboat]

This is a lunatic asylum for the criminally insane (planet Earth). It matters not whether one believes that or not; it doesn't change that fact.

The earth is not a lunatic asylum for the criminally insane. It matters not whether you believe this or not as it doesn't change the fact.

Could you imagine how horrible of a debate sight this would be if we all posted like you do? Is there not a God that can help you post?

Sadly, those who are most insane believe they are supposedly sane,

Is this possibly a projection?

because their ignorance masks their own arrogance

Is it possible that your arrogance masks things you are ignorant about, or is that only valid when you level such a claim at others?

That's why people are still struggling with simple concepts like "don't steal" and "don't lie",

I do not witness most people struggling with such things. Perhaps you need to surround yourself with better people.

Sadder yet, everyone who chooses, of their own free-will to ignore these simple lessons and the necessary effort required to constantly work on their own humility, is soon going to be executed, regardless of what they may mistakenly believe to the contrary.

How will these executions take place and when do you claim they will begin?

The only moral thing to do in this situation is to warn people of the consequences of their actions,

Therefore it would be moral to warn people that believe in religions? I warn you that believing that humans are criminally insane will have an impact on your life.

Only the meek and thus spiritually fit will survive.

In reality, death is a certainty that no one will survive.
You make lots of claims in your posts that you fail to show are accurate. Do you think yourself to be meek?

meek
/mēk/
adjective
quiet, gentle, and easily imposed on; submissive.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #101]

Wait a Seneca ....

In your examples you demonstrate a ruler listening to a pope/shaman. That is religion controlling the elite.

Do you think the people at the bottom need to have religion in order to be compliant? All they need is sport / entertainment.

Also for a counter example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becket_controversy

Rulers rule. They rule over their shamans. There are exceptions to every rule of course.
What this all has to do with you asking me to make morality not arbitrary is completely lost on me. I fear you are just trying to distract from how I did just that and the implications it has on religions and why we seem to have them.

I challenge anyone to unravel that.

Shamans and religion threaten the power of rulers.

That's why we separated church and state.

[A Freeman]

In the United States, there are 5 characters that should make it crystal clear that there is no separation between church and state:

501(c)(3)

In the United Kingdom, it's even more obvious, as the British Monarch claims not only to be the head of state, but also the head of the Anglican church, aka "the Defender of the Faith" (and the head of the B.A.R. association too).

The following is from the Book of Enoch:
58:1 Prince Michael the Archangel (Dan. 10:21; ch. 20:5) condemned and then decreed that The Judgement shall fall on CHURCH and STATE (Eze. 13:1-9; Matt. 23; Rev. 17:14; 19:2; Sura 3:64).

Don't let the fact that there are now thousands of different corporate fictional religions (sects/cults/denominations, etc.) out there fool you; they all are ultimately part of or beholden to the corporate fictional governments.

Church (Levi-athon) and State (Behemoth) are two-heads of the same beast system. They always have been and continue to be that today.

Isaiah 3:12 [As for] My people, children [are] their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people, they which lead* thee cause [thee] to err, and lead thee astray, TO THY DESTRUCTION.

*religious and political leaders, and any others in business, entertainment or sports, etc. who people wrongly put up on a pedestal/idolize

The ONLY power church and state wield over the people is what the people themselves give to them. IF people stopped funding both of these evil institutions, we would be infinitely better off. Instead, we are literally funding our own demise through taxes and in the offering plates.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #101]

Wait a Seneca ....

In your examples you demonstrate a ruler listening to a pope/shaman. That is religion controlling the elite.

Do you think the people at the bottom need to have religion in order to be compliant? All they need is sport / entertainment.

Also for a counter example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becket_controversy

Rulers rule. They rule over their shamans. There are exceptions to every rule of course.
What this all has to do with you asking me to make morality not arbitrary is completely lost on me. I fear you are just trying to distract from how I did just that and the implications it has on religions and why we seem to have them.

I challenge anyone to unravel that.

Shamans and religion threaten the power of rulers.

That's why we separated church and state.

You seem to have forgotten that you challenged me to make morality not arbitrary. I did that and you don't seem to acknowledge that I did nor have you commented on how I was able to do it. Now you distract by bringing up church and state.

I fear you are trying to drag me down to your level to then beat me with experience.

[Wootah]

Make morality not arbitrary ... please?

Ok. There is an all powerful God named Jeboda that created us and has demands.
For example:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her, and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her."
Bam! Morality about rape is now not arbitrary and all I had to do was invent a god concept. Obviously, I'll employ shamans that speak on behalf of this God that will help to relay this invented gods morality on to the populace in order for it to not be arbitrary.

Another:
Jeboda wants us to kill those that don't follow his teachings. Except for young girls that are virgins. Those we can keep for ourselves.
Morality about killing infidels is now not arbitrary and taking virgin girls as the spoils of war is A OK as well.

I can make just about anything I desire to be moral, see genocide and rape. What do you think, could I find a way to justify slavery too?

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I trust you are satisfied with my inventing a god concept in order to then claim that morality is not arbitrary like you requested.
Is inventing gods in order to control the masses moral though? I'll ask Jeboda and will get back to you with what I think, I mean, with what he thinks.

Your examples are making morality arbitrary. Another god or king could make different rules.

[Clownboat]

Make morality not arbitrary ... please?

Ok. There is an all powerful God named Jeboda that created us and has demands.
For example:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her, and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her."
Bam! Morality about rape is now not arbitrary and all I had to do was invent a god concept. Obviously, I'll employ shamans that speak on behalf of this God that will help to relay this invented gods morality on to the populace in order for it to not be arbitrary.

Another:
Jeboda wants us to kill those that don't follow his teachings. Except for young girls that are virgins. Those we can keep for ourselves.
Morality about killing infidels is now not arbitrary and taking virgin girls as the spoils of war is A OK as well.

I can make just about anything I desire to be moral, see genocide and rape. What do you think, could I find a way to justify slavery too?

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I trust you are satisfied with my inventing a god concept in order to then claim that morality is not arbitrary like you requested.
Is inventing gods in order to control the masses moral though? I'll ask Jeboda and will get back to you with what I think, I mean, with what he thinks.

Your examples are making morality arbitrary. Another god or king could make different rules.

According to the claims of the people, the rules are NOT arbitrary.
If you have trouble understanding this, see your own god concept and how its followers actually claim that this god concept is real and has a morality for humans, thus in their minds, this morality is provided by a God and is not arbitrary.

If you meant to ask me to make morality not arbitrary for those deluded by god concepts, that cannot be done as that is the mechanism humans use to make the arbitrary not arbitrary (in their minds of course).

Can you think of a better way to make morality not arbitrary compared to assigning rules that are claimed to come from a God and thus can not be questioned?

[Wootah]

According to the claims of the people, the rules are NOT arbitrary.
If you have trouble understanding this, see your own god concept and how its followers actually claim that this god concept is real and has a morality for humans, thus in their minds, this morality is provided by a God and is not arbitrary.

If you meant to ask me to make morality not arbitrary for those deluded by god concepts, that cannot be done as that is the mechanism humans use to make the arbitrary not arbitrary (in their minds of course).

Can you think of a better way to make morality not arbitrary compared to assigning rules that are claimed to come from a God and thus can not be questioned?

Well I do think God's morality is arbitrary in the sense that it is not universal but comes from God.

Actually, this thread (can we get back to the thread) is me diagnosing morality as the lie we tell ourselves to justify our evil.

I can't see how a moral law is not arbitrary if we can break it.

I do think God's moral law is best for us, as he knows what is best for us (a faith-based position).

[Clownboat]

Well I do think God's morality is arbitrary in the sense that it is not universal but comes from God.

I acknowledge that you think this and notice how it goes against what you say below (that morality is arbitrary because we can break it).

Actually, this thread (can we get back to the thread) is me diagnosing morality as the lie we tell ourselves to justify our evil.

I hear you, but this doesn't resonate with me at all personally. I acknowledge that this may be the case for yourself.

I can't see how a moral law is not arbitrary if we can break it.

If this is how you are defining arbitrary morality here, than all morality would be arbitrary (even those claimed to have come from god concepts) since all moral rules/laws can be broken. I would not define it this way myself though.

I do think God's moral law is best for us, as he knows what is best for us (a faith-based position).

I acknowledge that you think this. At one time I did myself after all.
I have since amended my thinking on this as I realized (perhaps falsely) that societies actually determine what is acceptable and what isn't and many use their preferred god concepts to justify what they have determined to be acceptable or not.

Take slavery in the Bible. Does it make more since that an actual God prescribed different rules for Israelites compared to foreigners when it came to owning slaves or that the Israelites society made these differing rules? I know what I think makes more sense.