03-23-2010, 05:12 PM
But his sheets were clean and everything. That was your problem. Next time you go somewhere, leave your room a mess and cum right on the middle of your own bedspread. It's a jungle out there so mark your territory, mang.
In less bizarre news, here's a video on Sam Harris lecturing on how science can provide morality.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_scie...right.html
Well, I'm one of those people who think that science has a very limited role. Science is based on human understanding making it prone to human error, which is why it's always in need of objective universal standards and real-world experimentation. A scientific moral code would be ethically dubious at best, where results are anything but conclusive.
It goes on for about 23 minutes, but I stopped after 9:30 minutes in. That's the point when he raises the question of whether or not it's "wrong" to lie and then compares it to the concept of whether or not it's "wrong" to lose one's queen in a chess match. "Sometimes [losing your queen] is the only good thing you can do." He compared the general morality of lying to a boardgame. I watched that part over and over again before continuing with the rest of it. The magnitude of that logical fallacy makes my head swim.
I just kept getting flashbacks of the Southpark skit where atheists take over the earth and warring over religious dogma is replaced by warring over secular dogma.
In less bizarre news, here's a video on Sam Harris lecturing on how science can provide morality.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_scie...right.html
Well, I'm one of those people who think that science has a very limited role. Science is based on human understanding making it prone to human error, which is why it's always in need of objective universal standards and real-world experimentation. A scientific moral code would be ethically dubious at best, where results are anything but conclusive.
It goes on for about 23 minutes, but I stopped after 9:30 minutes in. That's the point when he raises the question of whether or not it's "wrong" to lie and then compares it to the concept of whether or not it's "wrong" to lose one's queen in a chess match. "Sometimes [losing your queen] is the only good thing you can do." He compared the general morality of lying to a boardgame. I watched that part over and over again before continuing with the rest of it. The magnitude of that logical fallacy makes my head swim.
I just kept getting flashbacks of the Southpark skit where atheists take over the earth and warring over religious dogma is replaced by warring over secular dogma.

