/sci/ - Science & Math

Animals are mostly concerned with procreation.
Humans are not. We have brains capable of thinking outside the box. Many of us think up new ways to enjoy sex.
We're so advanced and our species so widespread and adaptable that we can pretty much do whatever we want.

>>2844667

>but it's not like they can't be substituted with a secular model.

says who?

Id like to say that is visible the decreasing quality of the discussions by this time(9:00 AM GMT) on sci.
Only high schoolers that believe they have already learned something relevant.
Shitty threads
Shitty arguments.

For those which have the same sensation, I tell that earlier there are good discussions(mostly when its afternoon-evening in the US)

Bye for today.

This is a morality thread. Instead of arguing about moral theories however I want instead to formulate a hypothesis. Of course this hypothesis could very well be false but I want to consider the implications if it were true.

First of all: I think we can all agree that the main goal of morality is goodness. To define it and to seek ways to achieve it seems to be the main goal of all moral philosophy. If I am mistaken and this isn't what morality is all about it is nevertheless what I want to talk about in this thread.

The hypothesis is: Compassion and Empathy is not simply related to the understanding of other sentient creatures but it is the same. Therefore the better our understanding of another creature is the greater is our empathy. Completely understanding would result in absolute compassion.

If we assume this to be true then wouldn't this mean that understanding of sentient creatures is the ultimate goal of morality because we want to do be good to creatures we emphasize with and to understand them entails to know what is good for them?

does animals have conscience of "self" ?

What if we stop exploring the cosmos and we start looking at the core of our planet?

I actually love all living creatures. Except insects that aren't praying mantis' and ladybugs.