/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8139875
>disgust over amoral behavior, e.g. a promiscuous slut
>mediated exclusively by culture

I don't think so. I have an anecdote: Before entering a relationship with my first girlfriend, I'd known she'd had casual sex, though I wasn't too concerned about it because I live here in the West, where it's not particularly taboo; I've been conditioned by society to think it's arguably acceptable.

However, after falling in love with her and being in a relationship with her, I grew increasingly disgusted by it. Ultimately, that was the main contributor to me leaving her.

I would've felt okay just to fuck her. But the thought of being involved with her any more deeply than that is repulsive to me now. Again, this isn't something I rationally knew about myself before being put into that situation. The feeling was instinctive.

I don't think she's a bad person (by modern, Western standards), and I still speak with her often. However the feeling of repulsion is visceral.

>>6947409
None of your comments are about the big bang theory itself. The big bang theory describes a small point that expanded. That is it. It doesn't talk about the very initial conditions, or before those conditions. Stop being so ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

>The whatever caused the big bang caused itself = a paradox

Nope. There need not be contradictory answers in a causal loop. No paradox. This is like GR 101. Plus we know plenty of shit with spontaneous (or no) cause; QM 101.

>a chain of causes

Again, still not a paradox. Raising further questions is not a paradox kid.

You are confusing your ignorance of basic physic concepts and basic logic, with a paradox. It is just another argument from ignorance. Just because you don't know something, doesn't mean others don't. You are just plain ignorant on basic physics and basic logic's, simple as that. You should go read some books.