Morality Squared (part three)

The following is part three of the drafting manuscript Morality Squared: on the Goethean-Feuerbach Prophesy, Nietzschean Void, and Henderson-Rossini Hypothesis:


Cut
page break (gray) 1000px
Keep


God head (labeled)
A depiction of the so-called “intellectual theist oxymoron” issue, aka "god head" (or faith head) problem, according to which many simultaneous conflicting views will be held in the mind of a scientific "faith" head, e.g. Pakistani Islamic organometallic chemist and physicochemical sociology pioneer Mirza Beg believing (a) in flying horses [i.e. the buraq Muhammad rode during his night journey] and (b) a science [i.e. physics and chemist] that does not recognized the existence of flying horses; according to which, is one is supposedly to “check their brains”, as they would their coat or hat, at the church, temple, or mosque door, as one questioning anon American attorney (c.1997) asked? [1]
14. Intellectual theist problem
(add section on the intellectual theory problem)

“Is there an intellectually honest Christian evolutionist position? Or do we simply have to check our brains at the church house door?”
— Anon (c.1997), query to The Scientist from a San Antonio attorney [1]

“Yes, an intellectually honest ‘Christian evolutionist’, a term which itself is an oxymoronic label, has to check their brains at the church door.”
William Provine (1988), “Scientists Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible”; "oxymoronic" affixed by Lee Strobel [5]

“A high IQ theist is an oxymoron.”
Libb Thims (2015), thread post #6 (Ѻ); mental truncation paraphrase of Lee Strobel (2004) on William Provine (1988) on anon (c.1997), Jul 5

(add discourse)

15. Harrisian atheism | Issues
The following is tentatively workable area of correction quote:

“I am certainly not claiming that moral truth [moral truth] exists independent of the experience of conscious beings or that certain actions are intrinsically wrong.”
Sam Harris (2010), Moral Landscapes [3]

This statement by Harris goes against two points of view. Firstly, Goethe declared, amid his "best book" incident, that principles of morality and immorality, based on the universal principles of physical chemistry, illustrated in his Elective Affinities were "true". Secondly, that "certain actions are intrinsically wrong" is proved by Crocodile Dundee driving problem, one example solution to the Atheist sin problem (Ѻ), namely that it is "intrinsically" wrong to drive on the right side of the road in Australia but intrinsically right to drive on right side of the road in New York, which is a result of the magma current flow within the earth core resulting in the earth's magnetic field lines pointing out of the earth in the northern hemisphere and into the earth in the southern hemisphere.

Likewise, one could say, anthropomorphically-speaking, that it is "intrinsically", i.e. belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing, wrong (or more wrong) for "carbon", a four-valence pronged atom, by nature, with its light-sensitive (induced) animation-ability (property) sp3 hybrid orbital intrinsic composition, as shown below; accompanied by Scottish-English atheist moral philosopher John Stewart's views on intellectualized bodies, with [carbon-based intellect (scientific); carbon-based life (colloquial)] insert:
Carbon (intellectualized body)
to have four hydrogen atoms attached to it, in the form of methane CH4, as compared to having two oxygen atoms attached to it, in the form of carbon dioxide CO2, for reasons of Biblical (as Christoph Wieland argued) or Quranic (as Mirza Beg argued) immorality. The physicochemical atheist, e.g. Goethe, Schopenhauer, Buchner, etc. (Ѻ), however, would say correctly that one can come to understand the intrinsic "naturalness" and system "naturalness" of such molecules (e.g. human molecules, dihumanide molecules, trihumanide molecules, etc.) in isolation (marriage unions, e.g. gay, straight, polygamy, polyandry, etc.; or in Christopher Hirata terminology: gay molecule, straight molecule, polygamous molecule, polyandrous molecule, etc.) or in systems (system behaviors, e.g. unruly behavior), by looking at the measurements of the enthalpy, entropy, and free energies of such formations; such as shown below for methane and carbon dioxide: [6]

Substance FormulaStructure \Delta H^\circ_f \,
(kJ/mol)
 \Delta G^\circ_f \,
(kJ/mol)
S^{\circ }\,
(J/K mol)

MethaneCH_{4}\,Methane-74.85-50.8186.19
Carbon dioxide CO_2 \,Carbon dioxide-393.5-394.4213.6

The ignorant person, steeped in passing versions of colloquial thermodynamics, may quickly point out that carbon dioxide has the higher entropy (214 J/K mol), therefore it is "more disordered" and thereby a more "immoral" formation than as compared to methane, with its lower entropy (186 J/K mol). These types of opinions well-number into the dozens, in the early to mid 20th century. Entering the so-called "Rossini era", i.e. the post 1970s years, consensus (e.g. Thomas Wallace and the other human free energy theorists) has arrived at the discernment that Gibbs energy is the key measure social system freedom, security, and well-being. In this perspective, we can say that, from an isothermal-isobaric STP reacting system perspective, that carbon dioxide with its more negative free energy (-394 kJ/mol) is more favored naturally to form than methane with its less negative free energy (-51 kJ/mol). These basis principles, accordingly, can be extrapolated up to explain human social formations in terms of "naturalness" and "unnaturalness".

One example, to illustrate, is 72-year rise and fall of temporarily stable molecular aggregate known as Marxian atheism based Lenin-implemented communism, which arose in 1917, with the Russian revolution, and collapsed in 1989, amid the wave of “Revolutions of 1989” (Ѻ), which was caused by the unruly acts of: state murder, corruption, Soviet occupation of the Baltic nations, the social revolution goal of which was: economic liberty, democracy, conservatism, and liberalism. The death tolls resulting from Communism are estimated at 100-million. This, however, is not to be attributed to godlessness, aka the atheism atrocity fallacy, but rather to unstable ideology put into implementation; which can quantified in terms of free energy of formation, just as is done for methane and carbon dioxide so as to gauge the tested “naturalness” of communism, as compared to other forms of government.
Ra's sun disc and Kepler's angels


16. Kepler’s angels | Dostoyevsky’s dilemma
See main: Dostoyevsky dilemma
Do section on how we laugh at the fact that Johannes Kepler used to “believe” that angels pushed the planets around the sky by flapping their wings; but yet when we look to our own presidential committees on “bioethics” we see the word “angel” being tossed around, amid studies which show that when students are given news that there is no free will they tend to cheat (and supposedly) steel more? [10]

“If god does not exist, everything is permissible.”
Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1880), The Brothers Karamazov; view of Ivan Karamazov

“Well, the group that got the no free will news cheated significantly more often than the other groups. The other two groups behaved the same, which is evidence that free will is a kind of a default assumption among people. There is a version of this study in which you get a dollar for every correct answer, so by cheating you're stealing too, and the no free will group stole more often in that one. A friend of mine, Roy Baumeister at FSU, did a study with hot salsa. I won't go through the details, but people behaved more aggressively when they got the no free will news. Okay. So then a little bit later we started getting hard evidence that giving people the news that there's no free will increases misbehavior, and I'll talk just about one of those studies. It was done by Kathleen Vohs and Jonathan Schooler. And what they did is they primed a group of people with the news that there's no free will, actual passages from scientific articles. And there was a pro-free will group and a neutral group. And then the next they were supposed to do is take a math quiz, and they were told that the program was glitchy so that if they didn't press the space bar right after the question showed up, then the answer would show up, in which case of course they could cheat. And then you could measure this just by whether or not they pressed the space bar.”
— Alfred Mele (2014), Discussion on free will and bioethics, Jun 10 [10]

“Free will is not the defining feature of humanness, modern neuroscience implies, but is rather an illusion that endures only because biochemical complexity conceals the mechanisms of decision making.”
— Anon (c.2005), “The Decider”, New Scientist [10]

“From the point of view of neuroscience, there is no such thing as free will, as we can only perceive an action after it has already occurred.”
— Stephen Wilensky (c.2005), DVD [10]

17. Pascal’s wager | Why taking the bet is wrong?
(add section) (Ѻ)

18. Problem of evil | Coupling solution
(add section; John Neumann scenario) (Ѻ)

19. Religious engine | Analogy
There seems to exist a close natural parallel between the development of the steam engine (mechanical system for work generation) and the development or rather form-change of religion (ordering system of beliefs for work generation); a realism analogy that would seem to shed light and clarification on the perpetual and ongoing confusion that seems to envelop the latter—the subject of the philosophical question of the ‘nature of the gods’ being the ‘darkest and most difficult of all’, according to Cicero.

Namely, when Goethe—a theist turned pantheist turned panentheist teetering atheist—in his 1815 poem, expressly stated the recognition of the sign of the cross, to which he had been tempted by the tiny cross on the neckchain of his beloved, was repellent to him and a ‘denial’ of his own [monotheistic] god, a renegade act like the temptation of Solomon by the women of the harem to honor the [polytheistic] animal-headed Egyptian deities—themselves deriving from the 42 local religion predynastic nome gods (which became reconceptualized, in Christianity, as the forty-two generations between God and Jesus)—there would seem to be a parallel to the way religion, theism, or the ‘invention of the gods’, which, according to Critias (410BC), was a engineered solution to the so-called ‘lawgiver problem’, namely lawgivers of ancient times invented gods as supposed hypothetical overseers of right and wrong actions of men, thereby creating a first draft social mechanicsmorality-meaning’ system, which, like the steam engine, by the pressures of change in nature, has evolved or rather became more efficient over time, through trial and error, similar to the way the steam engine evolved over time from the pump problem (1640s), i.e. how to get water out of flooded mines, to the gunpowder engine (1678), to ‘idea’ for an steam engine (Papin engine), to working steam engine (Miner’s friend), to improved steam engine (Newcomen engine), to the Pickard engine (1780), to the Watt engine (1781), to the theoretical heat engine (Carnot engine), to the science of thermodynamics (1865), and to modern chemical thermodynamics (1923).

In short, just as the steam engine has evolved, from a problem to a refined non-supernatural science, so too will religion, inevitably, evolved from a problem, namely the lawgiver problem, from polytheism (Imhotep ) to deism (Newton) to pantheism (Spinoza) to panentheism (Goethe) to atheism (Nietzsche) to modern extreme deanthropomorphized multi-aspect denying atheism explicit reformed science.

20. Incest | Irreligion model
(add section (Ѻ)

“I’m an atheist because at age 15 was told that my rapist gets heaven if he repents and chooses god, but I get hell even if I’m good but don’t believe.”
— aTashoo (2012), Storify.com tweet (Ѻ), Nov 24

Religious respect problem (Christianity + Islam) 2
A depiction of how outdated belief systems, result in a collision between ancient myth and modern morality.
21. Religious respect | Problem
(add section on the religious respect problem; some of which is touched on in David Silverman's 5-point firebrand atheism technique). (Ѻ)

Add discussion of the Theodosius Dobzhansky-cited Abdul ibn Baz 1966 heliocentric heresy anecdote; and how this connects to Osama bin Laden’s justification for 9/11 attacks, in respect to the foundations of “justice”, territory intrusion, the chimpanzee war, etc.; to elaborate on how Saudi Arabia is an example, figurative and literal, of the "blind leading the blind".

22. Mean Girls | Model
In a neutral non-anthropomorphic way, this same phenomena can be understood, via a combination of George Lundberg’s “proton-electron configuration” of people and the Mayer-Gilbert floating magnetics experiment, according to which new rings will spontaneously form as the number of magnets is increased, which is akin to the spontaneous splitting of social groups as new people are added.

On a smaller scale, some of this instability arising phenomena can be discussed and explained in going from a three-group stereotypically queen bee high school clique to an unstable unruly behavior “mean girls” phenomena, when fourth alpha-female enters the social system.

23. Lamb of God | Morality problem
(add section on how American Randy Blythe, lead singer of Lamb of God, formerly named Burn the Priest, was charged with manslaughter (Ѻ) by Czech authorities (Ѻ), for allegedly pushing a fan off stage, after repeatedly coming on stage, videos of which are available (Ѻ), and determined by the Czech court, of supposedly a largely non-believing country (Ѻ), to have been “morally responsible” for the killing; and incarcerated for a number of days in Czech prison; and is presently releasing on 14 Jul 2015 a book entitled Dark Days: a Memoir. (Ѻ)

#. Summary
(add summary)



Next icon (50x67)Next chapter
● Morality Squared | Part four

Previous icon (50x65)Previous chapter
● Morality Squared | Part two
main (vertical)
Morality Squared | Intro

End symbol 75● Morality Squared | End matter

{\text{Morality}}^{2}\,


More pages