Blog

  • The Huffington Post today raised an interesting question about ethics, asking whether white supremacists should be able to practice law, or whether the profession should eliminate people “who aren’t morally fit”. I suggest that the problem is a deeper one, one that lies in the fine distinction between morals and ethics. We should have transcended moral-based judgments. Since the rise of the governance wave pretty much every professional organisation comes with a code of ethics. However, recently, a backlash emerged that put financial optimisation back on top of the agenda, along with moral-based evaluation.

    Posted , Author

  • Scriptures like the Bible or the Qur’an have little to offer for the atheist scientist. The atheist scientist has completely stopped to ask “Why?” questions and finds delight in investigating “How?” things work. He knows emergence, butterfly effects, how complexity may arise from almost nothing, and does not need transcendental explanations for human complexity or afterlife.

    However, what has science to offer to people who did not give up “Why?” questions?

    Posted , Author

  • Easy takeaway from this lecture of Jordan Peterson: Peterson claims that humans are not 100% rational, not everything is transparent to us. We do things that we don’t understand all the time. That … is the shortest precise definition of Freud’s “unconscious” I have heard yet.

    Posted , Author

  • The Religions say that you shouldn’t interfere with creation or God’s will. But. Even if you go down that road, then whatever you do or decide is already contained in God’s will. It’s not people interfering with a creationg, it’s contingent intelligence expressing itself. This line of reason offers as little ethical discussion as does a purely Darwinist stance …

    Posted , Author

  • Jemand erklärt mir, Quantenmechanik ist der Beweis dafür: alles ist Bewusstsein, und ich spontanentlade im Google+-Feed von Jutta Ahrens.

    Ich glaube, manche verwechseln rekursive Interaktion mit Nichtexistenz, weil sie sie gedanklich irgendwie wieder in die lineare Kausalität aufklappen.

    Den Rant muss ich hier aber für alle Ewigkeit festhalten, dass ich zu sowas fähig bin, ich! :-) …

    Posted , Author

← Older Newer →