Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Diamond
Of course these concepts are natural functions of our brains.
39 posted on 09/27/2001 7:20:11 AM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: Nebullis
If morality is a property of matter, then how do physical and chemical interactions, which by their very nature are coercive force, lead to a moral prescription or a moral prohibition?

How does an idea, a statement, such as (lets pick one out of thin air) "Concepts are natural functions of our brains" arise from molecules? I guess what I trying to ask is, what is the origin, the meaning, and the significance of the concept "morality", if the concept itself is nothing but the result of brute forces of chemistry or electricity?

What if the pulses of depolarization in my brain traverse different pathways? What if the molecules that produce the idea, "morality" happen to go a different direction? Does morality then change? What if the neurotransmitters produce the output, "Concepts are NOT natural functions of our brains"?

Under a purely naturalistic premise I think that my brain could only be physically obligated, not morally obligated because it would be operating completely and solely by physical forces. When a machine's actions are completely determined by physical forces, the moral intent cannot be known because the entire operation of the machine is based on coercion.

Yet we both know intuitively that I am morally obligated. Why?

Cordially,

40 posted on 09/27/2001 9:21:07 AM PDT by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson