3 ms·

Why do you think science has any obligation to track with your own personal morals, is concerned with agency, or has anything at all to do with "souls?" Science

Why do you think science has any obligation to track with your own personal morals, is concerned with agency, or has anything at all to do with "souls?" Science is about understanding the how and why of things, on a factual basis. It has no responsibility to align to your worldview. I also notice you continue to refuse to engage on the very applicable analogy of carcinogens, cancer, and receiving treatment. I can only imagine it's because you know you would seek treatment if your life depended on it, despite the need for it being influenced by your actions. Regardless, I hope you never need to be in a situation where you have to choose between compromising the morals you're espousing now and getting treatment, and if you ever are, I hope you realize how foolish these ideals are, and that you get the treatment you need.

sincerecook 2y ago
I didn't say that it does have an obligation to do any of that. If anything it's the opposite, I think Science should abstain from turning moral issues into materialistic "facts" which is what they are attempting to do by turning everything that used to be a character or moral issue into a biological or physiological issue so that now every criminal, misfit and glutton is actually a victim of mental illness or addiction (and addiction is a physical, biological phenomenon) where conveniently all agency and personal responsibility is removed and no one can be blamed or impugned for anything and no one is ever at fault. I don't know what is even supposed to be left of a person when bad choices are not even choices anymore, as if only good choices are real choices and we can go around patting ourselves on the back forever. It's just so pathetic and absurd. If you need to tell yourself that being fat, dumb or lazy is not your fault, go ahead, I'm sure they'll discover a biological basis for laziness soon enough and we can all call ourselves differently motivated or whatever stupid euphemism they'll come up with and breathe a sigh of relief. At the end of the day you're just lying to yourself.

sincerecook 2y ago

I didn't say that it does have an obligation to do any of that. If anything it's the opposite, I think Science should abstain from turning moral issues into materialistic "facts" which is what they are attempting to do by turning everything that used to be a character or moral issue into a biological or physiological issue so that now every criminal, misfit and glutton is actually a victim of mental illness or addiction (and addiction is a physical, biological phenomenon) where conveniently all agency and personal responsibility is removed and no one can be blamed or impugned for anything and no one is ever at fault. I don't know what is even supposed to be left of a person when bad choices are not even choices anymore, as if only good choices are real choices and we can go around patting ourselves on the back forever. It's just so pathetic and absurd. If you need to tell yourself that being fat, dumb or lazy is not your fault, go ahead, I'm sure they'll discover a biological basis for laziness soon enough and we can all call ourselves differently motivated or whatever stupid euphemism they'll come up with and breathe a sigh of relief. At the end of the day you're just lying to yourself.