dimreepr

Not at all, but is it unreasonable for me to question the premise 'of the start point'?

I'm unsure what the difference is, in this thread/topic But as a matter of interest, is the null hypothesis, not just contentment? Unless we're getting into a Hari Seldon situation.

Politically, there's always an issue.

Survival, motivated by fear of being eaten. This is a different question (political), the motivation is still fear though. Reasoning is a byproduct of intelligence, our ability to apply it effectively, as with all life, lies on a spectrum...

Indeed, also @Otto Kretschmer what is motivated doing in the title?

If you know everthing, how do you know your teacher wasn't lying? I thought you wanted to talk in riddles, was that one to difficult? Does that mean I'm smarter than you?

If you know everthing, how do you know your teacher wasn't lying?

You can't be an atheist and believe that Hitler was born evil... Almost worth a topic of it's own.

I understand that I can be annoying and have annoyed a lot of the great member's on this site; how annoying is the child that simply asks, why do you think that is true? But isn't satisfied with bc I said so. Just to reiterate my point and get back on topic, I'm a human and so my freedom is limitated to that of a human (a bee would give a different answer), therefore anything that a human is capable of, from Hitler to Jesus, is generally dictated by my circumstances/context.

Nor is that... I'm trying to discuss a topic, why are you angry with that approach? If you're correct and I'm wrong, then show me how; but don't mock me bc I'm disabled and you might face a cancellation... ;) I've only mocked your arguments, I don't know you...

Mocking my answer's is not an argument, at best it's a logical fallacy, or are you being deliberately obtuse? I note, with interest, that you've yet to answer 'how can one judge one's level of freedom from within one's prison'? No it isn't, it's a description of nirvana AKA no place. "You can't step on the same river twice" is analogous to humanity, every one of us is entirely unique, but we can't help being swept along by the same river, however hard we wish it isn't true... ;)

Why not is there a rule, that I missed? You're thinking about "A Catcher in the rye". The point of the savage, is to be an external criticism of what 'we' consider the norm, for instance, 200 years ago the norm would be our culter accepts that 'god' is real, and you would be the savage as an atheist. OTOH you could sit in your ivory tower and think that my way is the only correct way, I assume you know how dangerous that can be... Only to you, without some sort of synopsis.

A priest can't be an engineer? What if the promise of the afterlife relieves the hardship of the present? I've been thirsty enough to share a dirty water trough with a herd of cow's, my point is you can't know how you'll react in a stressful situation. The Dunning and Krueger crowd will be utterly convinced that, in a life and death situation, they will act in a morally and heroic way, some might, but most of us will try to hide and hope we don't piss our pants. Seems entirely appropriate in a topic labelled 'the false flag of freedom'. How does one know one's level freedom from within one's prison? If you don't do angst then you don't do philosophy, as a palliative I'd recommend 'A Brave New World', and imagine that you're the 'savage'.

It's only seems like an extreme example bc you've never been hungry enough to eat from the gutter; in the unlikely event that you have to choose between eating that dirty morsal or give it to your equally hungrey child, then how could you understand my point. Life Insurance/assurance is only money and you can't eat that... Why are they mutually exclusive? This is not a binary question, for instance, what if one of your darling little athiests wanted to believe that grandad is still 'somewhere' and smiling down on it's godless soul? You should read some Nietzche, start here. The trouble with Occam's Razor is, it's only superficially true at every level...

Reality is thrust upon us whether we would wish it or not. Growing up, to what standard before reality bites? Responsibility is more a question of circumstances, for instance, when does your responsibility to protect your kids by not dying, out weighed by the needs of one of your five kids, in immediate danger? It's an age old fantasy, still shared by many. I think this is more a question of free will than freedom, humans tend to be predisposed to a mystical, god shaped, dimension; how does a rational approach replace that fundamental need? But now that we are free to laugh at the stupid, religious, people, we feel guilty every time we put on our lucky socks.