Which choice is better for society as a whole

I think it's moral if the guilt is proven beyond any doubt

Yes of course

In cases of unforgivable violence

You don't kill maybe innocent people

well there were numerous debates on death penalties around the world and it was found that many people are disgusted by it, so it became law that the practice was no longer enacted

Look everyone is going to use emotions in a debate regardless unless they're psychopaths and cannot feel emotion. However, You cannot make pure emotional statements with nothing to back its utility

Yeah that's retarded

Some people have to die

@מוות שחור#2673 There is a difference between something able to exist, and something being able to be argued for. Obviously, existence precedes reason. And reason never reaches infallible conclusions, it is relative to previous ones, and therefore can at once be totally wrong. Reason and debate exists on a lesser level than emotion: both produce our motivations in the world, but in terms of truth, the comprehension through emotion is capable of a higher level of understanding because it has the capacity to comprehend that which is yet unproven.

Like mob bosses and gang leaders who can operate within prisons

No emotion cannot comprehend what is yet unproven it *assumes* the unproven is proven

That's what makes it retarded

It *assumes* truth

You can assume truth on literally anything

A Muslim can assume truth

A Christian can assume truth

An atheist can assume truth

But sometimes that assumption resembles truth.

Assuming things exist is literally retarded

It resembles truth because you want to believe it does

It makes you happy

It helps you cope

Retarded line of logic

It says nothing about *truth*

Simply what YOU want truth to be

Do you understand?

truth seems to be an unrelated topic

No it's not

We're talking about the effectiveness of emotion in debates

In this case the existence of god

It is utterly useless

but im not talking about god

w t f

Then get out of the conversation

???

I'm not arguing two people on different topics at the same time

Wait your turn

I am stating that sometimes people believe in something before is has been 'proven' by reason. It is therefore possible to resemble truth through emotion, a hypothesis formed by intuition.

Sometimes people believe in things that are later proven

That's just confirmation bias

It says nothing about whether it is true

If I was some guy in 1000 ad

For some reason my emotions told me germs exist

I can't reasonably claim they exist without proof

There is some intuitive wisdom in emotion.

That's called confirmation bias

That's called a gamble gone right

A gamble

Nothing else

Right now I can also assume Tengri exists

Or Allah exists

While others claim other gods exist

Based on faith alone

One person will be right

There's no reason why you should gamble

That's not reason

That's called placing bets

There are two realities: your internal reality, and an external reality

The only one that you can prove exists, prove to yourself I mean, is your internal one.

Because guess what even if my emotions told me germs exist there are probably thousands of other claims that other things exist from faith and emotions

You have a point. Emotions cannot make empirical claims. I have made a categorical error.

How do I know who's correct? At this point let's say no one knows if germs exist

You see the problem

You're assuming that you're the right one

You're assuming you're the guy who gambled and found out about the existence of germs

Right now you have no clue

Neither did the germ guy

You can see a bacterium in a microscope, but you can't prove that it's not in illusion or that you're not just in the Matrix

I have to abandon that God is an empirical claim.

You assume you're the correct one, the miraculous germ guy, when in actuality *you have no clue if you're not just one of the millions of people who are wrong*

That's called bias

God is a phenomenon. A psychological reality that actually affects the outcome of history.
Therefore, God as an idea has power to influence the external world.

any idea can influence the external world

Are ideas real?

Yes.

They exist.

Where?

In your mind and the minds of others.

Sure god exists in minds of people

Just like Superman exists in comic books

If people worshipped Superman, he would have power.

That doesn't mean either exist in the external world

They're not sentient beings

They're just ideas

Myths

It depends on what you view as God

You can say that God is just The Great Design

Or you can say that God is Time

Some people used to worship Kronos, right?

All of those claims are based on nothing

They're just claims

They're based on feelings

You can experience God

I can claim the universe is a giant animal cell in an alien creature

You can experience many gods

Your faith makes it a reality

*a reality in your mind*

How strong is your faith that the universe is a giant alien

Yeah, that's the point of faith