jakebeardsley

Define "socially acceptable." Different communities will react differently. As with any words, profanities are valuable to the degree to which they are useful. Profanity can be fun, communicate strong emotions better that other words, increase pain tolerance, create an informal feeling, etc. Any linguistically intelligent person is capable of adjusting their speech based on who they are talking to, and since profanities tend to be more loaded with emotion, it's understandable that they would be considered improper for a workplace, just as it's reasonable to have dress codes, even though there's nothing wrong with any part of the human body. Profanity is not inherently harmful, but since it has emotional connections for members of our society it serves as a shortcut for all kinds of emotional expression--love, anger, misery, elation. People who choose not to swear voluntarily limit their ability to communicate, and cut off one extra tool for emotional release.

Hoping this doesn't come off as an aggressive creationist "If evolution is true, then why am I such a good person?" post. I'm an agnostic atheist. I believe that morality is like science or math--already there, waiting to be discovered through trial, error, and hard thinking. I want to know if there's some evolutionary evidence which explains why people usually have consciences. Is it because not murdering fellow members of your race tends to improve your species' ability to continue existing? Or social self-preservation, since consciences are largely rooted in cultural values? What circumstances might have made having a conscience beneficial for survival? Are other intelligent Earth species known to have consciences? Is there a scientific, rather than philosophical, way to address the question of whether intelligent life on other planets would have similar morality to our own?

There's no need to look at alien species to test the universality of specific religions; we have already observed on Earth that religion can't spread without human impetus. There were no Jews in ancient America. However, the concept of god is universal, at least on Earth, so there would be some philosophical implications if there were intelligent aliens who never in their history believed in gods. If they do believe in gods, it's not proof that god exists any more than different peoples on Earth believing in god is proof. Also, I'm not an agnostic theist, but I think there are at least a couple reasonable theories in that range. First, who says that god has to be one we've specifically discovered? Not one religion is as old as the human race; many religions have died out, and are lost to history; others are going to exist, but don't yet; and maybe it's just not possible to land on the right answer. A rational follower of a specific religion might see it this way: That there is divinity, and that their religion is just one way to access that divinity (like the virtuous pagan, but less condescending). Alternatively, a person can believe in divinity without assigning it labels, and this clearly doesn't require backing from aliens or anything else.

Thank you!

Hello, I am a high school student starting my junior year in the fall. I will be taking AP Biology, and would like to have a somewhat better understanding of evolution before I start. I've been meaning to read up on evolution for a while, but I've been timid because I don't want to find that I've built my understanding around information that is incorrect or already outdated. I want to ask about The Greatest Show on Earth in particular, since I have already read a few chapters of it, and like the style; should I be worried because it came out in 2009? Does the six year gap matter much for people who aren't scientists? If Show is outdated, what are some newer books that would be helpful for a beginner? Thank you.

I don't think it's possible to consciously stop believing in god (I've tried it the other way lots of times), but I also don't think there's a whole lot of reason you ought to. If you're wondering how time and matter started happening (i.e. before the Bang), I think a theistic approach is plausible enough. Personally, I don't believe in gods because I don't see any rational evidence, and I think that, for me, thinking only in terms of things that actually definitely exist helps me to feel better about my understanding of the world and also to make better choices, but for some people the reverse is true. People should never believe things that are demonstrably false, and I don't think there's much of a logical argument that can be made to convince other people to believe in god, but if that's your inclination I don't see any reason to push yourself. Think whatever you want until reason insists otherwise.