Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amd!decwrl!decvax!genrad!wjh12!foxvax1!brunix!rch From: rch@brunix.UUCP (Rich Yampell) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: misc. creationist topics Message-ID: <9651@brunix.UUCP> Date: Sun, 30-Sep-84 02:55:17 EDT Article-I.D.: brunix.9651 Posted: Sun Sep 30 02:55:17 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 05:11:58 EDT References: cybvax0.128, <32500002@uiucdcsb.UUCP> Lines: 12 Actually, if we are no more than self-replicating chemical masses, then there is, as yet, absolutely no basis for not stepping on our fellow man, with the possible exception that it is frequently not in our own best interests. And yet, one intuitively feels that there *should be*. Great philosophers have wrestled repeatedly with this problem, and have drawn varying conclusions. But the very fact that Kant, Nietche, or Sartre can come up with such wildly differing answers suggests that there in fact is no answer. Oh, sure, you can come up with morals and reasons to choose them, but that will always be a personal choice. It is a key philosophical problem which has yet to be satisfactorily resolved.\ Life is absurd.