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.