another form of denial.
On Aug 1, 8:49 am, Allan Heretic <dehere...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually Lee I think I have reasonable good, it seems to be more of a judgment call than anything else, then that will depend on your point of view.. I always come to the question am Ia having to justify my action.
> Allan
>
> On 1 aug. 2011, at 13:51, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hey Allen,
>
> > The thing with that is have you tried to live a life doing no harm?
> > It's impossible mate, it really is.
>
> > On Jul 15, 10:59 pm, allan deheretic <dehere...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The original guide line to live by is simply "Do no harm" the question
> >> comes down to is how many ways and laws do we have to create to justify our
> >> violations of the guideline and guidance? Like thou shall not commit
> >> murder,.
> >> Allan
>
> >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >>> Umm that is an interesting take on it Tony.
>
> >>> I'm a great beliver in the right of the individual to live life how
> >>> they wish to. It comes as a by product of my other great belife yep
> >>> the 'Golden Rule' so I must disagree with you about not allowing
> >>> individuals to cuase unhappiness.
>
> >>> If an individual wishes to life a live causeing unhappiness for all
> >>> then that is their choice and they must then take the consequences of
> >>> that choice, if that be prison or violence or whatever. I would not
> >>> curtail this right of the individual but then again, I would personly
> >>> make the choice to counter this individuals actions if turned against
> >>> me or mine, and I don't doubt that others would make the same choice
> >>> that I would.
>
> >>> I also doubt the power of murder to change thinks for the worst for
> >>> the majority of people, the rate of murder is overall really not that
> >>> high, so I must also disagree with you on that score.
>
> >>> For me the evilness of murder stems not from taking somebody elses
> >>> life, after all we are all destined to die, so death in and of itself
> >>> I can't see as an evil thing. Nope for me it is the taking away from
> >>> somebody all future choices, this I think is a great evil.
>
> >>> To make a man a slave does the same. Again all attributed to my
> >>> belife in the golden rule.
>
> >>> On Jul 14, 1:49 pm, Tony Orlow <t...@lightlink.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Jul 12, 5:02 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Hey Tony,
>
> >>>>> Indeed and I would go further and say that good and evil are wholey
> >>>>> subjective.
>
> >>>>> Ben declares that murder is normaly counted as evil, but sometimes it
> >>>>> serves the greater good. I would ask you all to consider why exaclty
> >>>>> is it that the majority agree with this.
>
> >>>>> In short why is murder evil?
>
> >>>> Because we desire stability in society, and murder causes pain and
> >>>> discord, making societal progress hard for us all. Is the murderer
> >>>> evil? No, I think the murderer is sick, but society must hold the
> >>>> individual accountable for their actions in some sense, or it will
> >>>> collapse into chaos. One cannot allow individuals to cause unhappiness
> >>>> for everyone else, or no one will be happy.
>
> >>>> Peace,
>
> >>>> Tony
>
> >>>>> On Jul 11, 6:31 pm, Tony Orlow <t...@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Hi Ben -
>
> >>>>>> A good question, and not one that I haven't spent much time
> >>>>>> considering. Here are my thoughts.
>
> >>>>>> One many levels, good and evil are subjective. When a cheetah kills a
> >>>>>> gazelle, that is good in the cheetah's eye and evil in the gazelle's.
> >>>>>> Indeed, our sense of what is good or bad rests first in personal
> >>>>>> pleasure and pain, and as we mature, is extended by association to
> >>>>>> include that which helps or hurts an object of attachment. For the
> >>>>>> rich, the current financial situation is good, and for the many poor
> >>>>>> it is evil. One's personal judgment is generally dependent on their
> >>>>>> perspective.
>
> >>>>>> One the other hand, if we assume some greater good, then actions
> >>> which
> >>>>>> encourage it are good, and those that set it back or hurt it are bad
> >>>>>> or even evil. For instance, for those that believe in evolution and
> >>>>>> would rather be a trillion human cells able to think on our level
> >>>>>> rather than a pool of algae, evolution may be viewed as a universally
> >>>>>> good thing. Actions that encourage it are good and those that impede
> >>>>>> it are bad. Since evolution happens on all levels, from stars to
> >>>>>> physical organism to minds and memes, one may view this as a
> >>> universal
> >>>>>> good. Of course, this depends on whether one personally believes in
> >>>>>> evolution, so again, even this objective good is subjectively
> >>>>>> estimated by the individual.
>
> >>>>>> Hope that was a valuable contribution. Have a nice day
>
> >>>>>> Tony
>
> >>>>>> On Jul 8, 11:16 pm, Ben <artistta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> I do not believe that we can define good and evil without entering
> >>>>>>> into a philosophical conversation.
>
> >>>>>>> Good and evil are not absolute rules nor can there be a universal
> >>> good
> >>>>>>> or a universal evil.
> >>>>>>> The concept of what is good and what is evil must be taught to us
> >>> as a
> >>>>>>> child, because we are not born inherently good or evil.
>
> >>>>>>> To murder is bad. However the statement does not speak of a
> >>> universal
> >>>>>>> good. Murder in so many cases has been used in good ways.
> >>>>>>> Euthanization has been used to end a suffering patients life.
> >>> Abortion
> >>>>>>> has been used to prevent a child from being born when childbirth
> >>> could
> >>>>>>> end a mothers life. To murder is bad in many cases but not all. The
> >>>>>>> extreme case of the word murder means to kill another human being
> >>>>>>> under conditions specifically covered in law. We can not define
> >>> murder
> >>>>>>> without discussing the implications. There are many instances where
> >>>>>>> murder must be re-defined as a good not a bad.
>
> >>>>>>> A child is not born inherently good or evil. Human beings are
> >>> unique
> >>>>>>> in the power of our brain. We are able to quickly associate good
> >>> and
> >>>>>>> bad. These associations are learned from society, our elders and
> >>>>>>> peers. A child that is born with no contact from these influences
> >>> will
> >>>>>>> associate good and evil with pain and suffering. A child with
> >>> contact
> >>>>>>> from these influences will be able to conceptualize good and evil
> >>> and
> >>>>>>> apply it to many different aspects of everyday life.
>
> >>>>>>> Finally, no universal good or evil will ever be agreed upon. There
> >>> is
> >>>>>>> no absolute good or bad that we must all follow. One concept can
> >>>>>>> impede on another and we must accept those societies that have a
> >>>>>>> rational way of thinking. Each society must continue to evolve
> >>> these
> >>>>>>> rules and change the commandments that were made centuries ago to
> >>> fit
> >>>>>>> the present day reality of life. To murder is bad, however we live
> >>> in
> >>>>>>> a civilized county in which many cases of murder are legal because
> >>>>>>> they are good. No one is born inherently good or evil and our
> >>> society
> >>>>>>> must continue to define every aspect of what could be good or bad
> >>> in
> >>>>>>> order to teach our children and they to develop their own, more
> >>>>>>> complete understanding to be taught to their children.
>
> >>>>>>> I challenge those of you who have read this to define an absolute
> >>> good
> >>>>>>> and evil.
>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Ben Kaylor- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >> --
> >> (
> >> )
> >> I_D Allan
>
> >> If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
> >> Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comments:
Post a Comment