Hedonism and its effects.

[Edric O]

That was just uncalled for, "Sir" Sard.

[VigilVirus]

Lol, lighten up, he was just joking ;D

[Edric O]

Well, it seems I'm a little bit tense these days. A lot of people have told me to lighten up... :-

[emprworm]

"You can do all you wish as long as you dont harm anybody else."

this is philosophically impossible to keep. Therefore, this is a meaningless standard. No matter what you do, your actions will have an effect on the world. I may cut down a tree that might not harm anyone that I can see, yet I could be causing great harm to people I do not see. If not now, then maybe later. Secondly, "harm" is entirely subjective. A religious person might be "harmed" by having to deal with a bunch of immoral nude drunks that hang outside his home all the time (just off his property). An atheist might be "harmed" by a bunch of religious people preaching their religion in school.

"You can do all you wish as long as you dont harm anybody else." is an impossible standard without meaning and as far as I'm concerned, it is an absurdity.

[VigilVirus]

hey, Edric, your good freind Emprworm hasn't joined this one yet and turned into another private war between the two of you, let's sing dance and rejoice.

Hehe, and you were saying? ;D

[Acriku]

Empr that logic can be used on the "Golden Rule" Do unto others as you would have done to yourself, where you might do something unintentionally hurting someone else, and you wouldn't want that done to yourself so you broke the golden rule. Whoopdiedoo. The Wiccan Reed is something to live by, not to govern by sheesh.

[Caid Ivik]

Religions are not about states and governments. Every time it was connected it brought back only hate. That your "Wicca" is such eastern infiltration. Love your land, love Earth...love material things, which will perish! And is love the best world for it? I think better is tolerance. You must tolerate everything.

But I tell you the truth. Everything without human intervention is going to chaos. That's natural. Primary order was God, which created the Big Bang. In that time started existence of entropy. The christianity is based on doing (between animals) irational things like love, respect and helpfulness to bring the order to universe. Eastern are fully opponent to it. They are passive and allowing everything to just flow in natural way. Be sure that way is entropy. Without christianity would we be all doomed to ethernal blind way of evolution and nonsense chaos.

[The_Sadukar]

if this is going to be another flame war soon, I might as well throw my self into the fray, and die whit honor ;)

Caid, no that not chaos thats ballance. and I'd say that ballance is better than forced order. People who need forced order is (IMO) just too dependen on others too live as they was 'ment' to do

[emprworm]

why is balance good? who says? On what logic can any eastern religion say "balance is the ideal state"? such a statement is not balanced in itself.

to promote that "Balance is good" requires someone else to promote that "Balance is bad" just to make that statement good in itself. Without someone else promoting that "balance is bad", then the statement "balance is good" would itself be without balance. Therefore, the logic of saying "balance is good" cannot possibly be the way of truth.

[The_Sadukar]

but emprworm, what you never lerand is, the truth is irrelvent all that matter is survival. And for survival a world in ballance is needed.

[emprworm]

what you never lerand is, the truth is irrelvent all that matter is survival. And for survival a world in ballance is needed

uhhh....truth irrelevant? So is that a TRUE statement you just made or a false one. And you tell me "all that matter is survival". Is that true? Are you sure that is true? Does it matter if that is false?

And for survival a world in ballance is needed

who says?

Is that true?

How do you know it is true?

if truth is irrelevant, then everything you just said is FALSE!

[quoudam72]

Balance is good does not have to have balance is bad to make it balanced that is without question that balance is good. That does not have to be religion that is philosophy What you would need is a center of balance. Balance is good ever heard of extremes? The pendulium will swing both ways until it is at rest will it not?

[TMA_1]

lol ahh I love to hear westerners try to talk about eastern religion and encorperate it in their thinking. You cannot encorperate eastern religion into your life till you also assimilate eastern culture. If you read many of the religious books of the east and whatnot, you will find that it is almost impossible to follow those religions or even take philosphies from them unless you take their culture as well. Those who do still take western culture and follow eastern religions are laughed at by many who are from the east. As a matter of fact, my physics teacher who I talk to a lot is a buddhist. He agrees and says the same thing. He follows the eastern culture to the tooth. So emprworm be careful with your ideologies. Sometimes they are idealistic and will flop. I promise.

[emprworm]

Balance is good does not have to have balance is bad to make it balanced that is without question that balance is good.

it is not. It might be without question to you, but not for me. WHY is balance good without question? Who says? Lets take a utopian city named "Edricsville" for example.

In EdricsVille, there is no pain, no suffering. There is no sadness to balance out the happiness. For every good deed performed by the citizens of Edricsville, there are no bad deeds to balance them. For every positive act that occurs, not a single negative act happens. The city of Edricsville is WAAAYYYY out of balance! So, why is that bad?

That does not have to be religion that is philosophy What you would need is a center of balance.

why? I question that, and I just want to know why you say this?

Balance is good ever heard of extremes?

yes, but does that make extremes bad? Who says that extreme is bad? I dont feel EXTREMELY happy in my life, but I would prefer it. I would much rather choose such an extreme over this dreary, monotonous 'middle of the road' existence. I think this balance philosophy of Siddartha Guatama (the Buddah) makes for a truly miserable life. I reject it completely. (and extremely. lol! :) )

The pendulium will swing both ways until it is at rest will it not?

and while it is swinging, it can perform work. Once entropy works its way, and the pendulum stops in the center, no work can be performed, hence it is useless. YOU CALL THIS GOOD?

I call it utter worthlessness.

[emprworm]

If you read many of the religious books of the east and whatnot, you will find that it is almost impossible to follow those religions or even take philosphies from them unless you take their culture as well.

logic is above culture, TMA. I dont care if you are a Hmong living in cambodia (one of the most primitive cultures on earth)....philosophy and logic STILL applies to you.

Logic does not submit to culture. A culture that rejects logic is simply irrational and illogical. Perhaps that is why they are so primitive. I reject the notion that cultures are inherently "good" as if it is something that must be preserved. There are cannibalistic cultures in Indonesia that not only consume their tribal enemies, but molest and gang-rape their children. Little boys have their penises rubbed by their parents and villagers until they scream in pain. Yet there are people who say "This is a precious culture. LETS PRESERVE IT!"

Bogus.

Lets annhilate that culture. Send in modern, educated psychologists, missionaries, whoever. ANYONE to remove a culture like that from this planet will greatly improve the world.

Furthermore, you do not need to experience something to understand it. I reject that view as well.

I can know all about Russia without having to 'experience' going there.

[nampigai]

ok I agree with you, that culture you described (allthough I do not know of it) sounds more like animals than humans.

But who are we to judge. the western culture isn't entirely good either, we breed mass murderes, cannibals and child molesters as well.

[emprworm]

well how about the Hmong culture? You heard of them right? They practice wife-stealing. (in their culture it is called a "catch hand marriage") In the Hmong culture, a full grown man of any age can sneak into the home of a young girl of 12- not even at puberty, kidnapp her, take her home, have forced sex with her (I call it rape), then proclaim the "good news" to her parents the next day that her daughter is married.

Yes, that is their 2000+ year custom.

It is reprehensible.

Many hmong that immigrated to the US during the vietnam war were arrested for this abbhorrent practice. It should NOT be defended in the name of culture. It should be eradicated.

[TMA_1]

logic is impossible for a long period of time. You are too nieve and idealistic emprworm. Trusting humans leads to being hurt and thrown down. How do I know this? Reading, experiance, watching people. There are some that are good, but those never change the world.

[emprworm]

logic is impossible for a long period of time. You are too nieve and idealistic emprworm. Trusting humans leads to being hurt and thrown down.

IDEALISTIC? What, are you kidding? LOL. Talk to Edric, I am the last guy you could call an idealist. To be honest, the stuff coming from you is more idealist than what I am saying. All this talk about 'culture' being some kind measuring stick for logic is an ideal in itself. Making the statement that logic is objecitve is not an ideal by any means. 1+1 = 2 regardless of what culture you are from.

If A implies B, and B implies C, therefore A implies C.

I dont care if you are a Mycennaen from 250 BC, a Tibeten Buddhist from 430AD or an MIT Professor from 2002 AD, that statement will always be true. That is not idealism TMA. Here is what the dictionary says about idealism:

Main Entry: ide

[VigilVirus]

it is not. It might be without question to you, but not for me. WHY is balance good without question? Who says? Lets take a utopian city named "Edricsville" for example.

In EdricsVille, there is no pain, no suffering. There is no sadness to balance out the happiness. For every good deed performed by the citizens of Edricsville, there are no bad deeds to balance them. For every positive act that occurs, not a single negative act happens. The city of Edricsville is WAAAYYYY out of balance! So, why is that bad?

Emprworm, if there is not bad, than there is not good because the terms can only exist relative to each other. One who does not know pain cannot appreciate pleasure and one who does not experience sorrow cannot experience happiness. Without the bad, the good would turn into normal and you would never know that what just happened is good.

Do you know for a fact that 1+1 cannot be proven wrong? Do you possess the omniscience of a God to say that throughout the future millenia no one will disprove the statement?? If not, do not say it.

[The_Sadukar]

Balance is good does not have to have balance is bad to make it balanced that is without question that balance is good.

it is not. It might be without question to you, but not for me. WHY is balance good without question? Who says? Lets take a utopian city named "Edricsville" for example.

In EdricsVille, there is no pain, no suffering. There is no sadness to balance out the happiness. For every good deed performed by the citizens of Edricsville, there are no bad deeds to balance them. For every positive act that occurs, not a single negative act happens. The city of Edricsville is WAAAYYYY out of balance! So, why is that bad?

I think it's bad because the people of Edricsvill will never konw of pain and suffering and as such thay won't be abel to enjoy their happy lives because thay won't know that its not such everywere and because of that they won't be abel to apriciate.

But you might never know, if thuis statment is true or false.

[emprworm]

Emprworm, if there is not bad, than there is not good because the terms can only exist relative to each other.

incorrect. there only needs to be a concept of bad. that doesn't mean that it must exist.

you see this in math all the time. We can conceptualize an infinite amount of finite things. yet no such thing needs to exist in reality. Yet there would be no concept of "finite" without the concept of infinite. And even though finite things exist, an infinite amount of them does not need to exist and no meaning is lost to the concept of finite because of it.

Do you know for a fact that 1+1 cannot be proven wrong? Do you possess the omniscience of a God to say that throughout the future millenia no one will disprove the statement?? If not, do not say it.

i do not know for a fact that little green men live on the Hale Bopp comet. I do not know for a fact that the little piece of dog excrement on my front lawn isn't in fact the Creator of the Universe. If you want to have FAITH in such things, go ahead. It wont make you rational, however.

You can have faith that 1+1 does not equal 2 if you want to. You wont be a rational person. What really makes you bad is that you use your computer to do it. A computer that is constructed entirely in binary terms. You used perhaps several billion 1+1=2 computations just to type that into your computer and send it to the forum for me to read. That is what is so utterly ironic. Of course, despite the rediculous statement and contradiction you just comitted, if you STILL want to believe that 1+1 does not equal 2, then by all means, you are free to do so. People believe all kinds of rediculous things in this world.

[VigilVirus]

Man, do you even read the post? I said that you cannot say that no one in the future will disprove it which is whta you said.

Like I said, the concept of good and bad are relative. If one has never felt pain he will not appreciate the better things in life.

Anyway, the concepts of good and bad were created by humans, so another person might walk in and say that, for example, that murder is good (not that I think that, but if we think rationally how can we say that it's not?). So you see, sometimes thinking rationally does not bring you to the answer and you have to take something as given.

[Caid Ivik]

Good and bad are straight with unchangable definitions. Good is anything on way to harmony and order, bad to chaos and hate. Relativising is evil. Don't think rationally, when you think about morale. Nature made no morale. God has given it to us.

[emprworm]

Man, do you even read the post? I said that you cannot say that no one in the future will disprove it which is whta you said.

it cannot be disproven, because it has already been proven.

You are making one of the following two claims (and I am not sure which one yet):

A) Logic can, in time, become illogical

B) There are no absolute truths

Both of those assertions are impossible. They are as bereft of reason as me saying "I always lie". Such a claim is nothing more than an absurdity.

First of all, to say that logic can become illogical is to deny logic itself. It is impossible to deny logic. The very claim "There is no logic" is a logical claim. Basically, in order to deny logic, you must first USE LOGIC. Impossible...and absurd.

Consider this logic:

If A implies B, and B implies C, therefore A implies C. This is not subject to some futuristic alien disproving it. It is not subject to proof. It IS . It will not ever be disproven because it is not a theory. It is REALITY. For you to deny this means you have to deny reality. Yet you cannot deny your existence unless you first exist to deny it. Any absolute denial requires an absolute existence to make the denial. You are, unfortunately, drowning in a really bad quagmire of irrationality. I highly suggest you take some basic philosophy classes. Having a good understanding of logic does wonders to your mind. It enables you to spot false reasoning and protects your mind from being deceived by lies and all the irrational crap that is constantly spewing in our society like a giant flowing sewer.

Now, lets look at this next false statement:

"B) There are no absolute truths"

Before I tell you why this is false, I would like you to think about it first. Consider it a logical excercise. Can you tell me why this statement is false?

Like I said, the concept of good and bad are relative. If one has never felt pain he will not appreciate the better things in life.

i dont know why you say that. I never lived in the Third Reich society under Hitler, I never felt what it was like, yet I still deeply appreciate my religious and racial freedom.

Anyway, the concepts of good and bad were created by humans,

how do you know this? maybe God created them.