Hedonism and its effects.

[emprworm]

The ancient Greek culture is the very foundation of our civilization!

it is inaccurate to say that the Myceneans were western.

Yet lets go back even further then. let us raise Ancient Egypt. Slave society. DEFINATELY not western.

the single greatest slaughter ever committed in all of human history happened in China - EASTERN CULTURE!

Would that be COMMUNIST China? Tell me, which civilization created communism?

lol so now your argument is basically "the whole world is western"

Uh, ok, Edric. Thats not much of an argument then. You argue that western culture is corrupt, implying that there are other cultures out there. Then when I cite other cultures, only to find that they too are 'western'. Furthermore, you gave me no examples of alternate cultures. Basically what you are saying, then, is that the human race is corrupt. Well!!! Duh! :) Genesis chapter 1 can tell you that!

[quoudam72]

Quote Emprwrm:

if you know much about the trans-atlantic slave trade you will know that Africans sold themselves into slavery, furthered by middle eastern muslims who were major financiers of the slave trade, (they received much of the wealth from the slave purchases) which then ended up in the hands of westerners. So it is more accurate to say that African, middle eastern, and western culture enslaved africa.

Quote Edric O :Oh, so the fact that THE ENTIRE CONTINENT OF AFRICA was ruled by Europeans until the 20th century doesn't matter?

As for them selling themselves into slavery... You call yourself a capitalist? Then you must know that where there is demand, there WILL be supply.

Quondam's information reply for Emprwrm and Edric O: The highest volume of the slave trade was in the trans-Atlantic slave trade from 1451 to 1867. Fage estimates that there was a total of about 12 million slaves taken from west Africa to Europe and the Americas by "Christian" traders over those 4 centuries. Although the volume was never as high in the trans-Saharan and Red Sea slave trade, the longer time involved resulted in the same total number of slaves involved. Muslims began large-scale buying and selling of African slaves 600 years before Europeans did and continued to do so 100 years after. The Arabs bought slaves in central, west and east Africa and sold them in North Africa, the Middle East and on the west coast of India. About 9 million slaves were involved in the trans-Saharan slave trade over the 10 centuries from 900 to 1880, and an additional 3 million slaves were taken across the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean over 11 centuries from 800 to 1900 - a total of 12 million.

Christian and Muslim slave traders found a ready market in which to buy slaves in all parts of Black Africa. Almost all them were captured and sold by African rulers and merchants. They found it more profitable to sell their enemies, criminals and debtors than to kill or imprison them. Even those rulers who first resisted trafficking in mankind later gave in to the great financial profits involved. We must conclude that there were three equally guilty partners in the crime of slavery: Pagan African rulers, Christian Europeans, and Muslim Arabs.

Gender is a significant factor in the comparison of Christian and Muslim slave trade from Africa. Two out of three slaves in the trans-Atlantic trade were adult males because the demand in America was for laborers to work the plantations. In the trans-Saharan trade, however, boys castrated to become eunuchs brought the highest price. The price for women was higher than for men because Islam permitted them to be used as concubines as well as workers. The result: only one out of three slaves sold in North Africa and the Middle East was a man. This accounts for the fact that there is no distinct Black segment in Middle Eastern society today. The eunuchs could not have children, the women’s offspring melted into the Arabic population, and the men often were unable to find wives. In the Americas, however, the Black population was segregated, and thus it has remaining distinct until today.

The horrors involved in the trans-Saharan slave trade: kidnaping and castrating young boys to be sold as eunuchs also known as "the living dead", in the harems of wealthy Arab landlords and force-marching young women across the endless miles of scorching sand in the Sahara desert to become slave/concubines also called "double bound", in the homes of total strangers. Although most were well treated after they arrived, many died in transit.

I only added this for fact purposes. As I have done more research I have found more information (although I knew of this (Christian and Muslim slave traders) I needed facts to back my conculsions.

[Edric O]

Yet lets go back even further then. let us raise Ancient Egypt. Slave society. DEFINATELY not western.

Ah, good point. Yes, slavery is older than western society. I never claimed otherwise. I'm saying that the West was the greatest user of slave labor, not that it invented it.

lol so now your argument is basically "the whole world is western"

Alright, let me put things into perspective. Western culture has invaded, sacked and aggresively dominated every other civilization in the world. Like a plague, it has infected the entire world. The ones who would not bow before it were stigmatized and worn down by a war of attrition. At this point in time, the only bastion standing in the face of western global domination is Islam. For their resistence, they were punished by various means and their once prosperous civilization has crumbled to ruin and partially reverted to barbarism. They have been repeteadly crushed and subdued like every other nation on the face of the planet. Yes despite this, they fight on. They do not have the power to wage all-out war, so they must resort to cowardly acts of terrorism. They are desperate, but they would rather die than see their culture assimilated by the West. THAT is why I respect them...

But I digress. To answer your question: At this point in time, there is no better civilization left in the world, because they were all crushed. When I talk about the immorality of the West, I am comparing it to the great cultures of the past, and to some that might appear in the future.

[emprworm]

edric, what exactly IS western culture then?

It sounds to me like I could reword your statement " Western culture has invaded, sacked and aggresively dominated every other civilization in the world."

to say

"Sinful Humans have invaded, sacked and aggresively dominated every other civilization in the world. Like a plague, sinful humans make up the entire world. "

All you are saying is that people have done bad things. Since you call the whole world "western culture" we have effectively lost all meaning in the concept.

QUONDAM:

Excellent excerpt. that was very very informative. thanks for that.

[Edric O]

*repeatedly bangs head against wall*

I do NOT call everyone a part of western culture. I call MOSTLY EVERYONE who is alive NOW a part of western culture.

[Anathema]

The western society did bad things. I think we can agree on that. The rest of the world did also bad things. But we claim that we are culturally and morally ahead of the rest of the world. It sure wasn't true in the age of slaver and colonies. Today, we reap the rewards of the massive exploitation carried out by our ancestors. If we are truly morally advanced, we make due for our ancestors crimes and help those in need of it.

Note: most nations already fund the development of certain countries, but that aid is so low it is almost a farce.

[Acriku]

Greeks weren't the first Athiests, they did believe in certain things such as hmm, GODS. The first specimen of the Australiopithicus species probably were athiests.

Every culture has done horrible things, so fricking what? Stay on topic.

[Edric O]

Greeks weren't the first Athiests, they did believe in certain things such as hmm, GODS.

Oh really? Does "Epicurus" ring a bell?

The first specimen of the Australiopithicus species probably were athiests.

And I suppose you can prove that... ::)

Every culture has done horrible things, so fricking what?

The point is that we did far more than anybody else.

[Acriku]

Oh wow really nice, I see. One guy that doesn't believe in the greek gods, you got me there Edric! Oh wait, forgot about all of the humanoid/human species that couldn't even comprehend the idea of religion, hmm I sense a lack of belief in a god. Want proof? You know I can't do that, so what is the point of asking? Give me a time machine, and I'll give you proof.

--The point is that we did far more than anybody else.

I said so fricking what, pertaining to this thread! Mr. So-off-topic-even-the-off-topics-go-off-topic.

[Edric O]

That "one guy" actually had followers, you know... ::) Quite a lot, too. Epicurean philosophy lived on for centuries.

Oh, I'm sorry, did I upset you by going off-topic? Tough.

[Acriku]

Still doesn't mean he was the first athiest :P

:-X

[Edric O]

He was the first documented atheist in history...

[quoudam72]

In an attempt to bring the thread back on topic Quondam steps into the conversation (which could be trouble because you should always be careful where you step) Laugh now and figure it out later. ;D ;) :P :P

The father of Hedonism was Aristippus of Cyrene. To the Cyrenaic succeeded the School of Epicurus, who emphasized the superiority of social and intellectual pleasures over those of the senses. He also conferred more dignity an the hedonistic doctrine by combining it with the atomic theory of matter; and this synthesis finds its finished expression in the materialistic determinism of the Roman poet Lucretius. Epicurus taught that pain and self-restraint have a hedonistic value; for pain is sometimes a necessary means to health and enjoyment; while self-restraint and prudent asceticism are indispensable if we would secure for ourselves the maximum of pleasure (see EPICUREANISM). With the decay of old Roman ideals and the rise of imperialism the Epicurean philosophy flourished in Rome. It accelerated the destruction of pagan religious beliefs, and, at the same time, was among the forces that resisted Christianity.

The revival of hedonistic principles in our own times may be traced to a line of English philosophers, Hobbes, Hartley, Bentham, James Mill, John Stuart Mill, the two Austins, and, more recently, Alexander Bain, who are popularly known as Utilitarians. Herbert Spencer adopted into his evolutionary theory of ethics the principle that the discriminating norm of right and wrong is pleasure and pain, though he substituted the progress of life for the hedonistic end.

The fundamental errors of Hedonism and the chief unanswerable objections to the theory may be briefly summed up as follows:

(1) It rests on a false psychological analysis; tendency, appetite, end, and good are fixed in nature antecedent to pleasurable feeling. Pleasure depends on the obtaining of some good which is prior to, and causative of, the pleasure resulting from its acquisition. The happiness or pleasure attending good conduct is a consequence, not a constituent, of the moral quality of the action.

(2) It falsely supposes that pleasure is the only motive of action. This view it supports by the fallacy that the pleasurable and the desirable are interchangeable terms.

(3) Even if it were granted that pleasure and pain constitute the standard of right and wrong, this standard would be utterly impracticable. Pleasures are not commensurable with one another, nor with pains; besides no human mind can calculate the quantity of pleasure and pain that will result from a given action. This task is impossible even when only the pleasure of the agent is to be taken into account. When the pleasure and pain of "all concerned" are to be measured the proposal becomes nothing short of an absurdity.

(4) Egoistic Hedonism reduces all benevolence, self-sacrifice, and love of the right to mere selfishness. It is impossible for altruistic Hedonism to evade the same consummation except at the cost of consistency.

(5) No general code of morality could be established on the basis of pleasure. Pleasure is essentially subjective feeling, and only the individual is the competent judge of how much pleasure or pain a course of action affords him. What is more pleasurable for one may be less so for another. Hence, on hedonistic grounds, it is evident that there could be no permanently and universally valid dividing line between right and wrong.

(6) Hedonism has no ground for moral obligation, no sanction for duty. If I must pursue my own happiness, and if conduct which leads to happiness is good, the worst reproach that can be addressed to me, however base my conduct may be, is that I have made an imprudent choice.

[TMA_1]

actually there were many "athiests" in ancient Greece. One was Socrates. Anyone who did not believe in the Greek panthion of Gods or any other Panthion were considered Athiests. He did believe though in a Force beyond us. Many greek thinkers did the same. As a matter of fact Aristotle once said, "To the Hebrews and Persions were given wisdom in Religion." Christians were even deemed athiests for not believing in the empire's panthion and the emperor as God.

I agree also that western culture has done horrible atrocities, but most large civilizations do. You live in a state of idealism that destroyes your reason.

[Acriku]

Everybody is an athiest. Do you believe in the Greek gods? Then you are an athiest, because you lack a belief in the Greek gods.

[TMA_1]

exactly acriku. listen to the man edric! hehe :)

[emprworm]

*repeatedly bangs head against wall*

hmmm, you know i was just thinking about how the intellectual quality of your responses was going down.

;) ;D

[quoudam72]

You can not be an athiest just because you do not believe in the Greek gods. Would that not just make you a non-believer? An athiest does not believe in god or a god for that matter. The word itsself (athiest) comes from Greek meaning 'godless'.

[Acriku]

We are all athiests, I just believe in one god less than you do. It's as simple as that. No semantics. No technicalities, that's it. The reason is because "god" in "lack of belief in god" is not specified, and can mean any god. I don't believe in Juno, or Jupiter. I am an athiest in this respect. You don't believe in Thor, I assume, you are an athiest in this respect.

[TMA_1]

actually christians were considered Athiests by the romans. That is what they called christians. Also many greek thinkers that did not abide by the religions of the world were called athiests even though they werent in our term exact athiests.

[Caid Ivik]

Will to work??? Western society is the most lazy civilization that ever existed! Hell, we glorify laziness!

Science did not advance in Europe because it got "liberated" from anything. It advanced thanks to the spoils of war we got from invading, plundering and wiping out almost every other culture in the world. Just like the Muslims advanced in their golden age thanks to invading, plundering and wiping out the Byzantines.

Western culture is to blame for all the greatest genocides and mass slaughters in the history of humanity. Don't you DARE call us civilized! We wiped out the native americans and stole their lands. We enslaved the whole continent of Africa. We spawned Hitler and Stalin. We created nuclear weapons. We brought the world on the brink of total annihilation. We pollute and kill the Earth itself!

Our "civilization" is the most repugnant piece of moral filth that ever existed! Bless the day when it will be crushed and forgotten!

Worshipping laziness? Bah, of course no one wants to work hard, but we have written it to our soul. Dechristianised people - atheists - who are getting out of our culture, those are worshipping it, that's what is this thread about. Also, we aren't lazy to think, what I'm trying to say. Muslims are. Those slaughters were done because we started to dechristianise. First Rousseau, who was trying to negate God, then came Nietzsche, trying to negate morale, and at last Hitler, Stalin and Mao, who done all the dirty work, those were preparing spiritual tools for. If we are so "barbarized" how you are trying to say, we would use those nukes. But what are they really? Keeping aggressive nations back, ensuring peace. But back. Our civilisation was flawed by these dechristianisating philosophy, but it mustn't be crushed, destroyed, but it must return to its core, to very heart of christianity. Thinkings of the christianity are most advanced, only really progressive and good for mankind. We must have them in minds, today is still just starting era. If you want to destroy it, you must destroy all over the world, because this civilisation is EVERYONE.

[The_Sadukar]

Will to work??? Western society is the most lazy civilization that ever existed! Hell, we glorify laziness!

Science did not advance in Europe because it got "liberated" from anything. It advanced thanks to the spoils of war we got from invading, plundering and wiping out almost every other culture in the world. Just like the Muslims advanced in their golden age thanks to invading, plundering and wiping out the Byzantines.

Western culture is to blame for all the greatest genocides and mass slaughters in the history of humanity. Don't you DARE call us civilized! We wiped out the native americans and stole their lands. We enslaved the whole continent of Africa. We spawned Hitler and Stalin. We created nuclear weapons. We brought the world on the brink of total annihilation. We pollute and kill the Earth itself!

Our "civilization" is the most repugnant piece of moral filth that ever existed! Bless the day when it will be crushed and forgotten!

Worshipping laziness? Bah, of course no one wants to work hard, but we have written it to our soul. Dechristianised people - atheists - who are getting out of our culture, those are worshipping it, that's what is this thread about. Also, we aren't lazy to think, what I'm trying to say. Muslims are. Those slaughters were done because we started to dechristianise. First Rousseau, who was trying to negate God, then came Nietzsche, trying to negate morale, and at last Hitler, Stalin and Mao, who done all the dirty work, those were preparing spiritual tools for. If we are so "barbarized" how you are trying to say, we would use those nukes. But what are they really? Keeping aggressive nations back, ensuring peace. But back. Our civilisation was flawed by these dechristianisating philosophy, but it mustn't be crushed, destroyed, but it must return to its core, to very heart of christianity. Thinkings of the christianity are most advanced, only really progressive and good for mankind. We must have them in minds, today is still just starting era. If you want to destroy it, you must destroy all over the world, because this civilisation is EVERYONE.

I what way are christianity progessive?

[quoudam72]

No semantics. No technicalities, that's it. The reason is because "god" in "lack of belief in god" is not specified, and can mean any god.

Sounds like a technicality if I ever heard one. So for the sake of a productive discussion I agree to disagree.

[emprworm]

i wanted to hear edric comment on my example of cities who built up weapons technology to defend against barbarian hoardes (such as the mongols). In this example, the proliferation of weapons and the technological progress the society made because of weapons research was not to conquer, but to defend vs. uncivilized non-western hoardes.

[quoudam72]

Damnit Emprwrm Edric already said something similiar to that. That makes you in agree with him... well... almost. ;)