Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> life
Dan
post Oct 26, 2003, 03:56 PM
Post #61


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



[quote]yes, but the person who pursues worthy goals will soon realize that happiness is, in and of itself, worthless.[/quote]
I disagree that happiness is worthless, and I disagree that anybody should come to that conclusion in the pursuit of worthy goals


[quote]the proof is in the experience[/quote]
since your experience does not exhaust all possibility, you have 'inducted' your proof. I have not seen an explanation as to why your 'induction' is reasonable


[quote]so your strategy is to keep asking 'why' questions to every reply and explanation I post? [/quote]
this isn't a strategy, 'bluebear'. You have simply not explained how one can deem an aim as 'worthy' short of declaring that one can deem 'worthy' aims. This is the tautology I am speaking of. Your pseudoexplanation that 'worth' involves 'striving', and that 'worth' is indicated by 'meaningfulness' do not explain what makes an aim 'worthy'. (unless you are saying that 'striving' alone makes it worthy, to which I wholeheartedly disagree).



[quote]I've tried explaining, but there comes a point when recourse to actual experience is necessary.[/quote]
I disagree. I say that this is an excuse of those who just don't understand their own motives well enough to articulate them



[quote]And I asked you to ask yourself what makes an act meaningful, and I can see that you have no idea why. [/quote]

yes, I do recall you passing the buck. Clearly I have stated that happiness is integral to the meaningfulness of an aim or have you been absent for this entire conversation?



[quote]At least I took the extra step and said that I would talk more about it later. [/quote]
all you did was dodge the question with promises of future engagement. I want to know NOW! smile.gif



[quote]That's fine for you, I suppose, but I have found aims much worthier than happiness, as have many of the great ones of the past that I've learned from. Fortunately, many people don't require happiness to have worthy aims in life and to have meaning. The life without happiness would be completely devoid of meaning and value for you, but certainly not for me. I think that says a lot.[/quote]
I think that says you don't have a clue as to your motivations. You are seeking some kind of satisfaction from your aims, and to be satisfied is to achieve a measure of happiness.


[quote]but aren't you kidding me with this whole 'happiness should be the aim of life' business?[/quote]
NO! wink.gif


[quote]Also, you never answered my question about why you don't (or do) pop 10 or more prozac each day since you're so keen on achieving happiness.[/quote]
because it's a fool's question. Prozac is like all those other 'failure' paths of yours; happiness from a drug just isn't going to 'endure'


8)



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 26, 2003, 04:23 PM
Post #62


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



[quote]it's good to point that out, that there are degrees of happiness, and that for any state of happiness, even happier states can be envisioned and are possible. As such, it would not be possible to be aimless if one's aim in life was happiness since one could always aim for more happiness and greater degrees of happiness.[/quote]
your belief in infinitely higher degrees of happiness is not implied by the 'evidence' you are referencing. This implication is yours alone, and it along with the consequences of it are simply your own speculations until proven



[quote]I will acknowledge that happiness can attain meaning and worth when considered to comprise a part of more meaningful and worthwhile experiences, even while I maintain that considered in and of itself, happiness, alone, is meaningless and worthless. [/quote]
who can say if you are contradicting yourself, when you lack a reasonable explanation as to what constitutes 'worth' and 'meaning'.



[quote]If happiness attains meaning and worth, it is only within the context of more meaningful and worthy experiences, and these more meaningful and worthy experiences are, in general, the result of pursuing and realizing meaningful and worthy aims.[/quote]
still only a pseudoexplanation. You have not explained why an aim should be deemed 'worthy' or why it should be 'meaningful'



[quote]Pursuing happiness as the sole aim in life is not meaningful, nor is it worthy.[/quote]
I'm thinking that you are simplifying the idea into some kind of juvenile pursuit. I agree, pursuing what you think is 'happiness' as a kid (like riding a rollercoaster) just may not work for very long


[quote]This does not rule out pursuing happiness as the means to further aid one in pursuing one's meaningful and worthy aims. But as such, happiness, in and of itself, is a tool and an aid, and not an end in itself to be sought for. [/quote]
until you tell me how I can 'deem' worth, or know that an aim will be 'meaningful', I say that you have offered no real explanation at all



[quote]One should aim for worthier and more meaningful goals in life, such as knowing God and oneself, and realizing one's potential and humanity's potential. [/quote]
and why are these goals 'worthier' and 'more meaningful'? Simply stating that they are is no explanation



[quote]If you make happiness your sole aim in life, then you might as well be shooting heroin or overdosing on prozac, since this is what your ethics justifies and really boils down to, and this, to most people, is simply repugnant, pathetic, naive, and is not what one's life is or should be all about.[/quote]
this is a 'straw man', because I disagree comletely that these pursuits will maintain happiness (or, as you know it, bring 'enduring' happiness). i.e., these means toward happiness will fail



[quote]Or better yet, the culmination of your 'ethics of happiness' for you would be to hook electrodes into your own brain and continuously stimulate your happy centers so as to make you happy all the time. Forget everything and everyone else, right? So long as you're happy, nothing else matters, right? The world could go up in flames, but so long as you're happy, everything's just great, isn't it? [/quote]
I'm quite disappointed in your use of straw men in arguing your position. But I guess this is your best recourse as you cannot logically explain your position without deferring to ambiguities and undefined notions


[quote]Since you would put the pursuit of your own happiness above all else in life, Dan, I take it you have no calling in life. Further, you seem rather ungrateful to life, since according to you, the life without happiness is not worth living. Well, did you ever think that perhaps it is you who are not worthy of life? [/quote]
My calling is to teach you some common sense, so that you are worthy of being called 'sensible'



[quote]Life is a gift of sorts, and with it comes tremendous responsibilities. Yet, you don't want the gift unless there's happiness included in the package. Besides being ungrateful, that's also just irresponsible, don't you think? [/quote]
straw men again, 'bluebear'


[quote]The key difference between your 'ethics of happiness' and my ethics seems to be that mine can justify life in the absence of happiness, whereas yours cannot.[/quote]
I think you are just living the fantasy of supreme self-importance, must be due to your coming up as a 'genuis'



[quote]In the absence of happiness, you would turn tail and run away from life and reject it, considering it not worth living, whereas I would still fully accept life's challenge and find meaning and worth in pursuing my aims. [/quote]
I would 'try again', because there is no escape.


[quote]In essence, your 'ethics of happiness' is weak and it degrades Man to a very small and ridiculous stature indeed, whereas mine elevates him to heights you cannot imagine and which are completely inaccessible to those following your 'ethics of happiness'. [/quote]
your self-importance is without bounds


[quote]A note about definitions, by 'meaningful', I mean 'significant, full of significance',[/quote]
OK. since you are pushing the definition to 'significant', can you tell me what makes an aim 'significant'?



[quote]and by 'worthy', I mean 'deemed sufficiently meaningful to oneself and/or to humanity to justify personal sacrifice and investment of resources'. [/quote]
great! so we remain with the question of why something should be 'significant'. At least we've condensed two unknowns to one



[quote]If you ask me what 'significant' means, I would reply that this is something that everyone hopefully knows from experience, and for me to further define such terms would result in a circular definition (which all definitions are if we continue to pursue the meanings of different terms indefinitely), or it would amount to me trying to explain to a blind person what it's like to see. [/quote]
I figured as much. You can't explain it so you blow a lot of smoke


[quote]At some point, you need to have recourse to the actual experience, and without this experience, nothing I say will get through to you. [/quote]
actually, an explanation will get through to me. It's the cop-outs that don't convince me


[quote]And finally, on a different note, and maybe this is already obvious, but having aims in life (i.e., being oriented towards the future in a particular manner) does not preclude experiencing the here and now, and of vividly living in the present. [/quote]
I pretty much agree with that assessment. After all, it's not like I can live anywhere else than where I am. In fact, I would say that it is impossible to live at any other place than 'here and now'.

[quote]On the contrary, living in the here and now, and fully in the present moment, while at the same time pursuing meaningful and worthy aims, is very meaningful indeed.[/quote]
Since I can't live anywhere else than 'here and now', 'here and now' is the only place where meaning can be found. Thus, you have not explained what the meaning is, only that if there is meaning to be found 'here and now' is where it's at


8)




User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 26, 2003, 05:50 PM
Post #63


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651




It's a funny thing, that when you should be shown the absurd consequences that result from your 'ethics of happiness', you should mere shrug them off as straw men, when in fact they aren't straw men at all. Hmmmmm, looks to me like someone's in denial. wink.gif

Another weakness in your argument is that you're unwittingly projecting yourself onto everyone else, meaning that since the only purpose of your life is happiness, you project it onto others and presume the purpose of their lives is just as base as yours, which Einstein himself labeled the ambitions of a pig. But of course you still believe that you're right, because in your mind, you're never wrong, right? And in this case, I suppose you can convince yourself that Einstein, and the countless other great individuals who explicitly warn against making happiness the sole aim of life, are just downright wrong, because if they were right, then god forbid, you would have to admit being wrong, and of course, you can't do that, now can you? I suppose you can convince yourself of just about anything, am I right?

Whatever be the case, I'm sufficiently comfortable with my refutation of your 'ethics of happiness' and of making the case for a higher ethics in this thread, that I'm sure most, if not all, reasonable and open-minded people will agree with me for the most part, if not completely.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 26, 2003, 05:57 PM
Post #64


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



What's funny is that you still have not explained what makes an aim 'worthy' (by virtue of deferring to the yet-unexplained idea of 'significance'). As for your theory of 'unwitting projection', what do you think you are doing?. I'm not interested in your appeals to authority, only your explanations (which are at least incomplete). Enjoy your illusory comfort while you can


8)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
T_Tom_Terrible
post Oct 26, 2003, 07:10 PM
Post #65


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 48
Joined: Jul 25, 2003
From: Potland, Whoregon
Member No.: 498



Hey, what's going on in here fellas?

It seems silly to argue at great lengths about such an intangible and extremely subjective experience. As soon as you tear the idea out of the experience you have reduced it somehow into something that is not real and never found in reality.

I agree with blue. Happiness ought to be thought of in proper context, as relative to experience. But whether one ought to pursue happiness directly and/or indirectly seems to be a personal choice where one approach may be perfectly suitable to one and unacceptable to another, with no ultimate "right way."

I keep my options open in this regard. I don't shun frivolous entertainment or the contempletive life. I say try it all and see how it works out for you.

tongue.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 26, 2003, 09:33 PM
Post #66


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651




[quote author=T_Tom_Terrible link=board=5;threadid=3066;start=50#msg15120 date=1067213425]
Hey, what's going on in here fellas?
[/quote]

Right now, Dan is still in flat-out denial over my classical reductio ad absurdum of his 'ethics of happiness', which states 1) that happiness is the meaning of life, 2) that everyone aims solely for happiness whether they know it or not, and 3) without happiness, life is not worth living. Clearly, such an 'ethics of happiness', if taken to its rational conclusions, results in the absurdity of each person doing anything, no matter how distasteful, repugnant, or degrading, in order to achieve personal happiness. He also seems to be in denial of the fact that multiple individuals, myself included, constitute counter-examples to his argument that everyone aims solely for happiness, and has tried to rationalize all the irrefutable evidence against his 'ethics of happiness' in some oftentimes amusing ways, though recently, he's put up a rather disappointing performance by resorting to aping some of my arguments against his position, seemingly unaware of the asymmetry between our two positions, and of the fact that the burden of proof has been on him all along to prove that everyone aims for happiness, and that happiness is the meaning of life, which he has never given any evidence for whatsoever. And so, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that Dan's mind is completely impervious to reason, at least insofar as the issue of ethics is concerned, and so it's probably best to just end on the semi-pleasant note, "To each his own".

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 26, 2003, 11:33 PM
Post #67


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



I am not in 'flat denial' of your reductio ad absurdum, I am in disagreement with your conclusion of absurdity. Your conclusion:
[quote]such an 'ethics of happiness', if taken to its rational conclusions, results in the absurdity of each person doing anything, no matter how distasteful, repugnant, or degrading, in order to achieve personal happiness.[/quote]
is a non-sequitor concerning the alleged absurdity. Why is it absurd that a person should seek happiness, and that their actions would reflect that underlying theme?

And why is my refusal of your references as proof of your claim evidence that I am 'in denial'? Where is the irrefutable evidence you claim to have presented? All you have presented is appeals to authorities who are unavailable for cross-examination, and your own personal testimony. In fact, I present as a counter-example to your authories the Dalai Lama, who says I believe that the very purpose of life is to be happy and I believe that the very purpose of our life is to seek happiness. http://www.thinkexist.com/english/Author/x...uthor_825_1.htm . The reason I am 'aping' your arguments is because you offered them as evidence that refutes my claim. If the burden of proof is on me to prove my claim 'Happiness is the meaning of life', then simply refuse my claim until proven. However, you have gone to 'disprove' my claim by offering your own counter-claim that 'Happiness is not the meaning of life'. The burden of proof for that claim is on you. The comment about my being impervious to reason is rather ironic, considering that you have not offered a sound reason to support your counter-claim yet believe that you have. I'm happy to end this conversation at any time, however I do not concede that you have either proven my claim wrong (which is not your burden) or proven your counter-claim right (which is your burden).

tongue.gif

(p.s. Joesus, where's the image? ??? )
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 27, 2003, 12:02 AM
Post #68


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651




I'm glad to see you're a good sport about things, Dan. smile.gif You know I was just joking about being impervious to reason. In fact, I do believe you're permeable to it sometimes, though it seems certain that we do have very different conceptions concerning the nature of Man and about what Man ought to do with his life. Nonetheless, some good may come from laying the arguments out on the table and making clear the definitions we're using and the assumptions we're making.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
v3d4
post Oct 27, 2003, 12:35 AM
Post #69


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 11, 2003
Member No.: 532



" making clear the definitions we're using"

i think you guys are using different definitions of 'happiness'.

personally, i think i like dan's definition better becuz dan's seems like a more noble and worthy definition than the idea of happiness being "i got what i want and screw everybody else" or a definition that would include having the pleasure centers of your brain stimulated till you rot to death.
thats my interpertation, i have no idea if anybody elses is the same or similar.
but then im not gonna argue if nobody agrees with me when i say that the yab norgile flamapanatat imperative gleek leepadrit without first making sure they understand what i mean by it. ;D
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 27, 2003, 01:08 AM
Post #70


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



well, 'bluebear', I am likewise glad to see your sportiness and humor concerning our little debate. I agree that our debate can be taken in a positive way toward understanding this fundamental question, and I appreciate the opportunity to dance with you.
smile.gif



(p.s. v3d4
I, like, totally disagree that the yab norgile flamapanatat imperative would ever gleek leepadrit. And anybody who has shipnot forrge could easily see that! ;D )

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
T_Tom_Terrible
post Oct 27, 2003, 03:59 AM
Post #71


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 48
Joined: Jul 25, 2003
From: Potland, Whoregon
Member No.: 498



I'm not sure that happiness can even be defined in an objective sense.

...But, supposing that it could, I would postulate all over the rug, uh, *ahem* that is, postulate that sorrow and happiness have an interdependent, cyclical relationship. Which is why happiness alone is not the meaning of life, even if the Honorable Dali Llama's mama said so herself. ...Mr Don't Appeal to Authority.

wink.gif

Perhaps we should start another thread entitled, "What is True happiness?"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
swan
post Oct 27, 2003, 10:30 AM
Post #72


Unregistered









[quote]postulate that sorrow and happiness have an interdependent, cyclical relationship.[/quote]

It has been my experience that as some point these became one :-*
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rhymer
post Oct 27, 2003, 12:13 PM
Post #73


Supreme God
*******

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2093
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Member No.: 385



Hi Swan,

"Happiness and sorrow" as 'one', yes ... but at opposite ends of the scale of the emotion of contentment.
Back to my 'thermostat' concept. We all have a different 'normal' setting.

And, pity the manic depressives who oscillate from end to end (bliss to hopeless sorrow) in an uncontrollable fashion! smile.gif :'(

I have amended the line above in view of negative criticsm received later.
My amended words, (which mean exactly the same) are:-

I have sympathy for all those suffering from manic depression (who oscillate between the extremes of despair and exuberance, characterised by deep depression and manic excitability). Indeed, I have sympathy for anybody who suffers from mood swings, however strong or weak their experiences may be, if it adversely affects their experience of life. The sympathy I have for such people, resides within myself and is expressed as a fact. It should not be construed to be sent or given to anyone.

Bill
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
+Franziska+
post Oct 27, 2003, 03:23 PM
Post #74


Demi-God
*****

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 833
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
From: Germany
Member No.: 157



Why should we aspire worthy goals?

To improve our effectiveness.

This improves and boosts our intelligence, skills, satisfaction and finally our happiness.
So this would support the quote of Happiness being a by-product.

But very generally, one does aspire happiness, contentment, enlightenment. There are people who do more, and people who do less for it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Timothy_417
post Oct 28, 2003, 02:24 AM
Post #75


Awakening
***

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 234
Joined: May 21, 2003
Member No.: 479



I'm disposed to regard life as ultimately meaningless, and consciousness merely a sinister trick of evolution.

But ask me again tomorrow....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Maniac Magee
post Oct 28, 2003, 03:26 PM
Post #76


Unregistered









[quote author=rhymer link=board=5;threadid=3066;start=50#msg15138 date=1067274798]
And, pity the manic depressives who oscillate from end to end (bliss to hopeless sorrow) in an uncontrollable fashion! smile.gif :'(

Bill
[/quote]

And, pity the greyfaced hunchbrains who are trapped in such dull and "normal" lives that they must try to prop themselves up by disparaging those who can change rapidly. Sure, some folks need help getting a handle on it, but all "manic depressives" do not suffer, Bill.

Magee
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rhymer
post Oct 28, 2003, 05:05 PM
Post #77


Supreme God
*******

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2093
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Member No.: 385



Hi Maniac Magee,

I have amended my post on the presumption that my use of the word pity is what caused the problem. It is an emotive word with different meanings for different people.
If that is not the problem you will need to be more specific.

Why not come and join us on Mind-Brain?
Our intentions are good, even if we sometimes upset each other!
It is a good place to relate experiences, thereby educating others and gives an opportunity to remove biasses, prejudices and misconceptions.
It is also a good place to learn, or at least be aware of other peoples thoughts.

Best regards, Bill.
PS.
If I see any of those people you referrred to I'll boot them for you!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LoneStranger
post Nov 10, 2003, 08:43 PM
Post #78


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Member No.: 687



wel.. I onyl read soem of that really long thread. I decided to put my input of teh meanign of life into this discussion because...well...I felt like it. I think that there is no meanign of life. We all live here because our parents had sex and you knwo all that good biology stuff. anyways, the meaning of life is nonexistent. peopel talk abotu teh meanign of life today because of hte inner need to establish a reason for them to live. So maybe in a way the meanign of life is to live? hmmm.....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Neoactive
post Nov 11, 2003, 09:59 AM
Post #79


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Nov 10, 2003
Member No.: 752



One might say happiness is dependent on its antithesis to exist. If you step beyond your emotions, you would move on from happiness, as well.

And perhaps the "meaning" of life is simply to do as you will do; nothing more, nothing less...

-James

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ga
post Mar 25, 2004, 10:41 PM
Post #80


Unregistered









Many have the conviction that the modern society is crossing by a deep crisis of values and meaning at the moment. Some alarming situations seem to indicate that the world has deteriorated to huge steps in the last years; but Is it really like this? can say truly say that our world is crossing by a period of crisis? The problem with this question is that it estimates a normality parameter, the existence of absolute values and an objective standard of behavior that governs all the human beings the same. If in the African forest a family of lions attacks a wild boar and she breaks it, the news will not appear on the following day in newspapers; but when an adolescent one takes a firearm and unloads its fury shooting against its professors and companions of school, that frightens and scares, because one does not hope that the human beings behave thus. But, how do we determine the behavior that is expected of the human beings? Based on the authority of whom, do we distinguish the good thing of the bad thing, the unjust from the just, the true thing of the false thing? Perhaps its determined by the things each person believes? The tradition? The opinion of the majority or an elite of experts in the human conduct? We needed a base legitimate authority that could establish the values that are to prevail the same to all, otherwise we will not have no parameter to pass judgment over the actions of the men. That is the great problem which nowadays the western society faces: it has rejected the jew/christian base on which it had constructed its system of values and now is as a boat to the drift in the ocean of the relativism and the subjectivity. What is good for you might be what is bad for me and vice versa. The concept of the absolute truth has become obsolete and with the death of the truth the virtue has also died. The modern man contemplates frightened the deterioration that there is to his around, but does not perceive that that one is the fruit that is harvested inevitably when it rejects to God and Its revelation. If a personal and supernatural God does not exist that created and maintains all the things with an intention, a God that has revealed itself to the infallible man in a book which we can include/understand rationally, then we do not have towards where to watch to find true answers to the most important questions of the man: Which is the intention of our existence? How one assumes that we must live? What is what is well, what is what is bad? If everyone has the prerogative to respond according to its own criteria or convenience, that is equivalent to say that the absolute and objective truth does not exist, nor the moral values either. When the foundations are destroyed is only time question so that the law of the forest prevails in the human society: the survival of the fittest
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ganji
post Mar 26, 2004, 12:32 AM
Post #81


Aspiring
**

Group: Moderator,
Full Member
Posts: 89
Joined: Dec 22, 2003
From: AZ
Member No.: 815



QUOTE
If a personal and supernatural God does not exist that created and maintains all the things with an intention, a God that has revealed itself to the infallible man in a book which we can include/understand rationally, then we do not have towards where to watch to find true answers to the most important questions of the man: Which is the intention of our existence? How one assumes that we must live? What is what is well, what is what is bad? If everyone has the prerogative to respond according to its own criteria or convenience, that is equivalent to say that the absolute and objective truth does not exist, nor the moral values either. When the foundations are destroyed is only time question so that the law of the forest prevails in the human society: the survival of the fittest


*yawns*

This is all old news. It's obvious we need to create our own values and meanings. What have you created?

What do you understand by absolute and objective truth? I have no idea what you mean by these terms, or whether you even know what you mean by them. Can you please explain exactly what you mean by absolute and objective truth, considering that all truth that we know or experience has a subjective basis?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rune
post Mar 26, 2004, 02:47 AM
Post #82


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 79
Joined: Mar 25, 2004
From: Perth, Western Australia
Member No.: 1734



I would argue trhat truth is always subjective. What we believe is conditioned largely by our hopes, our fears and our experiences. The truth for me, born female in a certain time and country, having had various experiences and emotions about those experiences cannot be exactly replicated by any other human being. My perception of the world, no matter how open I may be to the viewpoints of others, is inevitably coloured by this. Personally I find little to believe in the book to which the original writer refers, finding it more interesting as socio-political history of a primitive tribe. The basic premise seems to be that there are those (men!) who have, or claim to have, a 'god-given right' to dominate and control others. Macchiavelli did the same thing in a much more entertaining way!
However, lack of belief in an omniscient masculine deity does not, per se, obviate a personal standard of ethics and morality; indeed, when one has worked out one's own values, free from the hypocricy and double standards of the churches (of whatever persuasion), one may well find these not merely easier to adhere to, but much more meaningful.
It is, of course, so much easier to accept the standards and beliefs of others without taking the time and trouble to formulate one's own, in religious as well as political matters. But it's a darned lazy or unintelligent way to live one's life.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shai'tan
post Apr 01, 2004, 04:14 PM
Post #83


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Apr 01, 2004
Member No.: 1848



To Dan and Bluebear,

I'm a newbie, this is my first post (if you hadn't already noticed) and I am engrossed in your discussion. That said, i haven't had the time to read all of it yet, but i want to raise a point that you've already touched on, which i consider an integral part of the argument.

If you're not happy, then...what's the point in being 'alive' as we know it?

You can know everybody in the world, you can have everything, but that will not necessary make you happy. It will only contribute to your happiness.

Cheers, hope to see you guys around soon.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Apr 05, 2004, 08:18 PM
Post #84


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



hi Shai'tan

this is an old conversation that was pretty much concluded in a state of mutual acceptance of fundamental difference of opinion, but does have extension into recent conversation. Further comments on this thread are always welcome, as is engagement in more recent conversation

smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
spuh
post Apr 23, 2004, 07:51 PM
Post #85


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Member No.: 2126



Isn't "in all things, moderation," immoderate?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Apr 23, 2004, 09:10 PM
Post #86


Unregistered









QUOTE (spuh @ Apr 23, 04:51 PM)
Isn't "in all things, moderation," immoderate?

No more so than the saying "the only constant, is change" is valid
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tone
post Mar 04, 2006, 04:59 AM
Post #87


Overlord
****

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Mar 03, 2006
From: Chicago
Member No.: 4916



QUOTE(bluebear @ Oct 24, 11:45 PM) *

no, I understood you, but I still maintain that aiming for happiness is a mistake that will lead to emptiness and self-disgust.


Because all the aims are wrong and its biologically rooted. If person X experiences a sublime state of happiness (State X) for just 5 minutes as a fleeting peak experience, Hypothetically, person X can be in that state of consciousness 24/7/365 if all the internal factors which produced that state + all the external factors be sufficent to allow it to continue were reproduced and maintained constantly. Also whos to say that state X cant be farther improved upon. We see increasing evidence that the hardware (brain) will do whatever its designed to do. produce whatever state its inner workings can produce.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mayonaise
post Mar 06, 2006, 08:14 PM
Post #88


Awakening
***

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Feb 03, 2006
Member No.: 4823



You can jack me up too Tone :-)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
foreigner
post Oct 11, 2007, 08:06 AM
Post #89


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Oct 10, 2007
Member No.: 13395



QUOTE
the meaning of life,,, what is it, why are we living, as individuals, as a species, as a global community

I think every person in the world ask this question him/her self.it comes time when human thinks about his life,who is he,what he wants,what is he doing in this world,what is his goal and at last, how is he going to finish his life. sombody thinks that he was born to live several years,to do some things, to make a family,etc. and then die.and some one thinks only about his entertainment,relaxation,how to make his life more beautiful and happier... and what then?is this all?do you think that you were born in this world only for this?
only for this reason create you God? God?-you may ask surprisingly. Yes God.He create you,he was tortured for you, and with what are you going to answer him in return?
You must love God, live with Christian way and defence the commandment.

I like this words very much: What would be my life without your love, my God?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Oct 11, 2007, 12:51 PM
Post #90


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



What is the evidence for a belief in a supernatural being?

A better explanation of life is evolution by natural selection.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd August 2019 - 07:57 PM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

BrainMeta is supported by:

The Neurological Foundation & CerebralHealth.com

BrainMeta is enhanced by:

UVISI: Universal Virtual Intelligence Singularity Infinity
info@uvisi.com