or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The New Pope and 'Relativism'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New Pope and 'Relativism' - Page 4  

post #121 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
I know this thread is almost dead but I couldn't let it go without posting a link to the Cardinal Ratzinger Fanclub.

Yes, sadly, it's all too real. Love the teutonic font though. My personal fave is the baseball cap from the shop - the quote could be sigworthy with a slight alteration....


This cap is a fake : the font should be curved to fit the shape of the cap. Here the font is tight straight.
post #122 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
This cap is a fake : the font should be curved to fit the shape of the cap. Here the font is tight straight.

The straightness of the font, however, can only be properly understood in reference to a revelatory trinitarian framework.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #123 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
The straightness of the font, however, can only be properly understood in reference to a revelatory trinitarian framework.

post #124 of 193
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
This cap is a fake : the font should be curved to fit the shape of the cap. Here the font is tight straight.

The cap may well be a fake. Certainly the concept it is promoting is.

Fakeness is not the issue with religious matter though unfortunately, it is definitely for sale on the site, just as the Pope is definitely in the Vatican.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #125 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
The straightness of the font, however, can only be properly understood in reference to a revelatory trinitarian framework.

Thanks! Now that I finished choking on donuts and hot coffee because of the laughing fit you put me into..I can truly appreciate the joke. (scalded nose hairs and all)
I never get tired of being right all the time... but I do get tired of having to prove it to you again and again.
I never get tired of being right all the time... but I do get tired of having to prove it to you again and again.
post #126 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Some of us, however, are quite happy to embrace the fact that life is full of doubt and uncertainty...

Now you ARE being honest about where you are coming from, but you also need to be honest on how you operate on a day to day basis -- which is not 'fuzzy around the edges' at all.

There is a dichotomy of existence there.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #127 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Now you ARE being honest about where you are coming from, but you also need to be honest on how you operate on a day to day basis -- which is not 'fuzzy around the edges' at all.

There is a dichotomy of existence there.

What's the big problem, other than maybe wishing you could be more certain, about having to choose specific actions based on less than perfectly certain data? I believe such a process is widely known as "living".
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #128 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
What's the big problem, other than maybe wishing you could be more certain, about having to choose specific actions based on less than perfectly certain data? I believe such a process is widely known as "living".

I hear you, but at the same time you can't play fast and loose with a traffic cop, or loving your children, or respecting your parents.

There is definetly plenty of uncertainty, but it seems (to me at least) that the uncertainty comes in in the process of trying to live up to certain implicit standards. Being a good husband, for instance, is not complicated as a rule, but can be extremely difficult row to hoe -- overcoming being selfish, overbearing, a prick, etc. (and you all know who you are)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #129 of 193
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I hear you, but at the same time you can't play fast and loose with a traffic cop, or loving your children, or respecting your parents.

There is definetly plenty of uncertainty, but it seems (to me at least) that the uncertainty comes in in the process of trying to live up to certain implicit standards. Being a good husband, for instance, is not complicated as a rule, but can be extremely difficult row to hoe -- overcoming being selfish, overbearing, a prick, etc. (and you all know who you are)

Hmm....this is disingenuous. Sure those things are difficult to achieve and desirable also, but there's a 'but':

Many other undesirable things are ignored completely in Churchianity, and still others are actively encouraged: dogmatism, prejudice, bigotry and a certain conviction one is absolutely right without reference to facts (and in spite of them in many cases) - all these are 'sins' in my book and all are rampant and actively promoted by the Church (itself a classic example of something false and undesirable in the main).
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #130 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Hmm....this is disingenuous. Sure those things are difficult to achieve and desirable also, but there's a 'but':

Many other undesirable things are ignored completely in Churchianity, and still others are actively encouraged: dogmatism, prejudice, bigotry and a certain conviction one is absolutely right without reference to facts (and in spite of them in many cases) - all these are 'sins' in my book and all are rampant and actively promoted by the Church (itself a classic example of something false and undesirable in the main).


The excesses of bigotry in regards to dogma, yes. Tough love -- essentially in regards to people hurting themselves -- no. And that 'tough love' is really inescapable: Church, tribe, or government, Pope, shaman, or traffic cop, it's hard to get away from.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #131 of 193
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
The excesses of bigotry in regards to dogma, yes. Tough love -- essentially in regards to people hurting themselves -- no. And that 'tough love' is really inescapable: Church, tribe, or government, Pope, shaman, or traffic cop, it's hard to get away from.

That's true - I think someone called JC got away from it once but he got nailed up.

That's what happens when you're not tough I guess......
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #132 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz (emphasis mine)
I hear you, but at the same time you can't play fast and loose with a traffic cop, or loving your children, or respecting your parents.

What do you mean that you can't? Of course you can. There's certainly nothing like the inevitability of physical law going on here to stop you from playing as fast and loose as you wish.

Do you mean you can't in the sense of can't without suffering social consequences? Social consequences aren't an inevitable result of straying from any given moral path, however. People "get away" with things all of the time.

Do you mean you can't without suffering from guilt? There are, however, many circumstances where one person might think another person should feel guilty, but that person doesn't. You can vigorously assert until the cows come home that deep down inside a person will feel guilty and troubled whenever they break "the rules" as you understand them, but such assertions can't carry a whole lot of weight since you have no way of really knowing such things.

Do you mean you can't without suffering punishment from an angry god? This is hardly universally accepted, certainly not provable, and certainly not implicit (without a bit of unspoken circular logic) in merely trying to discuss the concept of morality.

Besides any consequences that might follow "breaking the rules", it's possible to decide that one simply doesn't believe in or care about the consequences.
Quote:
There is definetly plenty of uncertainty, but it seems (to me at least) that the uncertainty comes in in the process of trying to live up to certain implicit standards.

There's plenty of uncertainty in coming up with a universal set of "implicit standards" as well.

Even if one can come up with a more-or-less universal set of standards that most human beings seem to recognize, you've been trying to speak as if merely alluding to such standards turns you into either an admitted Christian, or a closet Christian who's simply in denial of the "revelatory trinitarian framework" which is somehow inescapably implicit in any sort of concept of morality.

Yet I've seen nothing from you to rule out in the slightest that common moral standards can't be derived from something as simple as the common biological heritage humans share as a social species. Maybe such a derivation doesn't satisfy your desire that morality be a deeper and more fundamental thing? If so, that's not my problem to answer.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #133 of 193
hehe, ive been away for a few days, dmz how can one deride relativism, when it is the very thing they practice day to day? yes I'm referring to you...


...dont make me pull up a load of absolutes given by God that you have decided/chosen are 'relatives' that you do not wish to adhere too.
post #134 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
...dont make me pull up a load of absolutes given by God that you have decided/chosen are 'relatives' that you do not wish to adhere too.

Fire away

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #135 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
What do you mean that you can't? Of course you can. There's certainly nothing like the inevitability of physical law going on here to stop you from playing as fast and loose as you wish.

I meant that in the same way you "can't" shoot the rod to the traffic cop and pull away -- or perhaps smack your wife around and not experience a breakup -- or ignore you child's emotional needs and not end up with a fairly screwed up individual. Maybe the way that communism falls a apart on a fractal level, that sort of thing.

Although, "proofs" (evidences, yes) of uncreated order, they are not.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #136 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Fire away

I.\tThou shalt have no other gods before me.
post #137 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
I.\tThou shalt have no other gods before me.


I'm trying.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #138 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I'm trying.

how hard can it be? Either God is the absolute, or he's the relative.

If God is an absolute, how can it be so hard for you to give up your 'relative' existance??
post #139 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
how hard can it be? Either God is the absolute, or he's the relative.

If God is an absolute, how can it be so hard for you to give up your 'relative' existance??

You lost me.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #140 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
You lost me.

I guess you 'relatively' decided that it is not absolutely right to stone your kids to death if they disobey you.


Next---
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy G*d: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it."
post #141 of 193
well?

when did you 'relatively' justify that it is OK to rest on the first day and do the work on the Sabbath?
post #142 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
well?

when did you 'relatively' justify that it is OK to rest on the first day and do the work on the Sabbath?

The Sabbath thing is easy, the day rotated in the Jewish Calendar, so that the day of the week was not the point so much as the resting one day in seven -- hands off our lives, etc.

But I must being dense on the other stuff -- help!

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #143 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
so that the day of the week was not the point so much as the resting one day in seven -- hands off our lives, etc.

But if the Sabbath day is an absolute command from the absolute word of God, and relativism is bad, then the 'day' very much becomes the point.

reinterpreting it to justify it as resting 'one day in seven' is pure relativism and in disobeyment of Gods' absolutism.

Try again.
post #144 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
But if the Sabbath day is an absolute command from the absolute word of God, and relativism is bad, then the 'day' very much becomes the point.

reinterpreting it to justify it as resting 'one day in seven' is pure relativism and in disobeyment of Gods' absolutism.

Try again.

I dunno, I think it's pretty striaghtforward -- and believe me, I've gone over that one more than I care to admit.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #145 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I dunno, I think it's pretty striaghtforward -- and believe me, I've gone over that one more than I care to admit.

damn right its straight forward. Its written in black and white in the book of absolutes. There is no thought required. If you think about what it means, it becomes a relative by default. And I have trouble believing you, not least because you cannot honour what your preaching.

Do you have to think or justify...

Do not steal.
Do not murder.
Do not coveat thy neighbours wife.

Absolutes. Black and White, no thought or justification required. Absolute laws.

Therefore Thou shall rest on the Sabbath Day, means exactly that absolutely, no wriggling, no justification, no explanations. Thou shall rest.

The very fact that JC came and pronounced the end of the old way makes the whole Bible a relative, because thought is then required to understand the message, not least because he spoke in more jibberish than thou.

Not to mention the fact that 2000 year old relative philosophies do not make an absolute anyway.\

If the Bible is the book of absolutes, why are there 10000 Christian Sects in N.America anyway? Does every sect bar yours have language comprehension difficulties?
post #146 of 193
"for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

Galatians 2:17.

Proof that religious bigotry is completely wrong in the eyes of JC. JC overwrit those old laws you cling too. ie Running around condemning Gays gets you nowhere.

You have to chose. Its either JC, or 3000 year old Jewish relativism.
post #147 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
damn right its straight forward. Its written in black and white in the book of absolutes. There is no thought required. If you think about what it means, it becomes a relative by default. And I have trouble believing you, not least because you cannot honour what your preaching.

Do you have to think or justify...

Do not steal.
Do not murder.
Do not coveat thy neighbours wife.

Absolutes. Black and White, no thought or justification required. Absolute laws.

Therefore Thou shall rest on the Sabbath Day, means exactly that absolutely, no wriggling, no justification, no explanations. Thou shall rest.

The very fact that JC came and pronounced the end of the old way makes the whole Bible a relative, because thought is then required to understand the message, not least because he spoke in more jibberish than thou.

Not to mention the fact that 2000 year old relative philosophies do not make an absolute anyway.\

If the Bible is the book of absolutes, why are there 10000 Christian Sects in N.America anyway? Does every sect bar yours have language comprehension difficulties?

Really, MarcUk.

There were Sabbath years as well, that doesn't mean only certain years were special, it is the rest interval that is important, not the specific year. That's why it was "the Sabbath day" and not "Saturday" -- and like I said earlier, the actual day of the week rotated due to the nature of the Jewish calender.

No dice.

On the law/grace thing you have Christ telling in no uncertain terms that the idea behing all of the Jewish Law was 'love God with all your heart....." and "love your neighbor as yourself'. So you have an admission of the existence of Law, justice, etc.

The Jewish covenant was broken after the sanhedren attempted to basically kill God, and take his inheritance; and, just to make things official, Titus came down and wiped (except for one wall) Jerusalem off the face of the Earth.

So now we still have Law, but it is written on our hearts [especially] when we are led by the Holy Spirit -- although if I'm any indication, it's not foolproof. Don't get me wrong, there are statements like 'what is not of Faith is of sin' and 'What you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven/what you loose on Earth will be loosed in Heaven...' that make this interesting, to say the least.

The ten commandments are an unmovable core to all of this --- and I would imagine things like hand washing and no sex during menstruation are not entirely bad ideas, either. Stoning incorrigible children? ...sometimes I wonder, actually it was a much different paradigm. You have to understand that the chain of evidence was very careful to have witnesses who were willing to undergo the same fate if there were any purgery, and then you have the matter of getting caught in the first place, and on top of that IIRC the FAMILY had to instigate the whole thing (a common requirement) -- so many more crimes than are punished today, were left between the individual and his maker. Many more. There is a odd paranioa of the Nanny state the somehow it must exhaustvily dole out it's tender mercies, Prohibition comes to mind.

But it's neither here nor there, we have to figure out the best way to love our neighbor and start there.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #148 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I meant that in the same way you "can't" shoot the rod to the traffic cop and pull away -- or perhaps smack your wife around and not experience a breakup -- or ignore you child's emotional needs and not end up with a fairly screwed up individual.

None of this is a very strong meaning of "can't" -- not for someone who wishes to demonstrate how the merest contemplation of morality inevitably leads one down one of only two possible paths, either to Jesus, or to an irrational, willful denial of Jesus, with no other ways to go.

Am I supposed to be stammeringly amazed that doing things which are typically considered "bad" to do often leads to consequences which are also labeled "bad"?

Am I supposed to be so impressed that the Bible codified some of this stuff a few thousand years ago, or so terribly unimpressed with humanity that I consider a Divine Source the only possible source for a few generalized cause-and-effect rules of thumb about which kinds of actions often lead to bad consequences?
Quote:
Maybe the way that communism falls a apart on a fractal level, that sort of thing.

And even music! \

Quote:
Although, "proofs" (evidences, yes) of uncreated order, they are not.

You've demonstrated by a few examples only that a generally recognizeable concept of morality exists. This hardly constitutes even "evidences" for any form of divinity at all, and certainly doesn't do much to support your very specific "revelatory trinitarian framework" which, any moment now, I'm expecting to see burst forth in a glorious crystalline perfection of philosophical reasoning.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #149 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
None of this is a very strong meaning of "can't" -- not for someone who wishes to demonstrate how the merest contemplation of morality inevitably leads one down one of only two possible paths, either to Jesus, or to an irrational, willful denial of Jesus, with no other ways to go.

Am I supposed to be stammeringly amazed that doing things which are typically considered "bad" to do often leads to consequences which are also labeled "bad"?

Am I supposed to be so impressed that the Bible codified some of this stuff a few thousand years ago, or so terribly unimpressed with humanity that I consider a Divine Source the only possible source for a few generalized cause-and-effect rules of thumb about which kinds of actions often lead to bad consequences?

And even music! \


You've demonstrated by a few examples only that a generally recognizeable concept of morality exists. This hardly constitutes even "evidences" for any form of divinity at all, and certainly doesn't do much to support your very specific "revelatory trinitarian framework" which, any moment now, I'm expecting to see burst forth in a glorious crystalline perfection of philosophical reasoning.

I think you're digressing, this has more to do with the business of saying there are no true absolutes, but then living as if there were. It's just a few exaples of that -- I don't want to turn this into a fact-finding mission to establish the existence of God.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #150 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I think you're digressing, this has more to do with the business of saying there are no true absolutes, but then living as if there were. It's just a few exaples of that -- I don't want to turn this into a fact-finding mission to establish the existence of God.

First of all, I've never said there are no true absolutes. I simply don't know if there are, if anyone at all knows if there are, or if anyone knows what they might be.

At any rate... who out there is saying that there aren't true absolutes (or is saying what I'm saying above), but then acting as if there are true absolutes? Can you give me an example of this?

What sort of behavior indicates that one is behaving as if absolutes exist? In what way is such behavior as you might cite completely incompatible with rejecting the necessity absolutes?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #151 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
First of all, I've never said there are no true absolutes. I simply don't know if there are, if anyone at all knows if there are, or if anyone knows what they might be.

At any rate... who out there is saying that there aren't true absolutes (or is saying what I'm saying above), but then acting as if there are true absolutes? Can you give me an example of this?

What sort of behavior indicates that one is behaving as if absolutes exist? In what way is such behavior as you might cite completely incompatible with rejecting the necessity absolutes?


In a way, that's an even worse position, because it's not really tenable -- like the song says 'if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice'.

You have to function at some level, and [I'm assuming] you're not out robbing banks and kicking the cat, so you have to be functioning with some sense of how you want others to treat you, which implies a connecteness that you can feel, but can't rationally account for, except as a collective illusion.

Anyway, I think this is VERY close to the 'Is TOO/Is NOT' stage. I'll let you have the last word.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #152 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz

You have to function at some level, and [I'm assuming] you're not out robbing banks and kicking the cat, so you have to be functioning with some sense of how you want others to treat you, which implies a connecteness that you can feel, but can't rationally account for, except as a collective illusion.

Anthropology tells us that 'manners' and ideas of 'right behaviour' are vital parts of our 'firmware', produced over thousands of generations as inhospitable environments dictated human culture. 'Society' is a survival tool, and evidently a very successful one.

This 'correctness' is not an illusion and is very simple to account for. 'Correctness' has been absolutely essential for our survival as a species. For those of us living in deserts and rainforests it's still essential today.

Gift giving, food sharing, social ritual, 'manners' and an idea of 'right behaviour', having been so essential to our species for so long, leave us an inheritance we can't lose so easily. For 90% of our history we were hunters and gatherers and we depended on them for our survival. I can feel this 'correctness' because I'm a hom sap. It's what we do, and given our history it's inevitable.

There's no metaphysical explanation necessary. We have culture and a long history.
post #153 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
In a way, that's an even worse position, because it's not really tenable -- like the song says 'if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice'.

What is an even worse position? I asked you questions about your position -- asking you to provide examples illustrating your position -- and this is what you come back with? My questions for examples somehow constitute a worse position?

Quote:
You have to function at some level...

Yeah... so? What's going on here? Are you trying to say that any choice for action (or even inaction) is somehow automatically a commitment to some sort of absolute truth?
Quote:
...and [I'm assuming] you're not out robbing banks and kicking the cat, so you have to be functioning with some sense of how you want others to treat you, which implies a connecteness that you can feel, but can't rationally account for, except as a collective illusion.

What's so mysterious about feeling a connectedness with others? It's exactly what I'd rationally expect to find in a creature such as myself which has evolved as a social animal -- no "illusion" required. Add in a hefty dose of social conditioning from my environment and you're left with a pretty good rational alternative to trinary divinities.
Quote:
Anyway, I think this is VERY close to the 'Is TOO/Is NOT' stage. I'll let you have the last word.

Since you're being so evasive about making clear what you think is or is not, "is too/is not" might even been an advancement, since it would require an as-yet-to-be-provide clarity about where you stand.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
post #154 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Anthropology tells us that 'manners' and ideas of 'right behaviour' are vital parts of our 'firmware', produced over thousands of generations as inhospitable environments dictated human culture. 'Society' is a survival tool, and evidently a very successful one.

This 'correctness' is not an illusion and is very simple to account for. 'Correctness' has been absolutely essential for our survival as a species. For those of us living in deserts and rainforests it's still essential today.

Gift giving, food sharing, social ritual, 'manners' and an idea of 'right behaviour', having been so essential to our species for so long, leave us an inheritance we can't lose so easily. For 90% of our history we were hunters and gatherers and we depended on them for our survival. I can feel this 'correctness' because I'm a hom sap. It's what we do, and given our history it's inevitable.

There's no metaphysical explanation necessary. We have culture and a long history.

I understand, but that only reduces us to machines, with absolutes (as abstract concepts) still being an illusion. Also, that apporach gets fuzzy when you approach Music, Art, Love, God, etc.

Anyway, I don't want to get away from the how the thread started, which was more of less a lambasting of Absolute Truth. So I guess my point is that Aboslute Truth is a valid concept; it may not be to a determinist's taste, but it is a distinct possiblity, with the alternatives are basically atomism or determinism of some sort.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #155 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I understand, but that only reduces us to machines, with absolutes (as abstract concepts) still being an illusion.

"Only"?

Do you mean that because the thought that we are machines and there are no absolutes is unpleasant or not "the desired answer", it has to be false? What is the line of reasoning here?
post #156 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I understand, but that only reduces us to machines, with absolutes (as abstract concepts) still being an illusion.

What you mean is 'you have produced an argument that has done away with the need to consider that 'absolutes' might inform human behaviour'. Yes, I have. It's history and environment and human culture.

We thought it all up for ourselves. I win!
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Also, that apporach gets fuzzy when you approach Music, Art, Love, God, etc.

No, it doesn't. They're all cultural / physiological 'firmware', or the products of that 'firmware' in the case of music and art, too.

Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
So I guess my point is that Aboslute Truth is a valid concept; it may not be to a determinist's taste, but it is a distinct possiblity, with the alternatives are basically atomism or determinism of some sort.

I've looked at the paleoanthropological evidence and suggested an explanation that needs no absolute truth. Your evidence is what, exactly?

post #157 of 193
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I understand, but that only reduces us to machines, with absolutes (as abstract concepts) still being an illusion.

Bingo - we have a winner.......
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #158 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Bingo - we have a winner.......

Nah. My argument returns to us the honour of being responsible for our own positive qualities. It 'reduces' us to people, which is exactly what we are.

If anything it also gives us the responsibility of remembering that when we transgress 'right behaviour' we're doing a disservice to the achievements of our ancestors and we're letting the side down 'the side' being all of our human brothers and sisters, human-type beans like usrather than letting down something none of us can ever see and can't even prove.

We did it. We're cool.
post #159 of 193
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Nah. My argument returns to us the honour of being responsible for our own positive qualities. It 'reduces' us to people, which is exactly what we are.

If anything it also gives us the responsibility of remembering that when we transgress 'right behaviour' we're doing a disservice to the achievements of our ancestors and we're letting the side down 'the side' being all of our human brothers and sisters, human-type beans like usrather than letting down something none of us can ever see and can't even prove.

We did it. We're cool.

Hmm, maybe I'd go with: 'we can do it and then we'll be cool' but from my pov there is one hell of a lot of conditioning out there and a monstrous regiment of people wiling to surrender that free-will and let their rulers do their thinking for them.

They've been programmed to react certain ways (regardless of the evidence) at the appropriate stimulus and that's what they do. Happens a lot on here actually....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #160 of 193
Quote:
Originally posted by Gon
"Only"?

Do you mean that because the thought that we are machines and there are no absolutes is unpleasant or not "the desired answer", it has to be false? What is the line of reasoning here?

It's kinda like predestination minus all the French and German theologians.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The New Pope and 'Relativism'