Just curious
- Thread starter fluffy bunny
- Start date
- Status
(ie - they're all taking 'happy pills' - the question being, are the characters happy......or are they just content? - LOVE that book)
Hereford Eye
Just Another Philistine
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 5,590
I think religion is supposed to address the fundamental questions: what is the meaning of life? why is there evil in the world? After it posits an answer to those questions, then it tries the next one: in view of our answers, what constitutes a good life? Nick Herbert wrote an interesting summary of science's latest response to question 1 in Quantuum Reality. I don't remember ever seeing a scientific response to question 2 or question 3. But I have seen a multitude of religious responses to question 2 and 3.
There will be those who take exception to my statement and claim that science has most assuredly taken a stab at question 3 through Philosophy. For the sake of argument, let's accept this exception. Dave Robinson and Chris Garratt wrote a nice little summary of where Philsophy has arrived in Introducing Ethics.
All of which leaves me still wrestling with all three questions.
There will be those who take exception to my statement and claim that science has most assuredly taken a stab at question 3 through Philosophy. For the sake of argument, let's accept this exception. Dave Robinson and Chris Garratt wrote a nice little summary of where Philsophy has arrived in Introducing Ethics.
All of which leaves me still wrestling with all three questions.
kahnovitch
Kiss my axe!
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,478
Interesting questions there Hereford Eye.
There are many answers to such philosophical questions. The answers vary from person to person.
We (hopefully) all find our own meaning for life and what constitutes a good one to us.
For some people it may be finding "true love". Some people want to open, broaden and educate the minds of others.
Our individual aspirations have a lot to do with what life means to us.
As for evil, we all have the propensity for it, but whether we cross the line is another personal choice.
There are many answers to such philosophical questions. The answers vary from person to person.
We (hopefully) all find our own meaning for life and what constitutes a good one to us.
For some people it may be finding "true love". Some people want to open, broaden and educate the minds of others.
Our individual aspirations have a lot to do with what life means to us.
As for evil, we all have the propensity for it, but whether we cross the line is another personal choice.
Hereford Eye
Just Another Philistine
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 5,590
What is the meaning of life? Religions provide a beginning to end response from creation to the last days. This is how the world came to be and this is how it's going to end or this is where it's going.
Why is there evil in the world? Religions provide reasons, e.g., a fall from grace, a necessary balance, et al.
What constitutes a good life? Following the relgion's rules.
These are the rasion d 'etre for religion and chronicled nicely by Joseph Campbell in his various books. When they function properly and provide people with believable, acceptable answers to the questions, they are positive elements in our history. When the rules become stultified, they become less positive and sometimes downright negative elements of our history.
People want the answers. As you point out, they sometimes develop the answers for themselves. For me what matters is Plato: The life which is not examined is not worth living" and Maurois' extrapolation of Plato: Either the soul is immortal and we shall not die, or it perishes with the flesh and we shall not know that we are dead. Live, then, as if you were eternal. The rules you follow matter to you.
Why is there evil in the world? Religions provide reasons, e.g., a fall from grace, a necessary balance, et al.
What constitutes a good life? Following the relgion's rules.
These are the rasion d 'etre for religion and chronicled nicely by Joseph Campbell in his various books. When they function properly and provide people with believable, acceptable answers to the questions, they are positive elements in our history. When the rules become stultified, they become less positive and sometimes downright negative elements of our history.
People want the answers. As you point out, they sometimes develop the answers for themselves. For me what matters is Plato: The life which is not examined is not worth living" and Maurois' extrapolation of Plato: Either the soul is immortal and we shall not die, or it perishes with the flesh and we shall not know that we are dead. Live, then, as if you were eternal. The rules you follow matter to you.
saintjon
Illustrious Gambler
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2002
- Messages
- 4,471
I had a religious experience last night at Zaphod Beeblebrox accompanied by a girl I've never met before who really likes to mosh!
I can't just go nuts like that for 5 songs anymore without paying the price. Anyone who wants to mail me a back harness and some kind of support pillow for my neck would be greatly appreciated.
One of my buds described our little dance session as a car accident on the floor. Nobody wanted to be near it, yet they couldn't take their eyes away.
Now that's what I call catharsis.
I can't just go nuts like that for 5 songs anymore without paying the price. Anyone who wants to mail me a back harness and some kind of support pillow for my neck would be greatly appreciated.
One of my buds described our little dance session as a car accident on the floor. Nobody wanted to be near it, yet they couldn't take their eyes away.
Now that's what I call catharsis.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Messages
- 1,712
"I used to think that life was unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse, if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
More quotes from babylon 5- there's a lot of old vedic and buddist philosiphy in there:-
"Faith sustains us in the hour when reason tells us that we can not continue, that the whole of our whole lives is without meaning."
"Every day, here and at home, we are warned about the enemy. But who is the enemy? Is it the alien? Well, we are all alien to one another. Is it the one who believes differently than we do? No, not at all, my friends. The enemy is fear. The enemy is ignorance. The enemy is the one who tells you that you must hate that which is different. Because, in the end, that hate will turn on you. And that same hate will destroy you."
And one for SJ:-
"Ah! He has become one with his inner self!"
"He's passed out."
"That too."
More quotes from babylon 5- there's a lot of old vedic and buddist philosiphy in there:-
"Faith sustains us in the hour when reason tells us that we can not continue, that the whole of our whole lives is without meaning."
"Every day, here and at home, we are warned about the enemy. But who is the enemy? Is it the alien? Well, we are all alien to one another. Is it the one who believes differently than we do? No, not at all, my friends. The enemy is fear. The enemy is ignorance. The enemy is the one who tells you that you must hate that which is different. Because, in the end, that hate will turn on you. And that same hate will destroy you."
And one for SJ:-
"Ah! He has become one with his inner self!"
"He's passed out."
"That too."
Last edited:
Aik Haw
Mystic Cyborg
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 395
Hereford:-
(Originally posted by kater
On another point is there such a thing as true altruism?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When one sibling gives up an organ for another sibling to keep living. When someone goes into a burning building to pull a total stranger out. When people give blood. Whenever one person risks their existence in a cause.
Happens just as often as people coming out of the stands to pound on a referee.)
Hereford, if you think on a purely genetic basis, giving up an organ for another sibling is an attempt by you to preserve roughly 50% of your genes with the aim it will be passed on. Dawkin's Selfish Gene, which I must admit I have some problem with some of it's biological reasoning but I agree with his concept that one seeks to preserve one's genes.
As for pulling a total stranger out of a burning building, hmm, one can argue that on a reward scale basis, your subconscious realises that pulling a person out will elevate your social status manyfold, and it is noted that only in societies where social status can be elevated by heroic or apparent altruistic acts do people actually save each other. Traditional Chinese societies which values filialpiety and gerontology ended up having by the end of Qing very little heroic acts barring attempts to save one's family etc.. because the idea of saving a stranger retains no merits or reward beyond the price of losing one's life in the flame. Oppose this to say, the Thai society where one's status can be radically elevated by a heroic act, where people subconscious run to save people!!
I cannot argue about giving blood for free.
As for the last one about dying for a cause, you do know that in religion, most people DIE with the aim of going up there, or somewhere, or Nirvana, so it can hardly be called altruistic when there is a price at the end. For people who are rather atheistic, they die with the aim their name will live on, which is the reward for their death, greater than life.
So I sincerely doubt there is true altruism among beings of this state of existance.
And Hereford, I highly disagree with what you quote is the function of religion. That MAY be the function of religion in the Western world but in the Eastern world, barring Christianity and Islam, religion serves not to provide a super tight moral code, or an aim the world is going to end etc.. Rather, religion merely points to the various roads available for one to walk towards Enlightenment. It answers no questions, for the questions you ask can only be answered by yourself in your own ways.
Shanoncia:-
So how many ways are there? I am puzzled.
As for the cat, well, we found a way to keep it quiet. We gave it some cat food to eat. It brought it's friends along and after some classical conditioning, they learnt very quickly to eat quietly and don't miaow.
saintjon:-
Just wondering whether you follow the traditional Gods that's all.
As for violence begetting violence, I think that is true ONLY to a certain level. The Chinese always say:-
From the stagnancy that comes from peace rises the bushfire of war, but when everything is torched, and all is but ashes and dust, the sprouts of peace grows once again.
Or another...
From the tension grown in peace comes war, and from the exhaustion that comes from war emerges peace.
Or from Mao Tse Tung, a rather comical but true insight into human nature.....translating.....
When you still have your gun, your bullets, your stick, your spades, your chopsticks, your fist and your teeth, you are liable to go to war with each other over even a grain of rice. However, once you have lost your gun, exhausted your bullets, burnt that stick, do not know where your spade went to, broke your chopsticks to a million pieces, bloodied your fist till the bone can be seen, and only have your parrot gum left ( teethless ), you will make peace even at the expense of your race!!
(Originally posted by kater
On another point is there such a thing as true altruism?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When one sibling gives up an organ for another sibling to keep living. When someone goes into a burning building to pull a total stranger out. When people give blood. Whenever one person risks their existence in a cause.
Happens just as often as people coming out of the stands to pound on a referee.)
Hereford, if you think on a purely genetic basis, giving up an organ for another sibling is an attempt by you to preserve roughly 50% of your genes with the aim it will be passed on. Dawkin's Selfish Gene, which I must admit I have some problem with some of it's biological reasoning but I agree with his concept that one seeks to preserve one's genes.
As for pulling a total stranger out of a burning building, hmm, one can argue that on a reward scale basis, your subconscious realises that pulling a person out will elevate your social status manyfold, and it is noted that only in societies where social status can be elevated by heroic or apparent altruistic acts do people actually save each other. Traditional Chinese societies which values filialpiety and gerontology ended up having by the end of Qing very little heroic acts barring attempts to save one's family etc.. because the idea of saving a stranger retains no merits or reward beyond the price of losing one's life in the flame. Oppose this to say, the Thai society where one's status can be radically elevated by a heroic act, where people subconscious run to save people!!
I cannot argue about giving blood for free.
As for the last one about dying for a cause, you do know that in religion, most people DIE with the aim of going up there, or somewhere, or Nirvana, so it can hardly be called altruistic when there is a price at the end. For people who are rather atheistic, they die with the aim their name will live on, which is the reward for their death, greater than life.
So I sincerely doubt there is true altruism among beings of this state of existance.
And Hereford, I highly disagree with what you quote is the function of religion. That MAY be the function of religion in the Western world but in the Eastern world, barring Christianity and Islam, religion serves not to provide a super tight moral code, or an aim the world is going to end etc.. Rather, religion merely points to the various roads available for one to walk towards Enlightenment. It answers no questions, for the questions you ask can only be answered by yourself in your own ways.
Shanoncia:-
So how many ways are there? I am puzzled.
As for the cat, well, we found a way to keep it quiet. We gave it some cat food to eat. It brought it's friends along and after some classical conditioning, they learnt very quickly to eat quietly and don't miaow.
saintjon:-
Just wondering whether you follow the traditional Gods that's all.
As for violence begetting violence, I think that is true ONLY to a certain level. The Chinese always say:-
From the stagnancy that comes from peace rises the bushfire of war, but when everything is torched, and all is but ashes and dust, the sprouts of peace grows once again.
Or another...
From the tension grown in peace comes war, and from the exhaustion that comes from war emerges peace.
Or from Mao Tse Tung, a rather comical but true insight into human nature.....translating.....
When you still have your gun, your bullets, your stick, your spades, your chopsticks, your fist and your teeth, you are liable to go to war with each other over even a grain of rice. However, once you have lost your gun, exhausted your bullets, burnt that stick, do not know where your spade went to, broke your chopsticks to a million pieces, bloodied your fist till the bone can be seen, and only have your parrot gum left ( teethless ), you will make peace even at the expense of your race!!
Hereford Eye
Just Another Philistine
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 5,590
I'm on Sammie's side and I would add that you can't have it both ways. If you let Kater decide that violence is genetic, than I get to counter with altruism as genetic. You could - OTOH - claim they are both learned activities but I suspect the basis of argument would be a soggy bottom.
As to the role of religion, with all your elucidation, why am I left with the firm impression that eastern religions have a beginning and an end? There is a Hindu, Shinto, and a Bhuddaic creation story and an end story, a heaven, or why else are you seeking enlightment? And do not the rules consist of how to achieve enlightenment? An outsider's understanding after all.
kahnovitch
Kiss my axe!
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,478
Aik, it seems to me you’re running in circles with your quotes here mate.
“From the tension grown in peace comes war, and from the exhaustion that comes from war emerges peace.”
Not so sure about that. There hasn’t been peace in Ireland for hundreds of years. The middle east, ditto.
Before I get a slap on the wrist from a Mod, I’m not trying to be political, just giving examples of my point.
As for altruism, you seem to believe that nobody commits a selfless act and that they are somehow acting with ulterior motives. Including by your own admission the religious worship of God/Gods.
Do you really think people are solely motivated by things they can gain from? Is there no genuine goodness or charity in people’s souls without some expectation of reward?
I find that somewhat pessimistic (even by my standards!)
The final snippet bugged me the most…
“you will make peace even at the expense of your race!!”
In total opposition to this, there are many people in history who died for the ultimate survival of their race or beliefs, in selfless sacrifice.
“From the tension grown in peace comes war, and from the exhaustion that comes from war emerges peace.”
Not so sure about that. There hasn’t been peace in Ireland for hundreds of years. The middle east, ditto.
Before I get a slap on the wrist from a Mod, I’m not trying to be political, just giving examples of my point.
As for altruism, you seem to believe that nobody commits a selfless act and that they are somehow acting with ulterior motives. Including by your own admission the religious worship of God/Gods.
Do you really think people are solely motivated by things they can gain from? Is there no genuine goodness or charity in people’s souls without some expectation of reward?
I find that somewhat pessimistic (even by my standards!)
The final snippet bugged me the most…
“you will make peace even at the expense of your race!!”
In total opposition to this, there are many people in history who died for the ultimate survival of their race or beliefs, in selfless sacrifice.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Messages
- 1,712
Gotta try this advocate thingy
One question flashing up in my mind is this:
what does it mean to be enlightened? Why do we strive for it? What's the point?
Surely to know all the answers will leave us with nothing to strive for, nothing to do next, leaving life pointless?
Ignorance is bliss
________________________
On another note, have to agree with sammie about the altruism thing, and the potential for good (as well as evil) that we all have within us. Whether we can tap that potential in spite of today's environment remains to be seen
Oh, and aik- your organ donation theory doesn't work- by giving non-germ cell donation (ie not reproductive tissue), the gene won't be passed on to the offspring of the donor- the gene doesn't get passed on.
The burning building- in most people, the 1st thought that flashes across most people's subconcious is NOT one of social status- most people wouldn't even realise the social implications until AFTER the event.
'only in societies where social status can be elevated by heroic or apparent altruistic acts do people actually save each other'- coincidental? or that in these societies the person was saved in the 1st place and is alive to elevate the status of the rescuer. And in those that don't- well isn't it a case of- he wouldn't help me so I'm not going to bother- someone needs to start the cycle. And some people are responsible for the start of such cycles and show the way
I don't agree with you entirely about the eastern religion thingy- it's not just about enlightenment and the paths for you to walk. Will explain later- just felt wrong when reading that sentence of urs
One question flashing up in my mind is this:
what does it mean to be enlightened? Why do we strive for it? What's the point?
Surely to know all the answers will leave us with nothing to strive for, nothing to do next, leaving life pointless?
Ignorance is bliss
________________________
On another note, have to agree with sammie about the altruism thing, and the potential for good (as well as evil) that we all have within us. Whether we can tap that potential in spite of today's environment remains to be seen
Oh, and aik- your organ donation theory doesn't work- by giving non-germ cell donation (ie not reproductive tissue), the gene won't be passed on to the offspring of the donor- the gene doesn't get passed on.
The burning building- in most people, the 1st thought that flashes across most people's subconcious is NOT one of social status- most people wouldn't even realise the social implications until AFTER the event.
'only in societies where social status can be elevated by heroic or apparent altruistic acts do people actually save each other'- coincidental? or that in these societies the person was saved in the 1st place and is alive to elevate the status of the rescuer. And in those that don't- well isn't it a case of- he wouldn't help me so I'm not going to bother- someone needs to start the cycle. And some people are responsible for the start of such cycles and show the way
I don't agree with you entirely about the eastern religion thingy- it's not just about enlightenment and the paths for you to walk. Will explain later- just felt wrong when reading that sentence of urs
Last edited:
saintjon
Illustrious Gambler
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2002
- Messages
- 4,471
why seek enlightenment? what motivation do you have left when you have all the answers?
Umm, you don't find all the answers. Maybe buddha did, but think how many Jesuses are out there, and that will give you a good idea of how much the eastern religion practitioner expects to achieve total enlightenment. furthermore, Taoist principals as I understand them, have a hefty concept of limitations, part of enlightenment is that you DON'T have all the answers, and you're not likely to get them all either, furthermore to want to have all the answers is a good sign that you're on an endless road to unhappiness.
In seeking enlightenment, your situation in life is improved through your ability to gain a new perspective on the unanswerable questions that nag us all. Lots of times the answer is right inside you, you've known it all your life, but you just don't know how to see it yet. Sometimes there isn't an answer and you need to learn to deal with that too. Getting into this sort of thing helped me more than I can tell you when I was younger. I got some answers, but the most important thing I got was a direction.
I only meant, in violence begets violence, that it is limited. Sure, when everything gets completely leveled, it tends to get a bit more peacable.
I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say with that Mao quote too Kahn.
Umm, you don't find all the answers. Maybe buddha did, but think how many Jesuses are out there, and that will give you a good idea of how much the eastern religion practitioner expects to achieve total enlightenment. furthermore, Taoist principals as I understand them, have a hefty concept of limitations, part of enlightenment is that you DON'T have all the answers, and you're not likely to get them all either, furthermore to want to have all the answers is a good sign that you're on an endless road to unhappiness.
In seeking enlightenment, your situation in life is improved through your ability to gain a new perspective on the unanswerable questions that nag us all. Lots of times the answer is right inside you, you've known it all your life, but you just don't know how to see it yet. Sometimes there isn't an answer and you need to learn to deal with that too. Getting into this sort of thing helped me more than I can tell you when I was younger. I got some answers, but the most important thing I got was a direction.
I only meant, in violence begets violence, that it is limited. Sure, when everything gets completely leveled, it tends to get a bit more peacable.
I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say with that Mao quote too Kahn.
Nevyn
"hot and jolly"
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2002
- Messages
- 748
Sorry saintjon but I have to correct you there about Jesus . There was and is only one Jesus who made claim to be the son of God , and the very fact that he gave his life for us is enough for me .
A question further back in the thread was as to why Christians refer to God as HE , this can be answered by the Lords prayer as spoken by Jesus " Our Father......."
As for 'enlightenment' maybe 'salvation' could be a better descritive term for some , was for me !
Truely selfless people are everywhere , but not in the limelight . I see them all the time , they don't even know they're selfless because that is who they are!!
On a more personal note I think that religous debate is like chasing your tail ,everyone reckons they got it!
A question further back in the thread was as to why Christians refer to God as HE , this can be answered by the Lords prayer as spoken by Jesus " Our Father......."
As for 'enlightenment' maybe 'salvation' could be a better descritive term for some , was for me !
Truely selfless people are everywhere , but not in the limelight . I see them all the time , they don't even know they're selfless because that is who they are!!
On a more personal note I think that religous debate is like chasing your tail ,everyone reckons they got it!
Aik Haw
Mystic Cyborg
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 395
Sammie:-
I though altruism is an act done solely without the hope of any reward or any gain either to self, family, population, race, religion, species or planet ( add anything higher from here on ).
Coming from gain to the population, you are not endangering yourself completely in a genetic sense are you Sammie? If your sibling says survive after you donated one of your kidneys and reaches reproduction, than effectively, an average probability of 25% of you will survive to the next generation ( in a genetic sense ). Even if you think you are doing something completely unselfishly and completely unbeneficial to yourself, you are only thinking in a morphological sense, not down at the codes which made you up.
Hereford:-
Ahem, Buddhism has a definite creation? Oh dear, that creation myth is merely a description of OUR universe, one of the only the Gods know how many millions there are. This universe is one of the many Divpa in existance according to Buddhism, and countless other Divpas are out there and countless of other Divpas has ceased to be and countless of other Divpas are yet to come. The things that in Western sense can be loosely translated as souls even though it is not has moved between these various Divpas since only do not know who knows when. Oh yes, there is a definite end to this Divpa but we are not bound solely to this Divpa. This is why Buddhist say we have no creation myth in a Judea-Christian sense as doctrinally we have no idea what started this entire cycle of Divpa etc..
Kahnovitch:-
Translation error, sorry. That really depends on what you call peace. The Mandarin definition for peace has two tier. One is the absolute bliss that exist in times of love and peace( Pax in Latin ), but the other one is the absence of war and the temporary cessation of violence.
When Chinese use the word, "Peace within yourself," we refer to the first peace. When we refer to peace within the family, we also refer to the first peace. However, when we refer to peace within the community or society, unless elaborated, it usually refers to the second. When we say, "That nation is at peace," we are not saying everyone there lives harmoniously, but we are saying that people there lives at the moment without killing each other for the past few months. The Chinese word for peace is "ping," and "an", meaning calm( ie:- no one fighting ) and safe. ( for the moment ).
So what I am meaning is that you can't throw stones at each other everyday, there are bound to have to be time when you ignore each other with the attempt to rebuild, even for a week or a month. That is already called Ping and An.
Sorry for the major translation error!! I am not good at translating accurately.
Umm, I think I will get saintjon to explain the last sentence for you. It is just a melodramatic statement.
fluffy:-
I like people who don't agree with me. This is what makes life interesting. What I hate most, as I told Mr. Kip, is when people say "Yes, yes yes yes yes".
I think I have explained to Sammie the organ donation theory to your sibling. It is not that YOUR genes miracalously walked from your kidney to infilitrate her entire genome, it is that she shares 50% of your genes, which means if she survives to reproduction, 25% of you exist in the next generation, so you are somewhat immortalised.
There are logics in your second arguement, I will have to think. That is a very good point you raised fluffy.
I though altruism is an act done solely without the hope of any reward or any gain either to self, family, population, race, religion, species or planet ( add anything higher from here on ).
Coming from gain to the population, you are not endangering yourself completely in a genetic sense are you Sammie? If your sibling says survive after you donated one of your kidneys and reaches reproduction, than effectively, an average probability of 25% of you will survive to the next generation ( in a genetic sense ). Even if you think you are doing something completely unselfishly and completely unbeneficial to yourself, you are only thinking in a morphological sense, not down at the codes which made you up.
Hereford:-
Ahem, Buddhism has a definite creation? Oh dear, that creation myth is merely a description of OUR universe, one of the only the Gods know how many millions there are. This universe is one of the many Divpa in existance according to Buddhism, and countless other Divpas are out there and countless of other Divpas has ceased to be and countless of other Divpas are yet to come. The things that in Western sense can be loosely translated as souls even though it is not has moved between these various Divpas since only do not know who knows when. Oh yes, there is a definite end to this Divpa but we are not bound solely to this Divpa. This is why Buddhist say we have no creation myth in a Judea-Christian sense as doctrinally we have no idea what started this entire cycle of Divpa etc..
Kahnovitch:-
Translation error, sorry. That really depends on what you call peace. The Mandarin definition for peace has two tier. One is the absolute bliss that exist in times of love and peace( Pax in Latin ), but the other one is the absence of war and the temporary cessation of violence.
When Chinese use the word, "Peace within yourself," we refer to the first peace. When we refer to peace within the family, we also refer to the first peace. However, when we refer to peace within the community or society, unless elaborated, it usually refers to the second. When we say, "That nation is at peace," we are not saying everyone there lives harmoniously, but we are saying that people there lives at the moment without killing each other for the past few months. The Chinese word for peace is "ping," and "an", meaning calm( ie:- no one fighting ) and safe. ( for the moment ).
So what I am meaning is that you can't throw stones at each other everyday, there are bound to have to be time when you ignore each other with the attempt to rebuild, even for a week or a month. That is already called Ping and An.
Sorry for the major translation error!! I am not good at translating accurately.
Umm, I think I will get saintjon to explain the last sentence for you. It is just a melodramatic statement.
fluffy:-
I like people who don't agree with me
. This is what makes life interesting. What I hate most, as I told Mr. Kip, is when people say "Yes, yes yes yes yes".I think I have explained to Sammie the organ donation theory to your sibling. It is not that YOUR genes miracalously walked from your kidney to infilitrate her entire genome, it is that she shares 50% of your genes, which means if she survives to reproduction, 25% of you exist in the next generation, so you are somewhat immortalised.
There are logics in your second arguement, I will have to think. That is a very good point you raised fluffy.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Messages
- 1,712
Where does that warm glow when you've done a good deed come from? Quite a lot of people I know just do good because it's the right thing to do, due to their upbringing and instilling of morals. No other reason, no other reward. What is right, and what is wrong comes as naturally as instinct in many people.
It's hard to see, but such people do exist in today's me me me society.
You can't judge it as altrusim by your definition Aik, since there is a psycological reward as such. However the motive isn't reward, it's the desire to do the right thing instilled from a young age along with responsibility.
Oh and the kidney thing would be applicable, if people weren't as willing to donate (if they had the choice- depends on country) to people who aren't genetically realted to them, eg a friend or loved one, the little girl who's lying ill in hospital and needs a piece of your liver in order to live.
It's hard to see, but such people do exist in today's me me me society.
You can't judge it as altrusim by your definition Aik, since there is a psycological reward as such. However the motive isn't reward, it's the desire to do the right thing instilled from a young age along with responsibility.
Oh and the kidney thing would be applicable, if people weren't as willing to donate (if they had the choice- depends on country) to people who aren't genetically realted to them, eg a friend or loved one, the little girl who's lying ill in hospital and needs a piece of your liver in order to live.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Messages
- 1,712
Originally posted by Shanoncia
Hey... After some research I think I'm going to convert to a masianic Jew. It fits my beleifs far better.
Is that the set of jews who believe in Jesus?
Aik Haw
Mystic Cyborg
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 395
fluffy:-
Just one point, this "warm glow" feeling has also been known when organised criminals rob a house, kill someone, etc.. Tim McVeigh felt this warmness after doing you know what. Some of those rapist also report the same sensation after commiting that most hideous and disgusting and horrid of crime.
The warm glow feeling I suspect is an emotion that comes forth from a job well done, that is all, not due to goodness or badness or anything.
I have to disagree that the concept of right and wrong is so distinct in everyone, or for that matter universal. First thing, what is right, what is wrong? Some members from the oppressed sector of society believe it right to steal from the rich, because the presence of the rich forces them down where they are, or so they perceive it as such( do you think Robin Hood is a hero or a common criminal that has been overglorified?) Some sects of the conventional religions believe it is their right to vent their beliefs upon others regardless of the consequences ( Jerry Falwell, Taliban, the pre reformation Church etc..). If the distinction between right and wrong is instinctual and consistent, than this should not happen.
As for the donation to non-family members, one can argue that in the case of brain death etc., ( where most of the heart, liver extraction etc.. happens ), the donor in a sense continue to go on living, even though not in the "normal" sense. This could be an incentive. Also, do note that a lot of so called "donation" in the modern world involves financial transaction, an equally strong incentive beyond "truncated" survival, genes etc.. Also, it could also bring about glory. In some countries, donors have such high level of respect that this could be a driving force to why they donate their organs, brain dead or quite well but missing one kidney.
I am still thinking on the fire question fluffy. That was a good one.
Shanoncia:-
What are you against in the modern church?
Just one point, this "warm glow" feeling has also been known when organised criminals rob a house, kill someone, etc.. Tim McVeigh felt this warmness after doing you know what. Some of those rapist also report the same sensation after commiting that most hideous and disgusting and horrid of crime.
The warm glow feeling I suspect is an emotion that comes forth from a job well done, that is all, not due to goodness or badness or anything.
I have to disagree that the concept of right and wrong is so distinct in everyone, or for that matter universal. First thing, what is right, what is wrong? Some members from the oppressed sector of society believe it right to steal from the rich, because the presence of the rich forces them down where they are, or so they perceive it as such( do you think Robin Hood is a hero or a common criminal that has been overglorified?) Some sects of the conventional religions believe it is their right to vent their beliefs upon others regardless of the consequences ( Jerry Falwell, Taliban, the pre reformation Church etc..). If the distinction between right and wrong is instinctual and consistent, than this should not happen.
As for the donation to non-family members, one can argue that in the case of brain death etc., ( where most of the heart, liver extraction etc.. happens ), the donor in a sense continue to go on living, even though not in the "normal" sense. This could be an incentive. Also, do note that a lot of so called "donation" in the modern world involves financial transaction, an equally strong incentive beyond "truncated" survival, genes etc.. Also, it could also bring about glory. In some countries, donors have such high level of respect that this could be a driving force to why they donate their organs, brain dead or quite well but missing one kidney.
I am still thinking on the fire question fluffy. That was a good one.
Shanoncia:-
What are you against in the modern church?
- Status
Sponsors
We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon
Your ad here.