Philosophy forum

[manifold]

Thanks a lot del! I have him painted into a corner and you're there opening the side window allowing him to flee like pussy.

To recap:

He says that if you don't advocate slavery, rape and stoning children to death you're not a true Christian, you're a neo-Christian.

Well, nobody advocates those things...

therefore,

There are no true Christians in the world according to JB.


Sooooooooo, who the fuck is he so pissed off at?

 

[Intense]

I think that it's time to cut bait, and try an old favorite fishing hole.

[/url]

chewy stuff

i myself dont accept moral absolutes, if that means something unbending. i consider morals to be doing "right", an expression of what we value, and the attempt to uphold justice. justice is the more elusive of the three, although plato in the republic deals with that. i will look into the theory of justice. thanks.

moral absolutes streamline our lives as it removes doubt over a course of action. however, i think many of us, despite that, wrestle with questions of what is right. since this is true, i cannot see morals as an absolute, but more the notion of absolute morals as a rough baseline around which we hub our decisions (if the preceding is the definition of absolute, then i woiuld have to accept moral absolutes). consider that in many diverse cultures, many of the same things are considered to be "wrong", which argues for a genetic moral base that some could take to be "god" or from a god. but i wonder if they are considered "wrong" because those acts would erode social cohesion only?

referring to kohlbergs morality exercise, there are two choices; one that upholds the state and one that upholds the individual. one choice violates a law, both legal and natural, against theft of the property of another person, and the second choice violates no legal right, but will end a life. i think many of us would value a life over property, and so the moral thing seems to be to steal to save a life. every action has intent and perception, and the intent must be understood first in order to determine if an act is moral or not.

the above is unsatisfactory and incomplete. but i am of the opinion i will always be unresolved on this. i hope that will be the case anyhow.

curious; what are your thoughts re kohlbergs morality exercise?

Had the chance to read over "Kohlberg's Stages Of Moral Development". Stages 1-6. http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htmWill that sufice for now? Here we are looking at 6 levels of response. Seems a real interesting study of human nature with a few minor cracks. I liked it.

 

[Intense]

I still see the Source as absolute

What 'source'? Demonstrate.

We are going to give this one shot which will determine to Me whether or not You exist to me, in relation to this thread, or function here primarily to disrupt, in which case I bid you fare thee well.

What I refer to as Source, is demonstrated as a Power Plant producing Electricity. The fact that the Electricity produced is Absolute. The actual use of the electricity used is relative to function. An appliance does what it does based on principal, based on design and structure, based on function, based on use and circumstance.

We know that fire has it's nature, we have devised multiple uses from fire, water, wind, each with respect to the true natures of these elements. We don't profess to know there is to know of these elements or resources, yet we make use of them. The fact that they exist in nature is absolute. Our understanding is relative because as we grow, our understanding, our ability, develop.

When I refer to God, The Source of Creation, To me, personally, It means the Author of a Power, beyond preconceived notion, beyond brand, beyond description, beyond limitations set by me or you. Religion, to me is seeking harmony with that source through conscience, and I believe that to be a life time goal. I personally view the scriptures as tools, however I am not fundamental, in that I am not led by the nose easily. There is no limit or authority, that you can place without the consent of conscience. That said, there is nothing I would impose on you or anyone else, against your consent. The Scriptures are a tool, just as dangerous to misuse as any other. Men's wills, influence, attempted justifications, fill the pages. There are multiple depths of understandings, there are corruptions, there are what appear to be contradictions.

What I am saying to you is that to me, God Exists, it is not for you or I to package and sell Him. It is not for us to let the limits for others where we are weak, or where we fail, but for us to move out of the way, and not obstruct. Dream, Envision, Discover, Invent, Build, tear down, with purpose, motive, inside the lines or outside the lines, what you sow, you reap.

 

[The Illusion]

There was absolute morality in the old testament. There is NOT absolute morality in the new testament because here you have Jesus saying that you "shouldnt" do this or that...but it wont matter because if you accept him into your heart, you will be forgiven and let into heaven.

Fundamentalist Christians are often busy beating the drum of morality with regard to various social issues, especially during political elections.
Such drum beating certainly gets attention from the media and politicians alike.
Many believers love to associate themselves with a higher power and trumpet their authority by making the claim that their beliefs are based on "moral absolutes".
In this way, they raise themselves up above the secular population and create an aura of righteousness and holiness.
In other words, they know what's best for society because they have God on their side.
However, the issue of absolute morality is often not as obvious as Christian advertising makes it out to be.

Read more Here: The Subjective Nature Of Absolute Morality

If there was such a thing as absolute morality, then it would be universal laws that all humans follow. There is no such thing as "absolute morality". It is a theoretical philosophical concept. Whereas, the truth of it is, that morality is a relative concept. All points of view are valid with respect to the individual. In fact the very word "Morality" is a relative concept to all societies using various codes of conduct. As long as there are humans, it appears that we will act in a manner to benefit the individual.

But Aristotle did see universal rules of behavior. He said it is always right to be kind, courageous, honest....But I see an invisible barrier to that...I see the added word....."unless".

Kant intimated that if humans behave in a way that we would want all other humans to behave, to behave as if there are universal laws that all humans follow then that is "absolute morality. Under his concept there is no such thing as "the greatest good". It would be wrong to abort a fetus, regardless of the consequences of not aborting. It would be wrong to kill a gunman who is threatening your wife.

Situation Ethics is that what is right or what is wrong depends on the situation. It is wrong to kill. But in a war killing is right. It is wrong to abort a fetus. Yet under certain situations it is right. The right and wrong of Situation Ethics depends on the outcome of the actions taken.

I don’t think Situation Ethics is a bad idea. I think it is the only way humans have in order to be productive, and lead a happy life.

Jamie

 

[The Illusion]

my postition is that women are the cornerstone of civilization, and are women only as they are thinking or acting for the benefit of the family. in any other capacity, they are not women. i say this as i have looked for characteristics that only are shared among women, and have found only their ability to give life. otherwise, i dont think there can be said anything about womens thinking process or behavior that cannot also be said of men.

The only thing that separates women from men is the reproduction cycle. We can have babies and that includes menstration, boobs...the whole lot. The only time a woman can metaphorically be a real "woman" is after she has children. That separates her from being a man. Anything else, as you say, is the same. Women can do just as much and think just as much and in depth as a man. The ONLY thing that separates us from men is the ability to have children. Again, this includes having a menstral cycle and having boobs. I had almost forgot that we were dealing with teenage children here so I had to simplify it for them as a courtesy. They might not be taking sex ed in school, so they wouldnt know now would they. However, it is said that the mind does not mentally mature until the age of 25, so anything below that will need to be taken into account and simplified for them...maybe even include some pictures.

Read More Here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2006/02/06.html

Read More Here: Brain Immaturity Could Explain Teen Crash Rate (washingtonpost.com)

Jamie

 

[The Illusion]

Intense - Vin says that he will get back to you tonight sometime on the "absolute morality" topic. He has a few things he has to do first.

Jamie

 

[Barb]

I'm wondering who among us really knows enough philosophy to post on such a forum?

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff.

I know damned well I'm not conversant about the real debates that exist in that field.

Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

Probably not to the level to discuss with philosophers, but we could discuss philosophers. I took Western Civ. Many of my other classes had reference to the thinkers of past times. It isn't that hard to read someones work and agree or disagree, we do it all the time. Here, Ill start, there's plenty to disagree with View attachment 7915

oiy.

let me begin by saying that mine and jamies marriage is not one of indentured servitude. we are partners, lovers, friends, and companions. she is my goddess, and i her god. there is a lack of the typical socially approved division of labor, and sometimes she and i clash over who will do what, but we are partners. when our infant was born, she would take care of the first nocturnal feeding, and i the second, for example. but then jamie is atypical, if there is such a thing as a typical female. but then, she and i are both reformed pagans. lol!

too often feminism actually denigrates the woman, stripping her of part of who she is, and i was gratified to see in this piece that the author allowed for a wide range of potentials for describing women, even, i would assume, as a traditional wife if so inclined.

intellectual adeptness doesn't always indicate a corresponding emotional adeptness, and then nietzsche had his own demons to wrestle with. he was expected to follow in his fathers footsteps into the ministry. it is entirely likely that his attitude towards women was in some measure supporting the typical attitude about women expressed by many christians even today, to atone for his inability or unwillingness to fill those familial boots. as i recall, his father died when fred was young ( and on second glance that was also mentioned in the piece) , and so he would have to be raised by his mother, and so his attitude (this sounds so freudian) could be a backlash against that. regardless, as was mentioned, he was a product of his time.

i appreciate this "It is a fact that living things tend to be neglected by ardent pursuit of any artistic or epic endeavor, and that tending to those needful beings lends one to neglect scholarly work," having said much the same about holy men, seers, shamans etc having to remove themselves from others so they can come in contact/experience what others will not, cannot or dont want to. to excel beyond the "normal" requires sacrifice, no matter what the endeavor.

my postition is that women are the cornerstone of civilization, and are women only as they are thinking or acting for the benefit of the family. in any other capacity, they are not women. i say this as i have looked for characteristics that only are shared among women, and have found only their ability to give life. otherwise, i dont think there can be said anything about womens thinking process or behavior that cannot also be said of men.

Someday soon, when I haven't been up for nearly 24 hours, we're going to have to discuss the underlined part. I wrote the paper I included in 2007.

 

[JBeukema]

The fact that the Electricity produced is Absolute.

We know that fire has it's nature, we have devised multiple uses from fire, water, wind, each with respect to the true natures of these elements. We don't profess to know there is to know of these elements or resources,

If you still think those are elements, you should come back after you've caught up with the last several hundred years.

When I refer to God, The Source of Creation,

Demonstrate creation
Demonstrate a source
Then demonstrate that the source is your god.
I don't give free passes.

To me, personally, It means the Author of a Power,

What power? What authorship?

beyond preconceived notion, beyond brand, beyond description, beyond limitations set by me or you.

You're trying too hard.

 

[Amanda]

my postition is that women are the cornerstone of civilization, and are women only as they are thinking or acting for the benefit of the family. in any other capacity, they are not women. i say this as i have looked for characteristics that only are shared among women, and have found only their ability to give life. otherwise, i dont think there can be said anything about womens thinking process or behavior that cannot also be said of men.

The only thing that separates women from men is the reproduction cycle. We can have babies and that includes menstration, boobs...the whole lot. The only time a woman can metaphorically be a real "woman" is after she has children. That separates her from being a man. Anything else, as you say, is the same. Women can do just as much and think just as much and in depth as a man. The ONLY thing that separates us from men is the ability to have children. Again, this includes having a menstral cycle and having boobs. I had almost forgot that we were dealing with teenage children here so I had to simplify it for them as a courtesy. They might not be taking sex ed in school, so they wouldnt know now would they. However, it is said that the mind does not mentally mature until the age of 25, so anything below that will need to be taken into account and simplified for them...maybe even include some pictures.

Read More Here: Brain changes significantly after age 18, says Dartmouth research

Read More Here: Brain Immaturity Could Explain Teen Crash Rate (washingtonpost.com)

Jamie

First bolded part: Bullshit.

Second bolded part: Insulting Bullshit.

Besides enormous differences in how our culture views women and our society treats women there are obvious physical differences and empirical evidence would suggest mental differences.

http://www.usma.edu/dpe/testing/FM21-20/Appa.pdf

Difference between male and female structures (mental and physical) >> Medical Questions, Weight Loss, Pregnancy, Drugs, Health Insurance

From the second link:

Some differences (such as reproductive organs) are congenital, while others obviously environmental (such as given names). Contrary to the beliefs of feminists or bisexuals, several studies have proven that there are expressed differences between males and females programmed within the DNA from the moment of conception.

Bolded emphasis mine.

Want more? Try this: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=physiological+differences+between+men+and+women
for a little over 25 million links on the same subject.

You want to pretend you're here for debate? Refute the assertions in the above links. I'm sure your response will delight and awe.

 

[JBeukema]

TI's post vaguely reminds me of JenT...

 

[The Illusion]

Hun, I found a thread while you were gone that I will most likely forget later so Ill post it on here in hopes that you will see it when you get home.

--> http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

Heres a couple news articles about the study:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article567852.ece

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/sep/20/research.highereducation


Contrary to popular belief, it states that men and women are psychologically similar in MOST aspects rather than them being different. She kinda correlates your thesis on this subject. The study just goes to show how much the media influences people to believe everything they read instead of looking at the scientific data. In one of my psychology classes at the university we had discussed this very thing and the gender difference hypothesis was conclusive. Genders, as you state are mostly alike except for the child bearing and reproductive cycle. I had made a topic today in the politics section that I think the voting age should be raised. You should look at that one too.

Jamie

 

[Kalam]

TI's post vaguely reminds me of JenT...

She doesn't fail quite as hard as the jent.

 

[del]

Hun, I found a thread while you were gone that I will most likely forget later so Ill post it on here in hopes that you will see it when you get home.

--> http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

Heres a couple news articles about the study:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article567852.ece

Men and women come from same planet after all, claims psychology study | UK news | The Guardian


Contrary to popular belief, it states that men and women are psychologically similar in MOST aspects rather than them being different. She kinda correlates your thesis on this subject. The study just goes to show how much the media influences people to believe everything they read instead of looking at the scientific data. In one of my psychology classes at the university we had discussed this very thing and the gender difference hypothesis was conclusive. Genders, as you state are mostly alike except for the child bearing and reproductive cycle. I had made a topic today in the politics section that I think the voting age should be raised. You should look at that one too.

Jamie

this isn't your refrigerator.

leave your notes to hubby someplace else.

 

[The Illusion]

Hun, I found a thread while you were gone that I will most likely forget later so Ill post it on here in hopes that you will see it when you get home.

--> http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

Heres a couple news articles about the study:

Men and women are from the same planet after all - Times Online

Men and women come from same planet after all, claims psychology study | UK news | The Guardian


Contrary to popular belief, it states that men and women are psychologically similar in MOST aspects rather than them being different. She kinda correlates your thesis on this subject. The study just goes to show how much the media influences people to believe everything they read instead of looking at the scientific data. In one of my psychology classes at the university we had discussed this very thing and the gender difference hypothesis was conclusive. Genders, as you state are mostly alike except for the child bearing and reproductive cycle. I had made a topic today in the politics section that I think the voting age should be raised. You should look at that one too.

Jamie

this isn't your refrigerator.

leave your notes to hubby someplace else.

I posted a link for not only my hubby - who is a poster here also, but to everyone who cares to look at the links. Ill post as I wish as long as Im not breaking the rules.

Jamie

 

[manifold]

Can I create another screenname and say it's my wife?

At least that would explain us having the same IP address.

 

[Barb]

Hun, I found a thread while you were gone that I will most likely forget later so Ill post it on here in hopes that you will see it when you get home.

--> http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

Heres a couple news articles about the study:

Men and women are from the same planet after all - Times Online

Men and women come from same planet after all, claims psychology study | UK news | The Guardian


Contrary to popular belief, it states that men and women are psychologically similar in MOST aspects rather than them being different. She kinda correlates your thesis on this subject. The study just goes to show how much the media influences people to believe everything they read instead of looking at the scientific data. In one of my psychology classes at the university we had discussed this very thing and the gender difference hypothesis was conclusive. Genders, as you state are mostly alike except for the child bearing and reproductive cycle. I had made a topic today in the politics section that I think the voting age should be raised. You should look at that one too.

Jamie

this isn't your refrigerator.

leave your notes to hubby someplace else.

I posted a link for not only my hubby - who is a poster here also, but to everyone who cares to look at the links. Ill post as I wish as long as Im not breaking the rules.

Jamie

In all honesty, if you two don't want to be viewed as a tag team (one voice speaking to and for itself), you should post independently of and less often to and for each other. Its a credibility issue, and a valid one.

 

[Gunny]

Oh look, a subforum that has had "Philosophy" in the subheader since 2004. What a shock.

Far as the "tag team" goes ... I gave you permission to have two accounts on one IP. I did not give permission to use each other's accounts; which, is a violation of the rules. One user account per user.

If you want to play games with an exception I made to the rules, I can rescind the exception.

Thanks. Gunny.

 

[The Illusion]

Can I create another screenname and say it's my wife?

At least that would explain us having the same IP address.

As long as your not going to say its your husband, Id say its believable.

Jamie

 

[del]

Can I create another screenname and say it's my wife?

At least that would explain us having the same IP address.

As long as your not going to say its your husband, Id say its believable.

Jamie

why, do you have a problem with gay marriage?

not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[The Illusion]

Can I create another screenname and say it's my wife?

At least that would explain us having the same IP address.

As long as your not going to say its your husband, Id say its believable.

Jamie

why, do you have a problem with gay marriage?

not that there's anything wrong with that.

Nope but his personality shows that hes not gay so if he were to say that the other person with the same IP was his husband, we'd assume he was lying.

Jamie