Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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
1 a (1) : all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical arts (2) : the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law, and theology <a doctor of philosophy> (3) : the 4-year college course of a major seminary b (1) archaic : physical science (2) : ethics c : a discipline comprising as its core logic, aesthetics, ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology
2 a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing fundamental beliefs
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 "shouldn't" 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.[/COLOR]
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 dont 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
I have a habit of looking up words i use all the time from time to time simply to make sure the way I use words is accurate. I figured since we are discussing philosophy then it would be wise to have an actual definition of it. Here is what I found:
1 a (1) : all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical arts (2) : the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law, and theology <a doctor of philosophy> (3) : the 4-year college course of a major seminary b (1) archaic : physical science (2) : ethics c : a discipline comprising as its core logic, aesthetics, ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology
Wasnt expecting the definition to include ethics. If that's the case then technically we already have a philosophy forum this one.
2 a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing fundamental beliefs
Including this definition, It makes me think this entire board is a philosophy forum. Mostly to discuss political idealogies but we have a number of subdivisions of the topic.
Seems to me that it could be argued we have enough forums to cover any topic. I could be wrong. There is no harm in asking for a new on though. If I remember correctly, this forum and a number of other forums was created when i asked about it. Seemed if we were going to discuss religion in the current events forum that maybe it would be better to have a religion forum... Same with some of the international discussion.
If you want my opinion, I think the reasons ethics was included was specifically to discuss philosophy if it wasnt connected with God. I see no reason not to discuss it here. But I am sure Gunny will do as he feels is best.
Jamie, The Bible is probably the most argued book of all time.
Catholic Site (New Advent)
NEW ADVENT BIBLE: Home
My personal favorite, Great search engine, and clean cut and paste. Welcome to Holy Bible the site dedicated to God's word. check out the Online KJV (King James Version) bible and a search.
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.
There are laws that we break every day, that complicate our existence. Application is relative to circumstance, motive, method, are all parts of the equation. Cause and effect is exact whether we are aware or unaware. Wisdom navigates, has a plan or vision. Purpose. Why waste time with tangents when guided by inspiration.
You say all is relative, I ask what harm is done, if any? All is not ok, where damage is done. There is no offense in thinking things through. There is a path, and there is that which violates space, sanctity, Life, Property.
Politics derives from Philosophy.
All is ok because it correlates with the natural order and balance of the universe. There has to be wrong in order for there to be right. Vise versa. You have to have immorality in order to have morality. Otherwise neither of them would exist.
Jamie
Politics derives from Philosophy.
That would be pretty much why I said this whole board is a philosophy forum divided into subtopics. Politics is a subtopic of philosophy. Religion can be too depending on what definition you use.
All is ok because it correlates with the natural order and balance of the universe. There has to be wrong in order for there to be right. Vise versa. You have to have immorality in order to have morality. Otherwise neither of them would exist.
Jamie
There is opposition in all things. I am not sure that means there is no absolute morality. But then that depends highly on what absolute morality is. Are we talking about moral code that following is always good? perhaps defining it would be wise.
Speaking of a moral code:
Do you think it's taught, or humans are born with it?
Do we know right from wrong by instinct, or from what our parents/society teaches us?
Politics derives from Philosophy.
That would be pretty much why I said this whole board is a philosophy forum divided into subtopics. Politics is a subtopic of philosophy. Religion can be too depending on what definition you use.
All is ok because it correlates with the natural order and balance of the universe. There has to be wrong in order for there to be right. Vise versa. You have to have immorality in order to have morality. Otherwise neither of them would exist.
Jamie
There is opposition in all things. I am not sure that means there is no absolute morality. But then that depends highly on what absolute morality is. Are we talking about moral code that following is always good? perhaps defining it would be wise.
Speaking of a moral code:
Do you think it's taught, or humans are born with it?
Do we know right from wrong by instinct, or from what our parents/society teaches us?
God's Word must be taken or rejected in full. If you accepted as the law of God, then you cannot pick and choose what to accept, for it is said in itself to be perfect and eternal, just like God. Either you follow God's law in whole (the straight and narrow path) or not. Those who pick and choose and follow their custom-built religions in defiance of God's law, refusing to obey all His commandments are following the wide and winding road to damnation and are blind to their own foolishness and fate.
These are the teachings of God, as revealed in the Holy Niecene Library ('Bible'), in all its current canons.
I still see the Source as absolute, in spite of me refusing to speak for or limit God in any other way.
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.
i would enjoy that. i had assumed you wrote the paper, which was why there was no author mentioned.
24 hours? excellent! it is interesting to play with the ceilings and walls we place around ourselves. or that society does. having been a boxer and kickboxer, i am well aware of the effort some must make to beak away from the naysayers who hold us to those artificial walls and ceilings. Lol! i have gone for three days with no food or sleep just to push the limits. our own minds hold us back. the changes that can occur in the human body in a matter of moments during trauma transcend physiological alterations, so the mind must be the key, and yet we pickle it, let it atrophy, opiate it and denigrate it.
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.
i appreciate your position and input. however, i have seldom allowed public opinion to sway me. when i lived in the 'bama bible belt, i wore a pentacle outside of my shirt. i know what is true in my life. i have been doubted before, and i cannot help that. being doiubted is the choice of the doubter, and is on them, not me. if i allow the scoffing of others to alter what i do, i have given into tyranny. i allow bullies to be rewarded. i am no longer being true to myself, but live a lie for the benefit of others who aren't even a friend and haven't my best interests in mind.
if i want to post something to jamie, and dont for fear of being seen as being a "tag team" or something else, then i have compromised freedom-mine. i will have censored myself. why is it that supporting someone who thinks much like me is being a tag team? i affirm those who think as i do, or at least show traits i admire. i do that in rl also. i like to gather such ppl around me (and married one of them). you are asking me to be false to myself?
at another forum, a young man assumed i was working for the FBI, and stalking him. that i was part of a team who were posted outside his house. his paranoia arose from fondness for very young girls and weed. he doubted my credibility when i laughed and told him the truth. *shrug*. i suppose i was simply new and change bothers some ppl.
request denied?
That's a shame.
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.
