[an error occurred while processing this directive]

The last word.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Lies People Tell DISCUSSION PAGES! ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Exodus 22:19 on September 15, 2001 at 01:31:56:

In Reply to: Re: The End (just too darn long)Pt 2 posted by ezekiel 25:17 on September 07, 2001 at 04:21:35:

In the interests of keeping this short, I'm only going to respond to points directly on topic, and of course, those that just generally annoy me - probably a lot more of the latter :)

: What is the justification for war? Can both sides claim self-defence? When an activity is done for the supposed 'greater good' of mankind, and when 'God' is supposedly on both sides, which is correct? If murder is so evil, than you must further condemn capital punishment, euthanasia and abortion as regardless of the motive behind each, the end result is ultimately the same, the cessation of human life. Thus, how can the cessation of another's life be classified as evil?
[sigh] I think most people make a definite distincion between euthanasia etc. and 'cold blooded murder'. I don't think that both sides of a war are necessarily acting for the 'greater good'... you've said yourself that most countries have their own intentions, whether they are regarded as ethical by most is another matter. IMHO the only justification for war is the saving of human life, which in some cases requires short term loss. Thus, evil is in the motive, not in the action.

: The only inherently moralistic portion of any human is the trait for survival.
Survival is an instinct....not a moral position.

: Anything you can find internally without the need for surgery, is something I really don't need to know about :) What else is cluttered inside there but hope and love? Pride?
A sense of belonging, spirit, love of life...

: Why do we have Halloween, public holidays? Because it is traditional. Humans as a rule don't like change, and where one system seems capable of resolving problems inefficiently, it is seen as far better than any from change.
: There are very few cases seen in civil court where one person is entirely at fault. Do we want consistency or do we want justice?
: If you're seeking either, the courts are the wrong place to look. (see judgements from early 19th century and compare)
Just because they aren't perfect doesn't mean they're not a system of sorts. We don't have courts because of tradition we have them because they're necessary. Some laws/rulings are tradition of sorts, but if anyone has a better system I'd like to see it!

::It's going to be tough explaining this one to someone who doesn't believe that people essentially have the same basic moral code..... I don't
::buy into the argument that nudity in magazines or on television is offensive.... it's only when it's forced down your throat that it becomes
::offensive. I don't know of a country in the world where it's ok to walk down a public street nude without some form of prior warning.
: Africa.

There's prior warning ... it's expected.

: :No, Of course not. Where did I ever suggest that the UN was just? I do however believe that the _majority_ of people in the world believed it was morally right to prevent Iraq from manufacturing 'weapons of mass destruction'.
: Incorrect. The majority of western nations believed it was right to prevent Iraq from invading Kuwait. The reason: Kuwait is one of the world's leading manufacturers of oil, and Americans would receive a far cheaper price with the current sheikhs. Don't get sucked in by propaganda, any interference in the affairs of sovereign nations in other parts of the world always have ulterior motives. If Kuwait was a poverty stricken wreck which no one would want, nobody would care if Iraq took it over. The majority of NATO even objected to the bombing of Kosovo. Many Eastern nations actually supported Iraq overtly.
That may have been a reason, but there were more reasons than that... why did the US get itself into Vietnam?

: Who makes that decision of what _significantly_ affects the majority?
The majority.

: : On many cases, majority = conformity = lack of freedom of thought. Although, on the flip side, there are a lot of weird individuals out there with extremist views.
: :I disagree. The majority is by definition conforming to something. That doesn't mean they lack freedom of thought!!!
: People as a rule don't lack freedom of thought, they just choose not to exercise it. It is far easier to accept the opinions and views of other people than it is to formulate one's ideals. It is far easier to accept than to question.
So they've made a choice then haven't they? Is this your view because these 'conformists' don't agree with you?

: What is a consensus? 80%? Good luck on these issues.
I think _you_ should define a consensus - you're the one using the word!

: :One at a time -
: Recreational drugs: Only affect the majority in that they cause death and disease which costs money. Majority of people do not want to use recreational drugs, hence laws against them.

: Taking recreational drugs doesn't necessarily cause death and disease any moreso than other facets of human life. Some drugs are undoubtedly dangerous but only to the individual and choosing to take these drugs is operating their own free will. What makes drugs such as marijuana any more dangerous than alcohol and cigarettes? Societally imposed, majority rules! (Oh my God, i've regressed to using exclamation marks :))
: Are they really correct?
You just answered your own question... the majority must be correct, as in a democracy they must be able to make their own decision. If enough people thought that marijuana should be legal then it would be, and is in various places.

: What are the difference between 'beliefs' and 'moral beliefs'? How does a child verify these facts? By interaction with other people and and their environment. If these facts are never verified, there is little questioning ever done.
What I meant was that you can be 'brainwashed' as a child, but in the end, when you are no longer influenced by your upbringing, you no longer take your parents/elders word for everything.

: Example: Quitting smoking or bad habits. It is far harder to think about than achieve. Motivation, anger management, inner peace are others.
No, many people think about quitting smoking, not many do it. It is a psychological block, not that they find it hard to think about.
I think you'll find that thinking about inner peace is easier than achieving it.

: :Your idea of knowledge and my idea of learning are different. Very different.
: That's because you don't believe in 'questioning' absolutely everything :)
Actually I do. I just don't believe that the majority is always wrong.

: :Denial will not cause you to reach happiness. It may cause temporary satisfaction in much the same way as a hit of smack, but in the end you will be left without purpose, without knowing what you want from life and certainly without getting it.
: Denial has as much chance of success for allowing happiness as any other form of existence. If you live life and never consider anyone else or what you want to achieve, than your goal in life is already mostly complete.
: If you have low expectations, than you are easily satisfied. Is this any better than to have high expectations, even knowing these can never be achieved? You are undoubtedly happier in the first example.
Maybe I'm completely different here, but low goals do not satisfy me if I know I'm going to achieve them. eg. if you set yourself a goal of opening a door it wouldn't be satisfying, but climbing mount Everest might be.

: As they say 'a pleasure deferred, is a pleasure enhanced'.
Well I couldn't let you get off so lightly with some of those comments...
funny, that's what my last gf used to say ;)

: The End

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Lies People Tell DISCUSSION PAGES! ] [ FAQ ]