Help
- Ratmentor
Quote
Religion = route to all evil, after all war is okay if relgion is envolved?
After life = you have to be dead to understand it, no?
Philosophy = every answer is correct!
pointless discussion.
After life = you have to be dead to understand it, no?
Philosophy = every answer is correct!
pointless discussion.
Im terrebly sorry but i compleetly disagree, accept for the afterlife part, but thats just lame...
On religion: We dont need religion to go to war, to rape women, kill children...
If we didnt have religion we would use skin color more ofter, or the sake of land... Or no reason at all...
There are no pointless discussions, every discussion brings you closer to A truth. Wether you accept and/or find that truth, difines pointlessness. Though that pointlessness is not of the discussion itself but of the discussers. (god i hate beeing a dislectic)
Oww and ill tell you what i tell everybody who says things like "Discussions are pointless" or "Arguing on a forum is like compeeting in the special olimpics, even if you win, your still a retard"
WHEN YOUR TRYING TO BE INDIFFERENT THEN DO NOT POST!
- Aneirin
Quote
This seems to be assuming a dichotomy that doesn't necessarily exist - that either life has a purpose in and of itself, or that it has no purpose at all. Purpose, consistent with the existance of an afterlife, can still be found in relation to a higher being, and in relation to one's fellow immortal beings - ie all of humanity. This is in fact more solid than some need to 'accept within one's own soul' an inherent purpose that no reason is given for - if in fact anything even can be said to have purpose merely in itself. It also allows (potentially) for a consistent notion of goodness to which people should aspire.
AH! the purpose thingy. For me purpose, in any form, is simple.
If you think you should drink alot, then your purpose is to drink alot.
If your friends want to make it big in the world, then there purpose is to get big in this world.
If you church wants to live by the christian rules, then its there purpose to live by the christian rules.
If this world wants to save itself, then this worlds purpose to save itself.
In short: "purpose is something we choose or is something chosen for us or something we are made for"
This theory also creates a paradox "When you dont have a purpose, then your purpose is not to have a purpose..."
Quote
To simply 'strive for true goodness' is difficult when people have different notions of what true goodness is, and may in fact be striving against each other.
Nah there are no different notions of TRUE goodness. There are different notions of normal goodness though.
Quote
If its greatest value is only ever for the next generation, ad infinitum, that is to say that no one will ever actually partake of that great value, and render it rather meaningless. To be able to find equal value in future generations, in the lives of those around you, and in your own life - even as precursors to a future eternity elsewhere - is more meaningful than simply finding purpose in an infinite extrapolation of the present.
Or the compleet otherway around, we are all the greatest value. If the next
generation is the most important, then we all are/were the greatest value.
It basicly means that we should keep the hotel room clean for the ones to come after us, and we hope that our predececors have done the same.
Quote
Essentially it's saying "Be good for the sake of some unknown future generations, and make yourself believe you'll be rewarded for it". A nice thought perhaps, but not a very rational philosophy.
Actualy its a good and rational thought, when you live by this philosophy, and succeed, you will die knowingly you did something good, which itself is a very great reward the moments before you die.
Wouldnt you like to be old and not have to think about the difference you've made in the world? Knowing that you helped people, that you made the world a better place to live in? Isnt that the greatest reward?
Quote
I never really appreciated the philosophical aspects of Erikson's series, but then, I never really appreciated philosophy as a whole, and I personally think it's a useless subject. Sure, it makes for interesting reading sometimes, but the tangeants don't ever lead anywhere useful, and drifting along them usually doesn't invoke personal satisfaction or happiness, just some genuine appreciation.
So your phylosophy is that its important to do things that give personal satisfaction? :outta: :banana:
Fedwin
Quote
There are plenty of crazy things in the Old and New Testament, but nothing like these quotes. In Genesis and Exodus, God condones slavery, incest, and murder; and in fact orders some people to commit these acts. And in Onan's case, God kills him for not committing loosely defined incest (fathering a child with his dead brother's wife). Jesus never repudiated any of it.
Ah well, the man was an asshole for doing that. That woman had no offspring to take care of her, so he condemmed her to poverty, which is a very nasty thing to do. It serves him right that god killed him (fictional or not)
Ive read some cool opinions here and im writing down everybook people are typing about, but some of you seem to think that a discussion needs to lead somewere. I, myself, find satisfaction in discussing with people. The greatest joy i get is when people compleetly disagree with me
this is very strange notion to alot of people, but meeting people that do not agree with you forces you to; either lie to yourself, or change or sharpen your opinions
