Stosh

It means you are heir to all that humanity is suceptible. So to look inward is also looking outward, and vice versa. Human behavior has been used as the denominator of goodness, and looking at it that way, man must concluded to be good by definition, one might also decide that human preference defines what should be called good, or bad if the thing is what we collectively dont like. Goodness could be what I personally want, or what we are told is defined by laws, or gods. Taoism leans on this propensity , that good stuff is what we like, what brings us health and long life, so we would only need to act according to our native social standard to be good , wise, just etc. Christianity, suggests that a man isnt good unless his behavior aligns with Gods law, and so a christian has to look to gods influence , or grace to deem himself good, or be judged by God himself to be good. So theres a point which could align the two definitions, pivoting around whether the spirit of God lives in all men , by his grace. ,,embraced by man ,,,Or if that glimmer is mans light on his own which he may embrace. Either way, most can search themselves and find goodness , the social imperative, empathy or compassion.

Get married?

I like Neil, I dont think he'd have said most of that.

I dont really know the mind of a fiddler crab, but figure , it has to have some kind of idea about itself, to recognize its own burrow vs that of its neighbor...at least. But a marble would drop into any depression without preference.

... How much money ?

The closest I do to energy work , is keep my mouth shut... occasionally.

At the point and to the extent , I am acting based on previous experience, something like with emotion , I am not actually responding based on the present one. I think that's tautologically true. But I still have to enact the volition at the time OR act without it , which we may fairly term reflexively. Emotions are predictable as falling into various categories common to anyone, they are not purely manifestations of personal experience, not a moral conclusion. Morality or immorality of an action isn't significant , or even real , if they can both lead to the exact same actions, its a moot concept. Morality is based on social sanction of a behavior, whether that condition is internalized or not. Whereas a persons personal decision about the appropriateness of some action, regardless of social standards is considered immoral.. as I am seeing this. Stopping at a red light , might be considered a morally sponsored action, for example, though I may do the same thing for personal reasons , which have nothing to do with social approval. The act itself would have to be both moral and immoral at the same time , if there was some kind of physically real morality (outside ones own conclusions). I'm thinking this is a pretty normal thing , to understand that each person has their own motivations, morality is a perspective.

I think youre placing these out of order , please slow down. First , You exist without choosing it. agreed what then? There's no expectation of end or failure or need simply to be existing. And even just waking up in the morning , I don't firstly ask whether I should live or die. I might be aware that I exist because I can do things , but again , that doesnt require me to question what would make my living continue. Again, my ability to do things is inherent in my existing, whether thats asking myself dumb questions or moving objects. The first time I actively make a choice ,I have to have decided to do a particular thing. Before that Im acting reflexively and without choice. This a distinction inherent within making a volitional choice. I might or might not ask myself about whether I should live or die , but that question in itself doesn't let me act. It doesn't provide assertive volition. I still have to pass through the ( possibly implied )decision of what do I do-- about it. Before that question I am frozen , and after that , I am freed. It is this tranformative state which denotes the quality of ultimateness , the fact that you always have to pass through this to act with volition. It may be that you think other questions are more 'important' but they aren't because they dont have the transformational effect. Youre still just hanging around existing , whether you decided you should live or die , or not. The wife says , our car is old , we should buy a new car.. you say Yeah. OK fine , you're still sitting there! SHould, doesnt move you , what it is you do however , you are actually doing. ( grammar falls a little short here)

Ok,, Ill bite,, As I see it , My value judgments are of black box origin, arising in my mind without my intentional control, they are in part based on my physical reality , and my reactions positive and negative to that. I am hard wired to be capable of certain sentiments . others which are subordinate I come to over time as being in alignment with to larger priorities. Ultimately there is an awareness of which I partake or exhibit which has no needs , and is self satisfied simply by existing. Not God , no dice. But in finding myself to be living, my first choice is what do I do, not Should I live or die , that is an ancillary question sometimes asked in order to address the ultimate question.. already presented.

Well if its pre-determinism , he is screwed , because he cant use logic to improve his life , or anything for that matter.

I don't see it that morality somehow equates to logic. Morality revolves around principles of right and wrong, which are value judgments, rather than logical conclusions. Whims and wishes provide the goals of logic, and so the logic one would employ to gain those objectives is subject to the whim. Logic doesn't tell one what they want out of life.

IMO "reality" isnt black and white other than in simplified pretense.

Well, in my experience, my upbringing, There were some values that my parents had ,that were foisted upon me. Others ... I think originate as outgrowth of the human condition... presuming were discussing kids of some mental development and level of socialization.. and some that originate with me out of individuality , but may. be the same as others arrive at anyway. Likewise, even people I have a bit of hostility towards may share core values with me. Even the most cursory consideration should obliterate the idea that familial relationship implies a significantly greater degree of common values than happens by chance alone, comparing similar circumstances of upbringing. I dont even know what ever brought you to that conclusion . Values tend to change as we age ,besides, siblings are to an extent ,rivals, men and women develop differently, and opposites do attract reasonably often. Everyone can look to their own childhood, for an example to test that idea. I think religion is usually inherited , but other than that a child is probably more like his peers than his own dad.

As a regular down to earth local guy said to me. Killling things is part of life. You cant avoid it. Now I couldve been childish, and pretend he was wrong, said something like You could live on fruit, or beg off others, But he was making a sincere point, not a flawed one. Theres truth in this. We do live in a finite world, and one mans gain becomes someone elses loss, somewhere down the line if you follow the chain of events All the way down. to the space you occupy and air you breathe. An exception to this does exist , Its the ideas you entertain in your mind. Its possible that you may be happy without making others sad. That isnt ALL there is to living, but , he Did say "Part" of life.

Since when do families share common values? I thought families were those genetically related groups of people who sublimated their mutual hatred ,out of fear of being alone.

bimp

bimp

Who me? .. if so , Yes'.'..........oh, this was to the op , nevermind.

I take a best guess, or leave the chad hanging.

See! Though it looks like our gov is a total clusterbang .. its inability to function, hinders what might be detrimental as well as that which one imagines might be good. Its what our founding fathers designed into the system Just like the basis for capitalism is self centered greed. To harness these elements of human predisposition , is pretty slick. Be happy and dwell on all that "lemonade". Negativity with no resolution possible,, one wisely minimizes ,IMo. So I dont want to screw the gov. or rail against it. This could only serve to make our representatives angry and jaded and less willing to persevere for the common good, if anything. According to your values as expressed, maybe exaggerated, the newts , the struggling cultures, and in fact ,everyone who swims against popular culture , should all be sacrificed for some advantage of uniformity. I just dont share that as a value. I like that folks can call their own shots,and that there is some collective control in some regards. as well.

I really really disagree, as far as our national parks are concerned , I think that reaction isn't deserved ,and if you looked into it , you might find that reaction to be downright .. incorrect. While I dont agree with every decision I hear about, on the whole, its far better than entrusting the newts to the stock market. Ill chalk that comment up to , joking around., but I think its counterproductive to blindly negative about the possibilities of collective govt, since , there is no other real option IMO.

Its not within my purview to do anything about it. For one thing, its a national park ... and There are people working on it. Even if that wasnt the case , one should pause and consider that we don't really know the ramifications of our actions, as I mentioned elsewhere.

Oh, its about having a cake and eating it , right? Ok , nevermind. Thanks for the correction.

But I Am concerned about the crater lake newts , To me its far more important that the last Buccaneers game results. Since everyone gets to pick what to be concerned about regardless of societies mainstream verdict on tribal culture is.. and that can also be considered choosing ones best passage. Rest easy , everyone is Already doing the best they know.

Yep in that kind of scenario , yes , we do have that level of being able to make a helpful judgement, and yes that is crucial. No doubt . But our ability to predict , to envision, still remains a very short distance from any individual Now. IMO What gives the illusion that one can predict far in advance , is 1 oversimplification of the factors and consequences, and 2 ignoring or passing off as a fluke, that which doesn't conform to the abstract chain of events we envisioned. In talking to people in real life , Ive asked for conversational reasons , "as a kid , Did you ever really expect to be doing this for a living ?" the answer has always been no. In fact its been emphatically a 'hell no'. I gotta agree though that at least conceptually , a 'good job' has perks , but .. like you said.. there are costs too. Parents do try to encourage kids in a productive vein, but , frankly the stockbroker with coronary heart disease or diabetes , or a drug problem ... probably didnt add that to the calculation when He enrolled for his MBA. Same as the guy with a low status job probably didn't foresee the love of his life, divorcing him for the burnt out stockbroker.