The origin of mankind

[Marblehead]

This is where we come to edge of the bally.

We wonder and challenge.

I want to investigate about immortality.

Young and strong, you are protected.

Yep.  That is one of the biggest attractions of religions:  the concept of life after physical death.  Of course, we hear different things from different religions.

 

In my mind, if a person questions the concept and finds an acceptable answer to their questions, all is good.  The reality of it doesn't really matter.  It is that person's belief and nothing can be proven one way or another.

 

If the belief helps a person deal with their manifest life then it must be considered good for that person.

[Junko]

You are right.

I appreciate a person like you believing that way.

Tomorrow,new sun will rise!

[Karl]

Yep.  That is one of the biggest attractions of religions:  the concept of life after physical death.  Of course, we hear different things from different religions.

 

In my mind, if a person questions the concept and finds an acceptable answer to their questions, all is good.  The reality of it doesn't really matter.  It is that person's belief and nothing can be proven one way or another.

 

If the belief helps a person deal with their manifest life then it must be considered good for that person.

 

I disagree, that is a pragmatic ideology and subjectivist in the extreme. To go through life based on a lie is to refute life completely. It is to hide, to evade, to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to think. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

[Junko]

I don't know how Marblehead would react to this.....

[Karl]

I don't know how Marblehead would react to this.....

 

He certainly won't be shy of telling me....;-)

[Junko]

You can tell from long experience.

[Karl]

You can tell from long experience.

 

Och Aye lassy I ken.

[Marblehead]

I disagree, that is a pragmatic ideology and subjectivist in the extreme. To go through life based on a lie is to refute life completely. It is to hide, to evade, to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to think. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

We have had this discussion before.  And I understand your objection.  However, if a concept, regardless of its validity, brings a little happiness into a person's life then I will always consider it good if what they believe effects no one else.

 

There aren't many people who are more of a physicalist than I am but I think you might be one of them.

 

And don't be telling me that my pegacorns don't exist.

[Marblehead]

I just read the rest of the posts after the above.  Funny.  Thanks for the smiles.

[Karl]

We have had this discussion before. And I understand your objection. However, if a concept, regardless of its validity, brings a little happiness into a person's life then I will always consider it good if what they believe effects no one else.

 

There aren't many people who are more of a physicalist than I am but I think you might be one of them.

 

And don't be telling me that my pegacorns don't exist.

If it actually didn't affect anyone else then I would agree with you. The fact is that it does not occur in isolation, it supports an anti-life narrative. To want happiness sans morality is problematical as well as contradictory. Totalitarian dictatorships are the result of many individuals accepting a lie, to then accept that the individuals are just trying to get a bit of happiness is to ignore the possibility that one day you might well be forced into the position of shedding blood to defend against their philosophy. You know that better than anyone. So, now, does that alter your acceptance in that you might be an unwitting contributor ?

Edited May 2, 2016 by Karl

[Marblehead]

So, now, does that alter your acceptance in that you might be an unwitting contributor ?

I respect your anti-nihilistic views.  Something I think a lot of people need a little bit more of.

 

But I am bound by the Anarchist part of me that tells me that everyone has the right to believe as they will as long as it does not negatively effect others.

 

Yes, I would spill blood, hopefully not my own, were a power to attempt to force me into a totalitarian or dictatorial way of life.  That too would be my Anarchist part revolting.

 

But face it Karl, there are a lot of people who live in conditions that prohibit real happiness and they can't find a way out of their conditions.  So why not a little illusion or delusion that brings them a few moments of happiness?

[blue eyed snake]

I disagree, that is a pragmatic ideology and subjectivist in the extreme.evade, to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to think. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

 

that's a matter of perspective, I might say exactly the opposite:

 

 to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to feel. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

 

 

[blue eyed snake]

We have had this discussion before.  And I understand your objection.  However, if a concept, regardless of its validity, brings a little happiness into a person's life then I will always consider it good if what they believe effects no one else.

 

There aren't many people who are more of a physicalist than I am but I think you might be one of them.

 

And don't be telling me that my pegacorns don't exist.

 

I just knew it,

a real american sage has pegacorns in his backyard, not only frogs and feral cats....

[Karl]

I respect your anti-nihilistic views.  Something I think a lot of people need a little bit more of.

 

But I am bound by the Anarchist part of me that tells me that everyone has the right to believe as they will as long as it does not negatively effect others.

 

Yes, I would spill blood, hopefully not my own, were a power to attempt to force me into a totalitarian or dictatorial way of life.  That too would be my Anarchist part revolting.

 

But face it Karl, there are a lot of people who live in conditions that prohibit real happiness and they can't find a way out of their conditions.  So why not a little illusion or delusion that brings them a few moments of happiness?

 

"As long as it doesn't negatively affect others" and that's the crux of your anarchist philosophy, but you are evading morality by espousing it and that brings you into conflict. Sooner or later that kind of mental evasion/conflict will manifest as physical conflict and then the problems begin. People don't act without effect on other people, it's simple cause and effect.

 

Perhaps this idea is because you are a materialist MH ? I noticed you describe me as a physicalist-which would be essentially a materialist which I'm not. To believe that is to discount free will and therefore a proponent of determinism. In other words 'whatever will be will be' ?

[Karl]

that's a matter of perspective, I might say exactly the opposite:

 

 to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to feel. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

 

 

 

I need to sit down and talk you through this obsession with your assertion of my 'refusal to feel' :-) it's completely incorrect.

The problem here is a lack of understanding. In your mind there are two mysticisms; one of muscle (materialism) and one of spirit (spiritualism). You have been brought up believing in this left/right, mind/body dichotomy. Because I don't appear to fit into the second category of mystic spiritual, you are assuming I fit into that of materialist. However I reject both and put man as a combined material/spiritual being at the centre of things.

 

[Marblehead]

"As long as it doesn't negatively affect others" and that's the crux of your anarchist philosophy, but you are evading morality by espousing it and that brings you into conflict. Sooner or later that kind of mental evasion/conflict will manifest as physical conflict and then the problems begin. People don't act without effect on other people, it's simple cause and effect. Perhaps this idea is because you are a materialist MH ? I noticed you describe me as a physicalist-which would be essentially a materialist which I'm not. To believe that is to discount free will and therefore a proponent of determinism. In other words 'whatever will be will be' ?

Well, I was going to label you a Materialist but decided to lighten up just a little.

 

No, actually everything I do at home effects no one else.  No one can see me while I am walking around in my house naked.

 

Morality?  Who's morality.  Only mine matters to me.  I'm not evading, I just have different views about it.

 

Yes, I am a Materialist along with all the other labels I have placed on my forehead.  I really don't believe in the existence of pegacorns but I enjoy thinking how neat such an animal would be if they really did exist.

 

No, being a Materialist does not negate free will in any form.  My material existence allows for me to opt for free will if I so desire.  Being a Materialist does not prohibit one from creating causes in the chain of "causes and effects:.

[blue eyed snake]

I need to sit down and talk you through this obsession with your assertion of my 'refusal to feel' :-) it's completely incorrect.

 

I need to sit down and talk you through this obsession with your assertion of my 'refusal to think' :-) it's completely incorrect.

 

The problem here is a lack of understanding. In your mind there are two mysticisms; one of muscle (materialism) and one of spirit (spiritualism). You have been brought up believing in this left/right, mind/body dichotomy. Because I don't appear to fit into the second category of mystic spiritual, you are assuming I fit into that of materialist. However I reject both and put man as a combined material/spiritual being at the centre of things.

 

you've no idea what is going on in my mind, 

 

but I agree totally with a lack of understanding your mind.

Edited May 2, 2016 by blue eyed snake

[Karl]

Well, I was going to label you a Materialist but decided to lighten up just a little.

 

No, actually everything I do at home effects no one else.  No one can see me while I am walking around in my house naked.

 

Morality?  Who's morality.  Only mine matters to me.  I'm not evading, I just have different views about it.

 

Yes, I am a Materialist along with all the other labels I have placed on my forehead.  I really don't believe in the existence of pegacorns but I enjoy thinking how neat such an animal would be if they really did exist.

 

No, being a Materialist does not negate free will in any form.  My material existence allows for me to opt for free will if I so desire.  Being a Materialist does not prohibit one from creating causes in the chain of "causes and effects:.

 

Surely everybody's morality matters to you ? Unless you would subscribe to the notion that having a camera installed by law in your home to monitor physical prudence and to lock you up should you be found incorrectly attired. The people on the other end of the camera woukd have found nudity offensive and against their happiness. They would not think it much that you should be correctly attired unless in the bath of in the process of getting dressed. That, they would say, was a small price to pay for their happiness.

 

Humans aren't snooker balls, they are self regulating. That means they a very specific kind of causality which isn't uniform. A snooker ball has a certain weight and action when pushed towards another snooker ball, but men do not.

[Karl]

I need to sit down and talk you through this obsession with your assertion of my 'refusal to think' :-) it's completely incorrect.

 

 

 

you've no idea what is going on in my mind, 

 

but I agree totally with a lack of understanding your mind.

 

Oh contrare, I certainly do know that you think and would never-and have never asserted that. Certainly I would say that you don't do so adequately, that your reasoning is in error and so are your conclusions.

 

I certainly know what's going on in your mind because you write it down. Unless you are in the habit of posting complete rubbish, then I must assume that this is what you believe to be true. I don't, however know if you like a certain food, or dream of being a ballerina, but then you don't post those specifics.

[blue eyed snake]

well, when it makes you happy to believe that you know whats going on in my mind on the base of just a few posts you're welcome.

 

but first you write, in general: To go through life based on a lie is to refute life completely. It is to hide, to evade, to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to think. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

 

I gave that back because i look at it from a different perspective.

 

Now you ' soften it up'  by telling me that I don't think adequately, that's pretty condescending. But again, if it makes you happy to act like that, go ahead. 

 

i go dreaming of pegacorns, like Marble ( but now of course, i'm writing absolute rubbish  )

 

 

[Karl]

It doesn't make me happy, it's just an observation.

 

If I said you were stupid, then you could accuse me of being condescending, or rather impolite, but I certainly don't think that to be the case at all. Instead you have drawn the wrong conclusions, but then you seem to imply you are ultimately reliant on the heart (emotional/feeling/intuition) and that irrationality is your preference for providing you with knowledge. From that perspective you dismiss reason as the ONLY tool of knowledge and its from there that I make that observation. If I said that I also relied on some degree of emotional, intuitive to provide me with knowledge then you could accuse me of being condecending.

[Nungali]

I disagree, that is a pragmatic ideology and subjectivist in the extreme. To go through life based on a lie is to refute life completely. It is to hide, to evade, to simply give up in an attempt to get through life by refusing to think. I would say that isn't a good, it is anti-life and therefore evil.

 

yep .... that Marblehead .... a real evil one there !  

 

 

 

                    

 

[Nungali]

I don't know how Marblehead would react to this.....

 

 

Probably evilly    

[Nungali]

Och Aye lassy I ken.

 

 

I was wondering who you were !  

 

 

 

[Nungali]

I need to sit down and talk you through this obsession with your assertion of my 'refusal to feel' :-) it's completely incorrect. The problem here is a lack of understanding. In your mind there are two mysticisms; one of muscle (materialism) and one of spirit (spiritualism). You have been brought up believing in this left/right, mind/body dichotomy. Because I don't appear to fit into the second category of mystic spiritual, you are assuming I fit into that of materialist. However I reject both and put man as a combined material/spiritual being at the centre of things.

 

 

A Swedenborgian ?  " Man stands at the crossroads."