The origin of mankind

[Nungali]

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

 

Interesting.  I now see a physicalist as someone who sees the dynamics in life coming from physical things and a materialist as someone who pursues material things ( like money , goods, possessions )   above  immaterial good qualities ( like satisfaction, completeness , fulfillment , compassion, love, security, etc  . )    I will adopt that distinction now, as I never had it before. 

 

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.

 

Yeah .... but now I know about it .... I can imagine it   

 

 

 I am one of those 'a man's home is his castle' guys .   I take it further ; if I want to lie in a deck chair naked in my front paddock in the sun and smoke bongs ... and not effect anyone else ....   why shouldn't I  ?  !  

 

 

 

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.

 

Materialist or physicalist ?  

 

 

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:.

 

Then you would realise that there are some causes and effects that  can cause a pegacorn to exist 

 

 

here is one  (if I understand the term pegacorn correctly ? )  ;

 

http://dnok91peocsw3.cloudfront.net/product/68709-original-1366930648-primary.png

[Marblehead]

I don't know anything about snooker so I will ignore that part.

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.

You see Karl, part of being an Anarchist is that we do not allow others to place their moral values on us.  That would mean no moral police on my property.  And if they brought a camera to install in my house you can be pretty sure that it would end up up their dark place.  As our Marines would say:  You would have to pry my weapon from my lifeless fingers before that would happen.

[Marblehead]

Yeah .... but now I know about it .... I can imagine it   

Don't bother.  There's nothing to see here.  Keep moving.

[Marblehead]

 

 I am one of those 'a man's home is his castle' guys .   I take it further ; if I want to lie in a deck chair naked in my front paddock in the sun and smoke bongs ... and not effect anyone else ....   why shouldn't I  ?  !  

Well, for me, not in the front.  Too many people go by my front.  But sure, in back.  No one can see me unless they have walked onto my property and around to the back.

[Marblehead]

Materialist or physicalist ?

Yeah, I suppose I should stop calling myself a Materialist as there are too many negative connotation fixed to that word.  A physicalist expresses it better.

 

Then you would realise that there are some causes and effects that  can cause a pegacorn to exist 

Yes, one did suddenly appear above.  And its a beauty.

 

here is one  (if I understand the term pegacorn correctly ? )  ;

 

http://dnok91peocsw3.cloudfront.net/product/68709-original-1366930648-primary.png

You may be confused here.  I think that is a "My Little Pony Guy".

[Marblehead]

A Swedenborgian ?  " Man stands at the crossroads." 

 

I saw him!!!  It was Robert Johnson.

[blue eyed snake]

Interesting.  I now see a physicalist as someone who sees the dynamics in life coming from physical things and a materialist as someone who pursues material things ( like money , goods, possessions )   above  immaterial good qualities ( like satisfaction, completeness , fulfillment , compassion, love, security, etc  . )    I will adopt that distinction now, as I never had it before. 

 

see if I can get it with my inadequately thinking equipment, aah yes, It's a nice distinction.

 

Yeah .... but now I know about it .... I can imagine it   

 

imagine me instead   , lying in that one corner of my garden where neighbours can't see me, hmm. summer is coming closer, maybe in a few days i can lay me down there, to get tanned all-over.

 

 

 I am one of those 'a man's home is his castle' guys .   I take it further ; if I want to lie in a deck chair naked in my front paddock in the sun and smoke bongs ... and not effect anyone else ....   why shouldn't I  ?  !  

 

so it is, moralism is strictly for moralists

 

Materialist or physicalist ?  

 

Then you would realise that there are some causes and effects that  can cause a pegacorn to exist 

 

the aformentioned beauty grazes in the meadow here, but you can see her only when you're not looking  (now how did I get a picture huh   , ain't that smart   )

 

here is one  (if I understand the term pegacorn correctly ? )  ;

 

http://dnok91peocsw3.cloudfront.net/product/68709-original-1366930648-primary.png

 

urgh.... could you please not post links to such revolting pictures again, that's neither a pegacorn nor natural beauty.

[blue eyed snake]

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,

 

see, there you go again, your observations seems to be infallible, but I draw the wrong conclusions, well, have it your way.

 

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. 

 

that's a conclusion, not an observation. An observation is about facts, the moment a sentence comes up like: " you seem to imply " you're in the concluding mode

 

From that perspective you dismiss reason as the ONLY tool of knowledge

 

I do indeed dismiss reason as the only tool of knowledge, i will never go back to that state of being, I'm happy I got out of it.

But it's a useful tool for many daily things , not to be discarded. You' re concluding (not observing) that  "irrationality is your preference for providing you with knowledge. "

 

that's a conclusion that's waaay beside the being sitting here typing.

But to be honest I don't care to explain that to you.

You would not understand it either, our perspectives are just different, and mine will stay the way it is, probably evolving further in a way that you deem unhealthy, or even evil 

 

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.

 

wish you all the best with your rational ways

[Karl]

I don't know anything about snooker so I will ignore that part.

 

You see Karl, part of being an Anarchist is that we do not allow others to place their moral values on us.  That would mean no moral police on my property.  And if they brought a camera to install in my house you can be pretty sure that it would end up up their dark place.  As our Marines would say:  You would have to pry my weapon from my lifeless fingers before that would happen.

 

Have you ever had to test that out ? That's where intention meets reality. At what point would you take action ? Presuming that as long as the states morality agrees with your own then there would be no conflict, or if so far you have escaped detection. The state isn't known for accepting disent without violent reaction. If you tried to put the camera where the sun don't shine, then shortly you would be surrounded by armed officers of the state intent on adjusting your attitude one way or another. It's easy to say you would do a thing when you are below the radar, or you agree with the current rules, but would you really go to war for some minor extra rule that infringed your current beliefs ?

[Karl]

see, there you go again, your observations seems to be infallible, but I draw the wrong conclusions, well, have it your way.

 

 

 

that's a conclusion, not an observation. An observation is about facts, the moment a sentence comes up like: " you seem to imply " you're in the concluding mode

 

 

 

I do indeed dismiss reason as the only tool of knowledge, i will never go back to that state of being, I'm happy I got out of it.

But it's a useful tool for many daily things , not to be discarded. You' re concluding (not observing) that  "irrationality is your preference for providing you with knowledge. "

 

that's a conclusion that's waaay beside the being sitting here typing.

But to be honest I don't care to explain that to you.

You would not understand it either, our perspectives are just different, and mine will stay the way it is, probably evolving further in a way that you deem unhealthy, or even evil 

 

 

 

wish you all the best with your rational ways

 

I see that you don't dismiss reason at all, you are using it right now to argue your point.

As evil emperor said in Star Wars "good, use the power of the dark side" ;-)

 

Yes, it is you that implies that you believe you no longer use reason, but I'm saying that you most definitely do use reason and no other thing-you just stopped believing that you have. That's an error. So, that is my observation. My conclusion is not that you have stopped reasoning, but that you think you have. However, you then add the caveat that you still 'think'. That's a little get out clause.

 

If a man thinks they are a tomato, my observation is that they think they are a tomato, but I conclude from observation that they are a man that thinks they are a tomato.

[Junko]

People are tomato to believe thier life span is only for 80 years.

[Karl]

People are tomato to believe thier life span is only for 80 years.

 

What ? Exactly 80 years. There are plenty of people with a lifespan far less and some far more.

[Marblehead]

Have you ever had to test that out ? That's where intention meets reality. At what point would you take action ? Presuming that as long as the states morality agrees with your own then there would be no conflict, or if so far you have escaped detection. The state isn't known for accepting disent without violent reaction. If you tried to put the camera where the sun don't shine, then shortly you would be surrounded by armed officers of the state intent on adjusting your attitude one way or another. It's easy to say you would do a thing when you are below the radar, or you agree with the current rules, but would you really go to war for some minor extra rule that infringed your current beliefs ?

As a matter of fact it was tested recently.  The moral police came to my house for the purpose of instilling the fear of the "law" into my being. 

 

Firstly, I met him at the road.  I did not allow him on my property.  He was standing in the road and I was standing in my driveway and that put me on a higher level than he was.

 

Fortunate for me there were two objective observers so he had to mind his manners.

 

Toward the end he tried to make his moral point and I called "bullshit" on him twice.  (I had violated no laws.)  (He was talking to me as if he was my mother and I am likely 30 years his senior.)

 

So he left after I called "bullshit" the second time.

 

About two weeks later I received notice that I was "randomly" selected for jury duty at the local Federal District Court.  (The "system" violated the law in order to get even with me for not violating any law.)  I filled out the questionnaire and submitted it.  A follow-up stated that I need do nothing else.  (I would not be selected for jury duty.)

 

So yes Karl, when I speak of my Anarchist mentality I am dead serious.

 

I will not allow my spirit to be destroyed by the fear of "The Man".  I will not die fearful - I will die brave.

[Marblehead]

What ? Exactly 80 years. There are plenty of people with a lifespan far less and some far more.

 

I hope it's not just 80 for me.  I'm shooting for immortality but will be at peace with 116.  Anything less would be disappointing.

[Karl]

As a matter of fact it was tested recently.  The moral police came to my house for the purpose of instilling the fear of the "law" into my being. 

 

Firstly, I met him at the road.  I did not allow him on my property.  He was standing in the road and I was standing in my driveway and that put me on a higher level than he was.

 

Fortunate for me there were two objective observers so he had to mind his manners.

 

Toward the end he tried to make his moral point and I called "bullshit" on him twice.  (I had violated no laws.)  (He was talking to me as if he was my mother and I am likely 30 years his senior.)

 

So he left after I called "bullshit" the second time.

 

About two weeks later I received notice that I was "randomly" selected for jury duty at the local Federal District Court.  (The "system" violated the law in order to get even with me for not violating any law.)  I filled out the questionnaire and submitted it.  A follow-up stated that I need do nothing else.  (I would not be selected for jury duty.)

 

So yes Karl, when I speak of my Anarchist mentality I am dead serious.

 

I will not allow my spirit to be destroyed by the fear of "The Man".  I will not die fearful - I will die brave.

 

Well good on you for having that attitude, but you did fill in the states questionnaire ;-) You chose the lesser and that's what compromise is about and what I was suggesting. You can't live by your own moral standards and completely ignore the state. Eventually you will be faced with dealing with them. The state doesn't always apply maximum force, but it does find ways to make you tow the line progressively.

 

Funnily enough I just read a piece by Eric Peters which used the analogy of the hair turning grey overnight, when it actually happens bit by bit. I prefer the boiling frog analogy. The thing is, even if you have to step outside your door to talk to one of the states thugs, then you have an opportunity cost. Instead of doing some gardening, listening to music or having a beer, you are forced into remonstrating with the state bully. Then they get you to fill in a form which also has an opportunity cost and which you must apply your name and sign (put your mark) or more bullies will appear and more form filling demands will ensue. They will raise the stakes until you either comply, or are marched off in hand cuffs.

[Marblehead]

Well good on you for having that attitude, but you did fill in the states questionnaire ;-) You chose the lesser and that's what compromise is about and what I was suggesting. You can't live by your own moral standards and completely ignore the state. Eventually you will be faced with dealing with them. The state doesn't always apply maximum force, but it does find ways to make you tow the line progressively. Funnily enough I just read a piece by Eric Peters which used the analogy of the hair turning grey overnight, when it actually happens bit by bit. I prefer the boiling frog analogy. The thing is, even if you have to step outside your door to talk to one of the states thugs, then you have an opportunity cost. Instead of doing some gardening, listening to music or having a beer, you are forced into remonstrating with the state bully. Then they get you to fill in a form which also has an opportunity cost and which you must apply your name and sign (put your mark) or more bullies will appear and more form filling demands will ensue. They will raise the stakes until you either comply, or are marched off in hand cuffs.

Yeah, I live in the society so I must comply with its laws.  I do not have to comply with the moral values of a few.

 

I filled out the questionnaire because it is law that I do so.

 

The initial complaint and the questionnaire were fraud - a violation of the law.  I violated no law.

 

As long as they do not have a piece of paper signed by a judge they have no power over me.  That would require sufficient evidence that I had violated a law.

[Karl]

Yeah, I live in the society so I must comply with its laws.  I do not have to comply with the moral values of a few.

 

I filled out the questionnaire because it is law that I do so.

 

The initial complaint and the questionnaire were fraud - a violation of the law.  I violated no law.

 

As long as they do not have a piece of paper signed by a judge they have no power over me.  That would require sufficient evidence that I had violated a law.

 

My Dad refused to fill in the census when we were kids. He had to go to court and was offered either a prison sentence or a fine-he opted for the fine. He filled in the very next census.

[blue eyed snake]

sigh...one more time

 

I see that you don't dismiss reason at all, you are using it right now to argue your point.

 

of course i do, i just told you: 

 

But it's a useful tool for many daily things , not to be discarded.

 

 

As evil emperor said in Star Wars "good, use the power of the dark side" ;-)

 

never looked at starwars

 

Yes, it is you that implies that you believe you no longer use reason, but I'm saying that you most definitely do use reason and no other thing-you just stopped believing that you have. That's an error. So, that is my observation.

 

your observe that i think that i' believe i no longer use reason???

far from that, as I already wrote in my last post,

 

 

But it's a useful tool for many daily things , not to be discarded.

 

 

 

My conclusion is not that you have stopped reasoning, but that you think you have. However, you then add the caveat that you still 'think'. That's a little get out clause. If a man thinks they are a tomato, my observation is that they think they are a tomato, but I conclude from observation that they are a man that thinks they are a tomato.

 

for all your intelligence and having read far more philosophy as I have,

you may contemplate to do a training in reading comprehension.

 

shrug

 

 

[Karl]

I could pull you up with the fallacies in your argument BES, but it would seem like I was throwing darts.

 

"But it's a useful tool for many daily things, not to be discarded"

 

You treat reason as if it's an adjunct that can be switched off and on, yet you are using reason to think it. That is use of a stolen concept. Substitute consciousness instead of reason and you might see how crazy that is. Our entire hierachy of conceptual knowledge is impossible without reason, because you must choose everything you do, nothing is automatic or purely perceptual. You may not reason logically but you cannot escape the need to use reason consistently.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Karl

[Marblehead]

My Dad refused to fill in the census when we were kids. He had to go to court and was offered either a prison sentence or a fine-he opted for the fine. He filled in the very next census.

Yes, if it is a law, as is the census here in the USA as well, it must be complied with else we pay the penalty.

[Junko]

What ? Exactly 80 years. There are plenty of people with a lifespan far less and some far more.

More or less,about 80 years I meant.

[Karl]

More or less,about 80 years I meant.

 

You think its far less or far more ? It looks to me as if it's exactly whatever amount it is and not a penny more or less. Of course I'm saying this knowing exactly where this is headed. First we should define what life is, what identity is with reference to a unique human individual - and I presume you agree we are all unique ?

[Junko]

Sure!We all are unique.

I am unique too that I believe in physical immortality.

[Karl]

Sure!We all are unique.

I am unique too that I believe in physical immortality.

 

can you describe how that would come about, in what sense and exactly why such a thing would even be desirable ?

[Junko]

To explain about physical immortality???

And do you mean what make me desire about it?