0
   

Bible Party of the USA

 
 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 06:11 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63453 wrote:
I interpret this response as saying that there is no good or evil. Is that a correct interpretation?


Is there no such thing as advantage and disadvantage? Is there no such thing left and right? Is there no such thing as easy and hard? Is there no such thing as fast and slow? Is there no such thing as cheap and expensive?

These are all matters of perception, do you suggest these don't exist as well? You seem to think that if something isn't concrete and absolute then it doesn't exist or it doesn't apply. Sorry to burst your bubble but life isn't always black and white.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2009 11:14 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63457 wrote:
Is there no such thing as advantage and disadvantage? Is there no such thing left and right? Is there no such thing as easy and hard? Is there no such thing as fast and slow? Is there no such thing as cheap and expensive?

These are all matters of perception, do you suggest these don't exist as well? You seem to think that if something isn't concrete and absolute then it doesn't exist or it doesn't apply. Sorry to burst your bubble but life isn't always black and white.


You sure are slippery. OK, do you exist?
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2009 01:38 pm
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63488 wrote:
OK, do you exist?


I think therefore I am.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Jan, 2009 08:35 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63491 wrote:
I think therefore I am.


Well, good for you. But, are you sure that you think? Do you ever come to a conclusion about something or do you just wander aimlessly around in an intellectual figure eight? If you do believe you have come to a conclusion about something, how can you tell if everything is relative?
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jan, 2009 09:02 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63501 wrote:
Well, good for you. But, are you sure that you think? Do you ever come to a conclusion about something or do you just wander aimlessly around in an intellectual figure eight? If you do believe you have come to a conclusion about something, how can you tell if everything is relative?


Is there a point to all of this? If not just say no.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 10:17 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63515 wrote:
Is there a point to all of this? If not just say no.


The point is, if everything is relative to the observer's point of view then nothing can be solid or real, there can be no fact or truth. If there are such things as fact or truth, then they must be the same regardless of the viewpoint of the oberserver. Your argument is that everything is up for negotiation or interpretation. This denies reality.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 10:40 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63585 wrote:
The point is, if everything is relative to the observer's point of view then nothing can be solid or real, there can be no fact or truth. If there are such things as fact or truth, then they must be the same regardless of the viewpoint of the oberserver. Your argument is that everything is up for negotiation or interpretation. This denies reality.


Relative does not equal non-existent.

Example: Hot

Things are only hot relative to other objects, coffee may be hot relative to other drinks but coffee would not be hot relative to let's say the sun. Because "hotness" is relative does not mean there are no hot object or that Hot does not exist.


Example 2: Location

Things only have a position relative to other objects. Celestial bodies only have locations relative to other celestial bodies. Try describing the location of the earth without comparing it to other objects in space, it cannot be done. But does that mean nothing has location? No, of course not.




Fundamentalists like concrete concepts, and often contend that if something is not concrete or absolute then it doesn't exist or it doesn't matter even if it does exist, this would forgo anything that is not able to be "nailed-down" or conceptualized. This may go to explain why fundamentalists do not like to think that species are not immutable. This line of reasoning is fallacious. Morality like most things is not a black and white thing, there are gray areas. While actions themselves are moral or immoral relative to the circumstances of a given situation, the basis of morality is the same throughout (harm vs benefit) this would require that people use reason and common sense to decide if an action is moral or immoral. but lots of people don't know what to base such a decision on and simply find it easier to rely on the immutable commandments of a certain dogma. while questioning the assumptions people base their lives on may present certain problems for people.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 11:43 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63587 wrote:
Relative does not equal non-existent.......
While actions themselves are moral or immoral relative to the circumstances of a given situation, the basis of morality is the same throughout (harm vs benefit) this would require that people use reason and common sense to decide if an action is moral or immoral. but lots of people don't know what to base such a decision on and simply find it easier to rely on the immutable commandments of a certain dogma. while questioning the assumptions people base their lives on may present certain problems for people.


How do you get reason and "common sense??"

What is "common sense?"
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jan, 2009 02:35 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63588 wrote:
How do you get reason and "common sense??"

What is "common sense?"


It is innate to most humans. Although it isn't used as much as it should sometimes Wink

It is simply a brain process meant to come to the most likely solution. It is part of our evolution.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jan, 2009 10:24 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63598 wrote:
It is innate to most humans. Although it isn't used as much as it should sometimes Wink

It is simply a brain process meant to come to the most likely solution. It is part of our evolution.


Tell that to our bankers.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jan, 2009 01:42 pm
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63664 wrote:
Tell that to our bankers.


Compared to caveman, "fire hot" it's a huge step up.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2009 01:07 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63665 wrote:
Compared to caveman, "fire hot" it's a huge step up.


I don't have a frame of reference to understand this quip.
0 Replies
 
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2009 01:23 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63598 wrote:
It is innate to most humans. Although it isn't used as much as it should sometimes Wink

It is simply a brain process meant to come to the most likely solution. It is part of our evolution.
Common sense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2009 05:50 am
@Volunteer,


It's called common sense, because it's common among different people, and yes it is innate through our perceptions and understanding of the world around us are similar.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 04:29 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63692 wrote:
It's called common sense, because it's common among different people, and yes it is innate through our perceptions and understanding of the world around us are similar.


Again, your viewpoint is based on what you've read in a book or been taught by people who have not done, only taught. My experience in each of those regions and world history indicates there is no such thing as innate sense that is common between nations.

Each nation has different societal values and circumstances. These shape what is common understanding within that society. They do not shape other societies except through elitist interaction.

Categorically speaking, the only things common to people in every society are their human needs.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 06:04 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63709 wrote:
Again, your viewpoint is based on what you've read in a book or been taught by people who have not done, only taught. My experience in each of those regions and world history indicates there is no such thing as innate sense that is common between nations.

Each nation has different societal values and circumstances. These shape what is common understanding within that society. They do not shape other societies except through elitist interaction.

Categorically speaking, the only things common to people in every society are their human needs.


The human race although geographically separated is very similar, the reason we see more differences is because we tend to emphasize the differences however there are more similarities than we tend to recognize.

How is it that cultures unknown to each other invent the same things? The most basic example is the bow and arrow, which was created by almost every culture even cultures that didn't know of each other, so how do we account for this? Common sense, allowed different people to come to the same conclusions, and in this conclusion it was that the bow and arrow was an effective tool for hunting and warfare. This is but one example, there are many.

From an insider's point of view it's easy to see the differences and overlook the similarities.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 06:18 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63712 wrote:
The human race although geographically separated is very similar, the reason we see more differences is because we tend to emphasize the differences however there are more similarities than we tend to recognize.

How is it that cultures unknown to each other invent the same things? The most basic example is the bow and arrow, which was created by almost every culture even cultures that didn't know of each other, so how do we account for this? Common sense, allowed different people to come to the same conclusions, and in this conclusion it was that the bow and arrow was an effective tool for hunting and warfare. This is but one example, there are many.

From an insider's point of view it's easy to see the differences and overlook the similarities.


Similar is different from same. Overlooking differences can get you killed.

Artifacts adhere to the rule of form follows function. Artifacts do not equal values or societal mores. All humans have the same needs. The differences occur when the individual man or each society addresses those needs in different ways using their unique values.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 09:24 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63714 wrote:
Similar is different from same. Overlooking differences can get you killed.

Artifacts adhere to the rule of form follows function. Artifacts do not equal values or societal mores. All humans have the same needs. The differences occur when the individual man or each society addresses those needs in different ways using their unique values.


this does not address my points.
Volunteer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 11:36 am
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63716 wrote:
this does not address my points.


You are deliberately being dense.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Feb, 2009 10:51 am
@Volunteer,
Volunteer;63719 wrote:
You are deliberately being dense.


No, you ignored my point about different cultures making the same inventions, through use of a common logic. Nor how we tend to emphasize the differences and overlook similarities.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/15/2025 at 11:03:27