9
   

Morality (a discussion)

 
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 05:29 am
@Leadfoot,
By 'him' I of course meant 'God/god'. I’m pretty sure Frank didn’t do it.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 06:57 am
@Albuquerque,
Albuquerque wrote:

Quote:
When if when someone provides me with a self consistent minimal viable product for sale I will cast my vote. A self consistent proposition which is not verifiable will bring me to agnosticism. I have yet to see one.


This statement is clear, take it as you want Frank.
It is rainy and windy in central Portugal right now, no reason to get out but its fine!
Catch ya later old man!


Yup, looks like I was correct that you have made a blind guess that there are no gods...and you are sticking with that blind guess the same way others, who have made a blind guess that there is a GOD, stick with theirs.

No problemo. I've had discussions with Jehovah's Witnesses that end up this same way.

Not sure how the Covid thing is impacting Portugal, but I hope you stay safe.

Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 09:38 am
@Frank Apisa,
No I have yet to cast a vote on any of the three options.

1 - I haven't yet found a proof that God exists thus I am not a believer.

2 - I haven't yet found a proof that a potentially coherent concept of God that may be verified does not exist thus I am not an atheist.

3 - And finally, I haven't yet found a coherent concept of God, that may or may not exist, in order to be agnostic about a valid specific ideation of God.

Portugal recently had a pretty serious Covid outbreak but the numbers are half down already with full lockdown. Ty for caring, stay safe up there Frank!
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 10:03 am
Finally I want to say something's about knowledge:

"I" know that I cannot be agnostic about Experiencing.

"I" know that I am a focus of Experiencing throughout my "life".

"I" know that Experiencing requires ratios and patterns.

"I" don't know what is the domain of an "I", nor how big it is, or where it seats.

"I" do not know where or in which Domain/Realm this Experiencing fits.

"I" don't know how many Domains/Realms of Experiencing there can be.

On Substance:

Substance(Capital) is permanent.

There can be no action without a substance.

The substance of action does not move.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 10:26 am
@Albuquerque,
Albuquerque wrote:

No I have yet to cast a vote on any of the three options.

1 - I haven't yet found a proof that God exists thus I am not a believer.

2 - I haven't yet found a proof that a potentially coherent concept of God that may be verified does not exist thus I am not an atheist.

3 - And finally, I haven't yet found a coherent concept of God, that may or may not exist, in order to be agnostic about a valid specific ideation of God.

Portugal recently had a pretty serious Covid outbreak but the numbers are half down already with full lockdown. Ty for caring, stay safe up there Frank!


C'mon, Al...obviously you have made a blind guess that no gods exist.

I am not talking about whether you are a "believer" or an "atheist" or an "agnostic." Those are descriptors...at best, shortcuts, at worst bullshit.

Here is my take:


I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.


It is an agnostic position...although it does not mean I must use the descriptor "Agnostic" for myself.

The first line reads:

I do not know if gods exist or not.

I truly do not know if a single GOD or several gods exist. I have given you a clear indication of what I mean when I use those words.

An entity or entities responsible for the creation of what we humans call "the physical universe"...IF THERE IS SUCH AN ENTITY."

Now...why not stop with the bullshit...and actually tell me if you know that there ARE or ARE NOT any entities of that sort.

And don't play games about cloudiness of definition, because you and I know exactly what we are talking about...the true nature of the REALITY of existence.

This thing we human call "the universe" WHATEVER IT ACTUALLY IS...

...are there entities (or AN entity) that caused it to happen...

...or does it exist (whatever that means) without ever having been caused by any entity or entities?

Be serious with this.

Don't let the fact that you have blindly guessed that there are no such entities make you pretend there are obstacles in the way of meaningful discussion of the issue.

Live with your guess...or join me in refusing to make such a guess because there is not enough unambiguous evidence upon which to make a meaningful guess.

**** the word "agnostic."

Deal with your actual take without a descriptor.

Actually put your position into a coherent comment.



Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 10:44 am
@Frank Apisa,
From A-Gnose, Agnose, means without knowledge Frank.

I took care of stating what I can and cannot say with confidence in the post that followed.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 03:33 pm
@Albuquerque,
Albuquerque wrote:

From A-Gnose, Agnose, means without knowledge Frank.

I took care of stating what I can and cannot say with confidence in the post that followed.


So you decline to put your take on the issue into words?

Why?

Here's mine again:


I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.


If you disagree with the first sentence....tell me why you disagree.
knaivete
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2021 07:17 pm
@Frank Apisa,
0 Replies
 
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 08:12 am
@Smileyrius,
In a conversation in another forum, another writer said that his morality is unique to himself. Implying that we all have different moralities. If one is going to define morality as perspective, then what is the purpose of having two words for the same thing?

Morality seems to be a code of ethics, which governs a group of people, but is a choice. An umbrella, under which a group may or may not come under.

Don't get me wrong. Societies may very well impose certain moral standards. These can be enforced by law. Take our Bill of Rights, for example. "We the people, for the people, by the people". The Constitution is said to have been built upon these "inalienable rights". So now we have law, to enforce those rights upon the people.

But, when the question of a "living document" comes into question, the morality of the original thinkers is nullified. The meanings change with the times. As man becomes more debased, then the morality of the laws governing man becomes more debased.

This is why many feel the Constitution should be interpreted as the writers meant it, based upon other writings, comments, etc, of those same people.

The laws of a nation do reflect the morality of the people, in a democratic society.

But then there is the media, which is used to contaminate the minds of the voters, under the guise of "art".

Way back, around June 1692–May 1693, this same form of "Art" was named....

Sorcery.

Mind control tactics, proven in court, and thus the punishment for this vile twisting of one's free will choice, was to suffer the flame.

Horrific to entertain the punishment. But was it not fitting? The judges back then were not so proud as to think they could not be swayed by the media. They knew full well the possibilities.

Is it moral to burn the witch?

When looked at from this perspective, one would have to say yes.

Show the average American the power of the media, and they would be astounded. Give them a choice in the matter, and they too, like the judges of old, would indeed.....

Burn the witches.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 08:21 am
@NoName77,
NoName77 wrote:

In a conversation in another forum, another writer said that his morality is unique to himself. Implying that we all have different moralities. If one is going to define morality as perspective, then what is the purpose of having two words for the same thing?

Morality seems to be a code of ethics, which governs a group of people, but is a choice. An umbrella, under which a group may or may not come under.

Don't get me wrong. Societies may very well impose certain moral standards. These can be enforced by law. Take our Bill of Rights, for example. "We the people, for the people, by the people". The Constitution is said to have been built upon these "inalienable rights". So now we have law, to enforce those rights upon the people.

But, when the question of a "living document" comes into question, the morality of the original thinkers is nullified. The meanings change with the times. As man becomes more debased, then the morality of the laws governing man becomes more debased.

This is why many feel the Constitution should be interpreted as the writers meant it, based upon other writings, comments, etc, of those same people.

The laws of a nation do reflect the morality of the people, in a democratic society.

But then there is the media, which is used to contaminate the minds of the voters, under the guise of "art".

Way back, around June 1692–May 1693, this same form of "Art" was named....

Sorcery.

Mind control tactics, proven in court, and thus the punishment for this vile twisting of one's free will choice, was to suffer the flame.

Horrific to entertain the punishment. But which was it not fitting? The judges back then were not so proud as to think they could not be swayed by the media. They knew full well the possibilities.

Is it moral to burn the witch?

When looked at from this perspective, one would have to say yes.

Show the average American the power of the media, and they would be astounded. Give them a choice in the matter, and they too, like the judges of old, would indeed.....

Burn the witches.


We can easily deal with "witches."

The danger to our society are the people so thoroughly programed that they want to blame the troubles we face...on "the media."

They are the ones who have to be dealt with.

I'm not saying burn them.

But we should offer them treatment for their psychoses.
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 08:32 am
@Frank Apisa,
Sir Frank, as to whether or not gods exist, I personally have never seen something come from nothing. Yet, here we are, in this supposed universe. If science is a reflection of Truth, then it stands to reason that there must be "something else", that we do not see, governing these "laws of nature". Something outside of nature, maintaining nature. Giving nature life, in other words, but keeps it all in check, in bounds. Yes there are the ones who defy Law. That is, in the Universe of the one who allows that belief. From that "possibility" grows all that Forces against the Absolute Stasis of Peace. Smile
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 08:38 am
@Frank Apisa,
As for how one comes to "know" God exists, not gods, but God....

Prophecy.

Quite simply stated. The fact that a New Jersey sliver of land, housing a group of people utterly hated by the majority of its surroundings, and is still there, is not accomplished by man or some Zionist conspiracy theory.

The fact that Israel exists, at all, is the proof you seek.
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 08:45 am
@Frank Apisa,
<quote>We can easily deal with "witches."

The danger to our society are the people so thoroughly programed that they want to blame the troubles we face...on "the media."

They are the ones who have to be dealt with.

I'm not saying burn them.

But we should offer them treatment for their psychoses.</quote>

If you cannot see the power the media holds, if Nazi Germany did not prove that power, then you are denying history now. LOL, and claiming to be "rational". Come on man, you don't have to like it, for something to be true.
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 09:17 am
@Greatest I am,
"You might have noted how Christians call evil good when they show their love for their genocidal Yahweh." -- you say ( I don't know how to quote properly yet)

Life, killing off that which causes Death, is genocidal? Do you not take medication when ur sick? Do you not stop a child from running into traffic? Do you not go to court when someone has stolen from you?

The giving of Free Will does in fact mean there must be opposition. There must be a choice. If no choice, then one is enslaved. The existence of evil does not make God evil. How else can Absolute Good make us not slaves?

There is a step from here that one can go as well, but only Legally accessed via the first. If you knew what was attainable, I think you would change your position in a heartbeat. But, that is just me being hopeful.

If one opposes the Light, one is in opposition, and causes Shadow.

No opposition to the Light, no Shadow.

Simple.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 09:33 am
@NoName77,
NoName77 wrote:

Sir Frank, as to whether or not gods exist, I personally have never seen something come from nothing. Yet, here we are, in this supposed universe. If science is a reflection of Truth, then it stands to reason that there must be "something else", that we do not see, governing these "laws of nature". Something outside of nature, maintaining nature. Giving nature life, in other words, but keeps it all in check, in bounds. Yes there are the ones who defy Law. That is, in the Universe of the one who allows that belief. From that "possibility" grows all that Forces against the Absolute Stasis of Peace. Smile


Aha...so you are making the blind guess that at least one god has to exist.

Okay.

Now we have one person blindly guessing in one direction...and one blindly guessing in the opposite.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 09:34 am
@NoName77,
NoName77 wrote:

As for how one comes to "know" God exists, not gods, but God....

Prophecy.

Quite simply stated. The fact that a New Jersey sliver of land, housing a group of people utterly hated by the majority of its surroundings, and is still there, is not accomplished by man or some Zionist conspiracy theory.

The fact that Israel exists, at all, is the proof you seek.


Sticking with that blind guess!

That figures.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Feb, 2021 09:36 am
@NoName77,
NoName77 wrote:


<quote>We can easily deal with "witches."

The danger to our society are the people so thoroughly programed that they want to blame the troubles we face...on "the media."

They are the ones who have to be dealt with.

I'm not saying burn them.

But we should offer them treatment for their psychoses.</quote>

If you cannot see the power the media holds, if Nazi Germany did not prove that power, then you are denying history now. LOL, and claiming to be "rational". Come on man, you don't have to like it, for something to be true.


We've got a major problem with people who are sure "the media" is the enemy...and people like Trump are not.
0 Replies
 
NoName77
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Feb, 2021 12:40 am
So ok, any morality, based on Self, is consuming, given no one being everywhere, all the time, and having all things. No single "person" has all that is required to meet these standards. Some might say that Time itself could be a god, but in our understanding of Time, there is a beginning and end. This is another aspect of God that no one can compare with.

Now this Time factor brings me to an understanding of Eternity. When I use the word, I mean a state of "is-ness". I mean literally, "is, was and always will be". The last two get looked at all the time, lol, but the IS-ness does not get considered, because what we currently Experience at any point is what we take as Reality. But our very own psychology admits to the Filter we Experience the world through. Given that filter, and the forceful push of certain filters, the Momentum mankind is dealing with is far more the invisible one that any physical one, and that invisible one is most often in "opposition" to what is required for Life.

Life grows life.

Death grows death.

What we feed, grows.

Life, death, momentum, force, none of which are visible to the naked eye. Yet all have direct effects on all we Experience.

Without Mind, there is no Experience. Without Mind, there is no Brain to Experience.

Just how Eye See it Smile
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Feb, 2021 07:47 am
@NoName77,
NoName77 wrote:


So ok, any morality, based on Self, is consuming, given no one being everywhere, all the time, and having all things. No single "person" has all that is required to meet these standards. Some might say that Time itself could be a god, but in our understanding of Time, there is a beginning and end. This is another aspect of God that no one can compare with.

Now this Time factor brings me to an understanding of Eternity. When I use the word, I mean a state of "is-ness". I mean literally, "is, was and always will be". The last two get looked at all the time, lol, but the IS-ness does not get considered, because what we currently Experience at any point is what we take as Reality. But our very own psychology admits to the Filter we Experience the world through. Given that filter, and the forceful push of certain filters, the Momentum mankind is dealing with is far more the invisible one that any physical one, and that invisible one is most often in "opposition" to what is required for Life.

Life grows life.

Death grows death.

What we feed, grows.

Life, death, momentum, force, none of which are visible to the naked eye. Yet all have direct effects on all we Experience.

Without Mind, there is no Experience. Without Mind, there is no Brain to Experience.

Just how Eye See it Smile


Lay off the weed. It makes you think you are an evolved being spouting great truths; you kid yourself into thinking you are sharing philosophical enlightenment. But if you look in a mirror, you will not see Kant, Kierkegaard, Locke, or Nietzsche. You will see Professor Irwin Corey.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Define Morality - Question by neologist
Relativity of morality - Discussion by InkRune
Killing through a dungeon - Question by satyesu
Morality. - Discussion by Logicus
Creationism in schools - Question by MORALeducation
Morality Concerning Prostitution - Discussion by brainspew
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/16/2021 at 03:23:30