echi
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Dec, 2005 11:45 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
If you give a hypothetical scenario to an animal (non-human), will it have the ability to reason it out?


Now, just how do you propose I go about doing that?
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Dec, 2005 11:46 pm
I don't propose you do it, echi. I am just trying to point out that you cannot give an animal a task that they have to reason out.
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Dec, 2005 11:52 pm
Sure you can, just not a hypothetical one. All animals are problem-solvers, some even tool-makers.
But I still don't get what the topic is, here.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Dec, 2005 11:54 pm
Well, I think we got a bit off topic. The topic is that Doktor S says he is a Satanist, and, as a Satanist he thinks he is a god and no one commits any selfless act.

Dok, did that cover it?
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:01 am
I did indeed say those things.

But the 'topic' was supposed to be discussion of autotheism in general.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:02 am
Cool. echi, Doktor S is the one that started this thread. He can probably steer you in the right direction.
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:03 am
The only selfless acts, as kicky pointed out, are those done without conscious thought (on instinct). But isn't human instinct what ya'll have been arguing against? ("Ya'll" being the ones promoting the idea of "selflessness")
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:06 am
I contend that conscious thought does not have to play a part. Conscious thought is only a gear in the machine.
Humans are driven by rational self interest on more levels than the conscious.
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:13 am
Dok--

The way I understood Kickycan's point is that the ego/self is only on the conscious level. Anything below that (more subtle) we have no direct awareness of and cannot consider it as part of the ego/self. So any action that is motivated by that unconscious level could be considered a "selfless act".
0 Replies
 
Im the other one
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:21 am
So....DoktorS

I was just wondering.....do you know Kundalini?

Hmm....and what does your name stand for?
0 Replies
 
Im the other one
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:22 am
Quote:
Nice going, guys. Discussing definitions definitely deflects from any need to discuss the original post. Now let's discuss the definition of 'distraction,' shall we?


Huh?

J/K

Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:24 am
Where did that quote come from?
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:26 am
Echi,
I disagree, because I fail to see a distinction between the conscious and unconscious in regards to 'self'
Everything we are, conscious and unconscious, is 'us'

I think the conscious is an extension of the unconscious, and can act as a motivator for conscious action.

So An act 'without a thought' is still being motivated by self interest. Imagine you fell out of a window. You would instinctively try to grab something, probably without thinking about it. What would be the motivator?
0 Replies
 
Im the other one
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:28 am
Quote:
Not at all, I'm actually quite adept at buisness and financial matters. But that isn't really relevant...


That's funny, he doesn't get it. Laughing

oh

ahem
0 Replies
 
Im the other one
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:28 am
Quote:
Not at all, I'm actually quite adept at buisness and financial matters. But that isn't really relevant...


That's funny, he doesn't get it. Laughing

oh

ahem

carry on
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:29 am
Ok, I'm the other one, when you put someone's quote out there, you need to put the userid of the one that quoted it.
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:32 am
itoo,

LoL..that you would attempt some sort of posture of intellectual superiority is amusing.
Do not try to interpret that which is beyond your means.
I understood full well what he was talking about, I am brilliant, after all.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:33 am
Ok, you guys keep losing me. I don't know whose quotes are being used and I don't know who is answering who.
0 Replies
 
Im the other one
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:38 am
Quote:
I have to agree with kickycan there. Kicky, we've been doing a lot of that lately.


Yeah, MA....KK's pretty smart. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Dec, 2005 12:39 am
Yes, he is. I love his sense of humor too.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Autotheism.
  3. » Page 7
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/31/2024 at 08:21:06