Modern Society and the Value of our Values

Frank Apisa wrote:

Could you flesh this out a bit, Craven, because I see it to be at the crux of what little disagreement still remains between us on this isse.

Why would one "have to" take the facts at hand and make a decision?

I don't recall saying that one would have to. If I did I was wrong. I do think it's impossible not to make a decision and I'll flesh it out below.

Frank Apisa wrote:

And why must the decision be "yea" or "nay>"

Why can't it be "too close to call?"

This is certainly something I didn't say. "too close to call" IS a decision. There's nothing wrong with that but I do think that by some criteria all things can be determined to be "too close to call".

Frank Apisa wrote:

In an earlier post, you used the term "fence sitting." I left it be because I really don't want to get into an agument on this -- but why is someone saying "I don't know -- and there is not enough evidence for me to make a meaningful guess (or estimate)" not being decisive?

I guess being an agnostic makes fence sitting a term with a little more negative connotation than for me.

I do not think fence sitting is bad all the time. Heck I can think of many situations where being on top of a fence is much better than on either side.

Frank Apisa wrote:

I think it is very decisive -- and incidentially, I think it is more logical than choosing one way or the other if one truly does not see a reasonable preponderance of evidence in one direction or the other.

I agree. While I think that there is a preponderance of evidence my initial point is that if absolute certainty is the criteria then we have to rule neutral with anything. But if preponderance of evidence is the criteria I have no further qualm.

Frank Apisa wrote:

So talk to me a bit about this. Maybe you will say something that will change my mind -- and make either "Yes there is a God" or "NO, there are no gods" more reasonable for me than "Beats the Hell out of me!"

I doubt that. Simply because of how rare it is for someone to say a few words and instantly change beliefs of this nature. Plus, it was not my intention.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
Yup, and my point was that all three are acceptable in and of themselves. I might question the judgement of some positions but do not think the fact that it's not an open and shut case should preclude a yea or nay.

No, it does not preclude one -- and I acknowledge that unconditionally. But because a "yea" or "nay" is not precluded, does not mean choosing one or the other makes more sense than "Too close to call."

Yup, that's what I meant by "all three are acceptable in and of themselves".

0 Replies

Craven, craven, craven;
That last post was a craven image of your former self; your abandoning ship; selling the farm!

Oh yes, by the way, you misconstrued my allusion to television; I was not trying to point out how amusing the antics of the "washed and holy" are, I was refering to the replacement of one "mind control" system by another.
And I must add, that I think television to be by far the superior as it has no distracting ethical delusions attached.

0 Replies

Terry wrote:

twyvel wrote:
What matters is that "I" am a sentient being who has determined that there are two absolute values in life:

1. Do not cause unnecessary pain to any other being.

2. Love and educate your children.

Everything else is optional, but I suspect that if there is a supreme deity and a final judgment or reincarnation of souls, extra points will be given to those who loved unconditionally and voluntarily aided others in their journey through life.

Your first point seems reasonable, however your second point it's not. You do have to educate your children but not love them TOO MUCH, that leads to NEPOTISM, I dunno if is a issue in USA but here in Mexico that's one of the biggest problems down here. Nepotism also helped screw many goverments, what makes you think your children is more important than another one. In my opinion people who practice love TOO MUCH for their children are indeed people who also practice Nepotism, maybe a little love won't be wrong. But it's extremely bad to put your children above all, mainly because it causes a lot of damage to society. In Mexico it happens that to assure the success of their own kids parents who are in the goverment give them a job there, rather to give it to a person who can actually do a good job.

0 Replies

yes Dux; one must be careful to avoid excess, where inappropriate; for example confusing loving one's children with rampant nepotism!

0 Replies

Before my opinion a bout nepotism & the love's for one's child offends anybody, i'm rather say i'm sorry, i maybe got a little carried away, mainly cause it's a big issue here, so it bothers me a lot, since that's a main reason why the few mexicans who do get to be something often leave the country, since this Nepotism doesn't allow them to get a good job here. Anyway, it's just an opinion from somebody who lives in a country ruled by families who practice nepotism.

0 Replies

Dux wrote:

In my opinion, Nietszche found 4 of the 5 elemental values: Comprehension, Loneliness, Perpicacity & Bravery, the other one I believe it is Selfishness

Are these values of your own devising or are you quoting a venerable philosophy? I find your family of elemental values interesting and strange. If this is how you carve up the cake of fundamental motivations, I'd love to hear more. What does each stand for, and what 'valuables' belong to each? Do they belong together in a hierarchy, or do we each have our own characteristic favourites?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

There are no gods, no goddesses. Therefore, any "values" are human constructs, and the question of cui bono arises.

If there are no gods, does this mean that all values are simply human 'constructs'? Yes and no. Yes, in as much as our values originate in the life and thought of human beings rather than in the will or mind of a god. But no - they are not constructs in the sense of 'mental' and arbitrary, simply the product of choice or whim - with no real force to make us feel and act, struggle, protect, defend and mourne.

This is what the advocates of the nihilism of total emptiness suggest - that nothing has value anymore because there's no cosmic spectator to grant value to things. In Nietzsche's account he saw this experience as a temporary phase (a kind of cultural depression). Not a logical conclusion from which there is no escape. There is PLENTY that we 'always already' value, that only needs to be recognised, understood and formulated socially.

Where choice comes in is not in 'inventing' values, but in weighing the values that we already live by and legislate by. The oracle of Delphi ("Know thyself") and good old Socrates ("What is happiness?", and the "unconsidered life is not worth living").

Terry wrote:

(some) values are universal: we value that which maximizes our chances for survival, reproduction, and happiness. All human cultures value family ties and tribal loyalty with rules for distribution of resources and interactions between people (resolution of conflict, permissible sex, distinction between murder and lawful killing, etc.) Children, comfortable homes, good food, wealth/status, and avoidance of pain are valued with very few exceptions.

True. The creative bit is evaluating: In particular, are there any values that are essential for health and happiness whcih are sytematically neglected in modern cultures way of life?

0 Replies

Craven

I enjoyed our discussion -- and I appreciate the information you shared.

That is the first substantive talk we've had in a long, long time. In fact, you were in Brazil the last time we traded ideas and impressions. Hope it doesn't take a long time to happen again.

You obviously are an atheists for good and compelling reasons -- and I "got" the explanations you gave for where you are and how you got there.

I respect your postion -- just as I respect the position of people who have examined the evidence available and come down on the other side of that philosophic coin.

I have taken the agnostic avenue after my examination of the evidence -- and I am comfortable with my choice. I'm delighted that you see my choice to be a function of much study and contemplation (as you and the theists have done) and not as some kind of cop-out or lack of spine to make a dicision. Most people who know me -- even if just on the Internet -- don't consider me to be a shrinking violet or someone afraid to speak his mind.

My guess is if I ever do see enough evidence to throw me into one camp or the other -- I will immediately become a large pain-in-the-ass as an advocate and apologist for that side. (But I truly don't expect that to happen.)

You mentioned that you went from theist to agnostic to atheist.

I took a different route -- going fom theist to atheist to agnostic.

Too bad so many of us start out as theists. Too bad kids are routinely taught the kinds of things kids are routinely taught in our society.

I think we agnostics and atheists can work together to help guard against the kinds of excesses too much theism can bring to a society -- and do so while still respecting the sensibilities and rights of theists.

FINAL THOUGHT: This is a great forum - and you should be very, very proud of what you have created. My compliments to the people helping you make it great.

I pledge to pay it its proper respect by not engaging in personal attacks. (I knowI knowI've already screwed up a couple of times, butI promise!)

I may, however, from time to time, use one of those devices you suggested: "The post was really dumb" as opposed to: "Man, you are dumb!"

0 Replies

Punkinhead, you're absolutely wrong . . . but hey, most of you are . . .

0 Replies

Frank, Amen! Wink

c.i.

0 Replies

Frank,

Like I said, straddling a fence can be smarter than coming down on either side in more situations than I can name.

There is no shame in that. People like to paint out world in two colors (like a yes or no) when there are many more options than that.

Dux,

People who never lived in places where nepotism is not a bane will not get it. I have lived in Brazil, for example, where an entire town only employed family members of the mayor and the mayor defended nepotism openly.

Don't worry about the criticisms you received here, it is partly bourne of ignorance of the dangers nepotism poses to a society.

0 Replies

First a view of my values, since this is what the thread is about:

Comprehenssion.- it's something everbody needs, & by that i mean comprehenssion of the world & of himself or herself, & by that you can start to have a different view of the world

Loneliness.- obviously I don't practice this value yet, cause I'm only gonna practice when I'll be more mature, wise & when I won't miss talking to other people. But the good thing a bout loneliness is that it reveals a whole new world at you, your own world that sometimes we don't pay attention to.

Perpicacity.- it's elemental to evolve into new forms, perspicacity is why new ideas start flowing through our brain, it's an elemental value to me.

Bravery.- you can't handle the truth if you are not brave, cause truth is so complicated & sometimes harsh, however it is never soft & gentle. If you are not brave you'll leave the quest because of fear

Selfishness.- I believe that selfishness helps you know yourself, helps you undertsand your own mysteries, & it helps to understand the things around you once you learn almost everything about yourself.

Btw, PumpkinHead, this values are my invention, however it was a coincidence that when I read "Beyond Good & Evil" of Friedrich Nietszche, he wrote that those where the values of the free spirits, in other words of the ones who thought like him. Btw, this is in the 9th part, chapter 284, of Beyond Good & Evil. & the last one was part of my values before i read that book. Smile

On other matters, Craven here it is as bad there, the only waay you can get to best public high school in Cancun(Bachilleres), is to have family that works there, it doesn't matter if you had a 9.9 in the exam, they won't let you in unless you go to SEyC in Chetumal, it totally sucks, Nepotism is one of sociesties big issues

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Punkinhead, you're absolutely wrong . . . but hey, most of you are . . .

That's a very tedious reply

Besides, who is the "you" you refered to? Are you the transcendent being everyone has been discussing?

0 Replies

Dux, you mention lonliness as a elemental value. What about relatedness? Look how much time and energy are taken up in making and maintaing CONTACT with others... this forum being an example. This value would appear to be missing.

Lonliness has negative connoations in english (did i read somewhere that your 1st langauge is Spanish?). Still, I think I know what you mean - getting away from the social hubbub... often in woods and on hilltops. Solitude is the word that comes to mind. Is this what you mean or is it something else?

Too much solitude becomes lonliness. Too much contact leaves you stretched out inside...

0 Replies

PumpkinHead wrote:

Dux, you mention lonliness as a elemental value. What about relatedness? Look how much time and energy are taken up in making and maintaing CONTACT with others... this forum being an example. This value would appear to be missing.

Lonliness has negative connoations in english (did i read somewhere that your 1st langauge is Spanish?). Still, I think I know what you mean - getting away from the social hubbub... often in woods and on hilltops. Solitude is the word that comes to mind. Is this what you mean or is it something else?

Too much solitude becomes lonliness. Too much contact leaves you stretched out inside...

Loneliness is an elemental value to me, however it's the last one i'll be able to use, cause i still need to learn from other people, like i said, when i'm about 45-50 years old, i'll go to the country to write, think & learn other things, that's why it's elemental. However, first I gotta have the other values aplied in my life in the best way possible, & that's what i'll do in the next 30-35 years, the good thing is that I know at an early age my values.

& yes PumpkinHead, spanish is my first language.

0 Replies

Will you permit me to interrogate you a bit further on this?

I understand that these are personal values - they are what strikes you as most important (or are these the elemental values of humanity?)

If they are yours, then why do you regared loneliness to be more elemental than relatedness? Is it because you think that relatedness can be outgrown?

0 Replies

PumpkinHead wrote:

Setanta wrote:
Punkinhead, you're absolutely wrong . . . but hey, most of you are . . .

That's a very tedious reply

Besides, who is the "you" you refered to? Are you the transcendent being everyone has been discussing?

Your lack of a sense of how ridiculous your self-importance truly appears is tedious. Get a sense of proportion, stop sitting in majesterial judgment of matters of personal opinion--stop trying to be the transcendent being yourself--and you'll greatly relieve the tedium you've brought on yourself.

Get a sense of humor first and foremost. Then get a grip.

0 Replies

Quote:

Get a sense of proportion, stop sitting in majesterial judgment of matters of personal opinion

If you read the posts I've been making, you'll see all i've done for the most part is ask questions. Because I'm interested in what others have to say about something I'm interested in. Its you that is breaking in with what appears like magisterial judgments. Look at your sole contribution:

Quote:

PumpkinHead, you're absolutely wrong, but most of you are..."

Move on to somehing that interests you more, or onto something you want to give an opinion on

0 Replies

Hey, yo, PumpkinHead:

Before you and Setanta set times for a duel; please understand he's a wonderul, subtle member here.

Thanks :wink: .

0 Replies

Kiss, Kiss, darlin' . . .

I will defend to electronic death my right to find anything posted in these fora to be silly or pompous . . .

0 Replies

Modern Society and the Value of our Values

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know