Total posts: 3,942
-->
@Theweakeredge
Again, this thread was supposed to be on moral authority, not necessarily that god even commanded people to kill gay people.
I'm not quite sure that theists see God, quite the same way they see human or natural law moral authorities.
Though I'm not 'really sure they see God as a moral authority either, since it seems a bit vague to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I don't imagine most people 'do know their blood type, I've forgotten mine, A something or other.
How was/is the fainting for you to deal with?
Something you had to have an active awareness of I mean?
Or it's symptoms or what to do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Leaned back it there's a backing, for instance, 'propped in some way, that if they go limp they collapse a short distance, rather than a long distance and a hard knock to the floor.
Doesn't really happen 'often.
This site says to only expect it in 2.5 percent of patients,
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
When drawing blood from some people, it can be useful to make sure they're seated in such a way that if they faint, they don't fall off the chair.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
What would you do if you were suddenly teleported to the past? For me the answer is simple. I'd kill myself. Before we get too hasty here, I'm not suicidal, I swear. I have too much nothing to do to die. But, if I were teleported to the past, in order to not alter a single event in history, I would find a remote area and discreetly kill myself. No matter what atrocity I could prevent, it's not worth messing with the timeline to prevent. As a result of preventing one tragedy who knows how many more could occur? Is this the right thing to do though?
Same as I do now, try to enjoy life.
Probably try to make use of future concepts, be it tech or theory in various fields, then fail at it as I don't actually know how much of it works.
But maybe get lucky, or just the gist of some ideas be enough.
Maybe only end up as 'mildly intelligent servant.
Maybe only have small success at minor business of original for the times concept.
Maybe become powerful/wealthy instead of lesser results.
But I'd 'try at success and ease, the more the better.
As for the timeline, well, I'm selfish, and place value and emphasis on myself.
Besides if the time line is so topsy turvy 'I get tossed to the past, things are probably screwed anyhow.
No, I think the right thing to do is to enjoy oneself, seek success.
. . .
Well, people have different values, and individuals have different values at different times.
Still, I'd say live and make of life in the past what one can.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Yes, often when it comes to entertainment, as I can't seem to recall information so vividly as 'experiencing it again. Be it written word, audio, video, one get's the picture.
Farther in the past, choices made, thoughts thunk, that too. Even embarrassing moments, times of failure, humiliation. . .
I suppose I like considering 'who I am, and 'how I came to be.
For me at times it's just fascination with oneself, narcissism, though not 'really 'more than others, ordinary really, but that doesn't matter to a person who likes viewing themself.
Sometimes in the considering, for 'me, it's the cautioning of the present, and future. Lightly given admonishments to not be prideful, or hateful, or 'try not to be such anyhow.
Though I can't say I 'try to remember the memories I find hateful, those just pop up 'now and 'then.
Those I mainly try to push away, suppress, let pass, fade.
Though I might take them for a moment, use them in a constructive manner against momentary or future hardship.
What one's survived in the past, or might accept to occur in the future. Or mitigate in the present of future.
Ah, rambling,
why is my mind prioritizing what is bad for me?
Just my opinion, and I might have heard it somewhere else.
But seems to me 'advantageous to recall what has hurt us in the past, been unpleasant, dangerous, horrid.
Advantageous to the point of natural instinct maybe, one wants to 'avoid such stimuli in the future after all, and if one doesn't remember that fire burns, that a plant gave one a rash for a month, that Evangelion and similar anime was depressing, one might experience such again. Might not avoid it, if they don't remember it.
Back to rambling though. . .
I suppose memory can be an interesting media, a book, a daydream. Even if one can't remember perfectly, daydreaming can be interesting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Yeah, it's me, Leaning.
Though I haven't 'left DDO, I felt a desire for conversation, and have been encouraged over time to come on over some.
So I came over.
Pinged you, so to speak because I noticed you'd been on a 'moment recently, and I have enjoyed talking with you in the past.
Well, I'm not a vegan either, but eating chicken eggs bother me, from time to time. Not 'all the time, or even 'most the time, just now and then, when I 'think of them other than as food.
. . .
True, I 'don't much like the friend function on websites, or even real life quite.
Dislike the idea of a friendship proving false, dislike it because I feel 'obligation when I've made such a declaration, besides, I figure actions speak well enough a relationship between people. More than 'words.
Maybe if this was older times somewhere, where people become sworn brothers or blood brothers, it'd make sense, like becoming business partners, with an oath, so to say. When people took oaths and promises, serious like, to the point individuals in mythology, often experienced woe in the keeping of promises made too quickly or thoughtlessly.
Oh and thanks for reminding me, I will search what it is to refresh my memory and it is all your fault :)
Aw. Well humans and our morbid curiosities at times.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Well, all I can say is I don't dislike Tradesecret, that I think a number of the things said by them are worthwhile or at least interesting, but as they talk of religion mainly, that I've ever seen, I don't follow them enough to know them well.
Perhaps they aren't as well spoken as I think, but as I might have said other times, I consider myself only 'mildly interested in religion, thus I only look in on the religious section 'now and 'then, and thus only see Tradesecret's posts 'now and 'then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I think that people have interests now and then, more or less, or more frequent hobbies.
Sometimes people only have an interest in such a subject for the novelty, but become bored of it in time, and stop looking at such videos.
Sometimes people even late in life, have such as a habit of their interest.
So long as you're not 'causing death/pain/destruction to others, eh.
So long as it does not make you unhappy, eh.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Well, all I can say of the origin/root of the word 'spell, is that I have no knowledge or education about it.
To be fair, Tradesecret 'says in his post that you referenced, that it is a "Quick answer."
"People can look at a book, evaluate its ideas and add these to ideas they already have or don't have."
As he says,
Seems only fair to me that his words be judged in the context that he 'gave them.
An argument against the Bible being held as some eldritch object of negative power by atheists, as though it's some piece of theistic devilry only capable of harm upon homosexuals.
Besides, the argument stands in my mind, Guns Don't Kill People.
One can argue against that statement, but to do so is semantics, ignoring the idea in the statement.
As he says people can 'look, 'evaluate, 'add to ideas,
I simply don't think his use of the word 'cause, falls into the nuance you attack him for.
Stoics for instance like to assert that outside influences need not have power/influence/cause upon the Stoic,
That in how one chooses to fortify oneself, perceive the outside is what matters.
And again, I don't 'disagree with your interpretation of 'cause, I simply think there's other viewpoints, nuance to it as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Whether it's the atheistic French Cult of Reason murdering everyone, 5 September 1793.
Or
Deistic Catholics murdering Protestants, August 24, 1572.
Atheistic Humanists of 2020,
or
Theistic Christians of 2020.
Is it 'really the books, or is it the people, and how they've 'taken them?
The other aspects of their environment, culture, history?
Personally I believe that the Bible is capable of offering great good to a person.
I can understand your opinion on it's 'causing, but I also understand people of a different opinion, and what they're getting at.
If a society is determined to respect and accept homosexuals, would not the people interpret the Bible in a fashion relative to their society?
Courses I don't disagree that media has 'an effect on culture.
Just difficult to gauge maybe.
Dungeons and Dragons (Joke)
. . .
Maybe explicit music results in more likely people picking up swearing habit.
But maybe one doesn't 'follow the other.
Perfectlike I mean.
. . .
If Bible has 'influence on person considering genocide evil, can the Bible be attributed to have 'caused this.
If Bible has 'influence on person considering genocide good, can the Bible be attributed to have 'caused this.
Seems 'bit specific, bit 'too much weight resting on 'one variable of human experience.
Rambling to self,
Is it an active 'agent that's required for certain points of view?
By that I mean some people's perspective on something not 'causing something.
Ice on the road would 'cause crashes I suppose, but again, that's just from a certain perspective.
Not sure 'disagreement is occurring, different perspective maybe, different pages.
After all, I don't think a Bible can be compared in 'causing as some items, such as road ice, or a torch being thrown into an oil painted house. .
Some murderers 'claim certain songs 'caused them to murder,
Created:
Posted in:
Interesting topic, though I can't think of anything worthwhile to say, yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I dunno, it's an argument in similar vein as 'guns don't kill people.
And I get where you're coming from, but I don't think such logic is 'strictly wrong.
Hammer's for instance don't kill people, it's people who use them as warhammers in medieval era, or in fits of domestic insanity modern era.
If a person was 'reasonable, not hateful or of murderous faith, the Bible would not be dangerous I think.
If a person was 'reasonable, not hateful or of murderous faith, then patriotism to country would not be dangerous perhaps.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
I thought it was interesting/enjoyable to read.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Just give the quote/passage/words,
And I'll give my opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
So other than that incident, what's your opinion of Quora?
Or instead rather, what particular bit of conversation are you casting about with this thread, I'm meaning.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Really just pointing out that god, especially of the old testament, really liked human death and suffering
I suppose one could view it that way.
But I think atheists make a mistake when they think it can 'only be viewed that way, and are then befuddled that theists 'are theists.
By that I'm just saying, lot of interpretations, takeaways, pieces.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Sooo. . .
Got negative answers, negative conversation, what?
Personally I rather like using the site, though just for a quick looksee at people's opinions of certain subjects.
Not that I always agree with them.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
What about it?
By that I mean, what's your question 'about it?
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
The Binding of Isaac,
While it's true that Isaac was not sacrificed in the end, and that it seems certain God never intended him to be sacrificed in the end. He 'did still tell Abraham to sacrifice his son.
Bible has numerous different versions and translations.
Though an atheist, I pretty much translate it however I want now, as I figure the original meaning to be lost, or at least very difficult to ascertain with certainty, so what matters to me is what perspective 'I find enlightening or useful.
The Binding of Isaac,
I can view as perhaps human and child sacrifice was practiced in antiquity, and this passage of the Bible was Gods way in telling his people he knows already that they fear, respect, and revere him to such an extent. That they 'never need commit human sacrifice again to 'prove their devotion to him.
For my idea of God would be 'displeased by human and child sacrifice.
But there's 'still the problem of a man being asked to do something we'd consider immoral. . .
Hm, perhaps can be resolved by God would not have asked the same thing of a person unwilling to commit such an act, but he chose a member of his people that 'would, that he might teach him and the rest of the people, otherwise.
Though other people have different interpretations I'm sure.
I'm still an atheist, but looking for meaning in the Bible is still interesting to me, from time to time.
Though my understanding of it, on a scale 1-10, I'd rate a 1.
Anyway, end point, is that the people who say their God would not ask them to kill you, could be correct from a certain point of view. Perhaps God would only ask a conflicted person to kill you, as a way of teaching them their perspective to be wrong.
Well,
That's one view anyway, another view would be people who believe that their God 'would tell them such, and that they 'should follow such.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
Aren't they already?
I go into a library, there's the kids section, the young adults section, and the adults section.
. . .
Though I admit there's no warning when a book in the adult section is going to contain sex or murder, 'near always one never finds those explicit subjects in the childeren or young adult section, that 'I remember.
Created:
-->
@Username
Well, I 'still think morality has no value.
There's nothing to be frightened of a daddy longlegs, it can't bite you. It's harmless.
Even if one becomes frightened by it, it 'still can't bite you, It's harmless.
Even if a human 'attributes and 'acts as though there's value, there is none.
Created:
-->
@Username
Hm, at a Google glance, I think you're right.
They seem pretty much the same to me, but maybe I'll think different after reading a bit.
Created:
-->
@Lunatic
My view of nihilism,
Hm, to 'me, nihilism is an intellectual conclusion that all these moralities and ethics that get bandied about by communities, societies, groups of people, are objectively empty.
Why is that. . .
I suppose it's because they look interchangeable upon humans to me, despite making claims to the contrary, despite claiming that 'their view is the right one.
I don't think that the killing of babies is wrong as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that being greedy is wrong as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that helping other people is good as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
I don't think that loving your fellow man is good as a moral truth,
Merely a subjective one.
That 'doesn't mean I'm going to go around killing babies, robbing other people, stop helping people, or stop trying to have good will towards others.
I'm a human after all.
More specifically I'm a certain 'type of human.
I was born with all the biological necessities for empathy, intelligence, understanding, love, patience.
I was raised and habituated in an environment that 'encouraged my current moral code. Same way a course of water runs over the land and cuts a trench into it, my moral code is fixed the same way. It's difficult for me to go a different path, than the one I'm set upon.
There's human born with their brains wired up a different way,
Humans raised in different environments, that give rise to perceptions and actions, secularly recognized as negative.
And there's humans sometimes who suffer brain damage, such as Phineas Gage, and whose perceptions and actions change.
I suppose I might 'still encounter some experience in my life that changes me physically or mentally.
But until then, I don't have the requirements to not act morally, as it's currently recognized.
Returning to the point though,
. . .
Nihilism is an intellectual rejection of concrete meaning/morality as they are commonly recognized.
Which is not very healthy, 'only in itself I'd say.
I think humans live on meaning,
Which is why nihilism is an uncommon label for one to put upon oneself.
It really doesn't say much for what values a person chooses to live by.
What subjective goals and aspirations they possess.
Instead people pick up monikers such as Stoic, Existentialist, Absurdist, these different labels, and 'many others, speak of how a person chooses to respond to that intellectual conclusion of nihilism.
Myself, I'm a bit bitter about it all, and call myself a nihilist out of irritation, a bit of wallowing in my grief for what I view as lost.
But even those labels such as Stoic, Existentialist, Absurdist.
'Still leave a lot to be explained of what that person is, or how they act.
So they pick up others such as,
Democrat, Republican.
Christian, Atheist.
Environmentalist.
Egoist, Altruist.
American, German.
The list goes on, though there's usually context into which when speaks of such labels.
I'm rambling a fair bit.
To my idea of nihilism, there's no intrinsic meaning to be found in existence.
No way that things 'must be morally speaking.
We're all humans sitting at a game of Life, or chess, Candyland, or Risk.
There's nothing really that says we 'have to play, or 'must follow 'these or 'those rules.
The games were invented by past humans and ourselves,
Anything sacred in the rules only exists my those wills,
And they can bend, or break, or be abandoned.
And all that will matter is the moment, those individual meanings that people give to it.
"Illusions, vagaries of perception. Temporary constructs of a human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose."
Which is why God is such a comfort at times to some people I imagine, for human's artificial actions and meanings are still not grounded.
Still not sufficient.
But we are human, and we endure, or not.
Hm, too much incoherent babbling for my liking, especially at the end.
As I've said, my understanding of nihilism is a self taught and primitive homebrew.
I'm willing enough to discuss it with other people,
Helps me understand my stance, sometimes change it.
But my understanding of it is still yet shallow and tangled.
Created:
-->
@BearMan
I 'want to stop focusing on the argument so much, and start spouting off ad hominems.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
Well, I consider myself a nihilist, so I doubt you'll get one from me.
. . .
Though I suppose there are nihilists other than me, with more thought out explanations for their behavior and beliefs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
Well, what type of argument/logic 'would you find convincing?
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Perhaps not 'unequal, but the individual 'losing a lot of their rights.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
Mind you, nihilistic thinking aside, I 'still consider murder and incest to be wrong.
Justifying things just becomes complicated, because of context and tiny variables.
A tap to the shoulder, a punch, a touch to an area, a middle finger, an eye roll.
Depending on context are good, bad, somewhat this or other.
Seems to me so many variables and nuances in life, I'm not 'too concerned with dissecting it, so much, sometimes.
"I know that I know nothing"
Age old wisdom, and an idea that I 'try to keep to mind in life, less I become too preachy or pretentious with what I think I know.
Still, I like talking at times.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
The only solution I see is governmental force and an organization of 'rights different than the one's 'I like here in 2020 USA.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
Sorry for the bio and long winded winding tangential rambling post, but feels easiest way to me, for me to explain my point of view.
And all just my opinion, even if I state it forcefully here or there.
I like attaching the labels Nihilist, Hedonist, Materialist to myself.
Third child of four, I grew up in a lower middle class household, was lightly raised as a Christian.
I'd characterize my mother as a devout Christian Neutral Good as she's the type of person to do what is seen by society as right simply because she believes it to be right. An odd type of person who if she found $100.00 on the ground in a store aisle would turn it into the stores lost and found (True story)
My father as more of a Chaotic Neutral in an odd circumstance where he was employed as a teacher for some 15ish years before becoming a prison guard. Yet despite belonging to lawful professions I'd call them, is the type of person to 'step on $100.00 so that other people can't see it, to show R rated magazines and movies to his kids when their mother wasn't around, to ignore Do Not Trespass signs, drive without a seatbelt, and so on.
As I said my Christian indoctrination was light, and so I came to decide atheism was more logical to me over time.
Though this had a problem.
I was 'terribly bothered over the idea of myself not existing someday.
I was somewhat bothered by the implications of ethics and morality.
Now I'm mostly calloused to both those implications.
But even with a nihilistic conclusion, I'm still human, still have my habits.
I follow and believe somewhat in my upbringings morality and ethics because it makes me happy, because it feels right, because certain logical paths follow by it's logic.
I don't think that murder or incest is objectively right or wrong, because I think the term objectively is in truth meaningless.
'But,
We we don't mean objectively when we 'say objective, we mean according to what we 'are.
What we are being the nature and nurture of humans.
We possess a capability to naturally come to appreciate empathy and logic,
We've formed a society that encourages such,
We speak by 'objectively, 'subjectively of our cultural norms.
When I say murder or incest is wrong, I am in a way preforming double speak.
For what might I become if I were rich and powerful,
Or even poor and weak,
If the 'justification came to mind?
Though they were books written 'against such thinking,
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky
and
The Sea Wolf by Jack London
Had immense influence on me, because they were thoughts and opinions I had already formed, but in the books were given prose.
Anyway, the point being that to my mind, perhaps morality does not exist, only secular ethics.
Murder is wrong because I don't like murder.
It is wrong to society, because society does not like murder.
In a 'general sort of phrasing anyhow, let's not nitpick on exceptions.
Same with incest.
. . .
Ach, but this is again the same answer I gave before, circular, without actually making effort to explain 'why such logic is held.
. . .
. . .
Perhaps,
Haidt’s “social intuitionist model” thus posits that “moral judgment is caused by quick moral intuitions and is followed (when needed) by slow, ex post facto moral reasoning”
Perhaps,
Maslow's Hierarchy,
Physical Needs and Safety, are met by a functional society, where we encourage behavior and norms which either in practice or appearance 'cause this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
I then believe our laws are founded on the principle of intersubjectivism, in that things are wrong because your community claims it is, however, for personal reasons.
Well then it's easy for one to say that incest is morally unacceptable in certain communities because certain communities claim it is.
Though that's circular.
And of course the community would 'still have reasons for why they 'hold such a presupposition.
But if your yardstick for why anything is right or wrong is personal reasons, I somehow feel doubtful that a reason could be suggested that you would not find arbitrary. And thus no matter what I suggest, it 'seems to me that you would say the reason could be mitigated or only matters in x circumstance. Thus you will always arrive at the conclusion that incest is not morally wrong.
But perhaps my view of you and the question is mistaken.
I'm still not sure what type of argument would convince you that incest is morally wrong though.
Short answer that seems likely to me, is that incest is probable to be harmful in certain circumstances.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
@Juice
I'd agree with consent and genetic problems being two reasons reasons.
Why is 'anything morally acceptable or unacceptable?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
dream within a dream within a nightmare
I like it except for the middle part, feels a bit more like skipping abrupt than intentional, but again I say, I like the rest of it.
Well, maybe like middle part too, I'm unsure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
So I Googled this because I didn't know what it was about, but =/= means "Not equal to" then?
Well, I suppose that atheists 'doesn't equal 'creed any more than 'theist equals 'creed.
It's just another identifier to be used in tandem with other identifiers, definitions, context and so on.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not against communities of people instituting employment of last resort as AddledBrain put it.
If it proves advantageous, other communities should follow, But I dislike big government being involved in matters that citizens 'ought be able to fix themselves.
I 'really think that removing the autonomy, power, and identity of states over time was a mistake.
Pandemic - Makes sense for government to 'offer some guidance.
Hurricane - Makes sense for government to 'offer some guidance.
Flood - Makes sense for government to 'offer some guidance.
Famine - Makes sense for government to 'offer some guidance.
Immigration, well, now that states identities and laws are mixed so much, states 'have to get involved in other states business, and though it goes against my grain, it makes sense for big government to have an active role in controlling immigration, and stopping illegal immigration.
Which ruins much of the narrative of local right, that I like.
Or rather shows how corrupt 'I think it has become.
Rambling,
Anyway, I'm not against communities of people instituting employment of last resort as AddledBrain put it.
Created:
Posted in:
Personally I'd say Covid19 stole the election from Trump, and really, no matter 'how he would have tried to deal with it, Democrats would have still weaponized it and put the blame on Trump, I 'suspect, but maybe wrong suspicion.
I'd imagine if Covid19 hadn't popped up, Trump would have won.
Created:
I'd agree that Biden not having been 'confirmed to have won yet, to be the delay.
Doubtful about the China stuff though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Egalitarianism is a bit abstract/scattered in meaning/esoteric for my easy understanding.
When applied to objects, lesser animals, plants.
Though it's sad, and I suspect wrong, I subscribe a fair bit to tribalism I think.
A mix of practicality, tradition, progression, and tradition.
Created:
Posted in:
Trump is hardly Hitler.
All I see Trump doing is playing politics, which I don't really care for, but people who rabidly hate him, seem incapable of realizing that's what politicians do.
Take that absurd Russian interfering and collusion.
As if America doesn't literally assassinate leaders of countries we don't like, and strong arm countries for our own interests.
Russia posts a few Pro Trump posts on message boards and suddenly the left is in tears.
Though I didn't care for 'how Trump went about fighting illegal immigration,
Bah, what was the left doing to address the issue, other than criticizing Trump.
Just saying let's accept every single criminal who illegally lives in our borders, heck let's let them have drivers licenses, what?
To me Trump 'is the lesser of two evils.
Rather than Biden, who advocates dismantling citizens right to bear arms, admittedly by degrees slowly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Juice
I'm registered as an Independent.
Though I do like the right to own guns.
Dislike illegal immigration.
Dislike the idea of people getting sex change operations in the military.
Take pride in being an American.
Still admire religion, and accept others practice of it, though more and less.
Dislike abortion, though I prefer avoiding the issue.
Support the police.
Dislike drugs.
Have mixed feelings on same sex marriage.
Have mixed feelings on gambling.
Mixed opinion about censorship.
I 'like tradition often I'd say.
Though it often conflicts with myself liking 'freedom.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Looked like a close race to me, in which Trump managed to retain an impressive amount of support.
Impressive of Trump, 'I'd think, even if a loss.
Assuming that he loses anyway, which seems likely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
So yeah, I tried to debate on Twitter. It didn't end up well
That's rough, man.
Created:
Posted in:
I have to wonder, why presidential elections are so close, whatever happened to landslide victories?
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
You need influence to win, I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Ever watched film Moneyball (2011)?
Created: