Mufungo said:

So what time have you spent trying to understand why and how Droz came to his conclusions before making your judgments here?

---

Judgments about what? Did I comment on the personal nature of Droz, calling him good or bad? What exactly is your question?

Jimtown said:

You should be living good,it should never be a conscious thought. Something along that train of thought anyway.

---

Icelander said:

Perhaps this sort of behaviour could be based on a conditioned response that had been earlier shaped by positive reinforcement (i.e. good emotions), but does that really matter or reduce the selflessness of the deed at the time they're risking their life with no guarantee they'll pull through?

It does reduce the selflessness. To give ones life for another one must feel that it is a "good" or "right" act and therefore be in accord with ones ethics. Following ones personal ethics gives one a feeling of rightness, goodness and personal satisfaction for one reason or another.

Again there is no selfless act. We always act in our own best interests first and formost whether it benefits others or not. This is our nature.

---

MushroomTrip said:

Jimtown said:

You should be living good,it should never be a conscious thought. Something along that train of thought anyway.

---

How can one know what one should do, since the thought exists only in the unconscious? Knowing happens in the presence of consciousness.

---

Through meditation and enlightenment?

I'm in way over my head here but I read that somewhere. I'm positive about that, at least.

It's possible that I read Buddha said you could never do a completely selfless deed. Like there was always some shred of your existence that had the thought of some benefit coming your way from a good deed,be it emotional or otherwise.

Maybe that's it alike what I think Icelander said...

MushroomTrip said:

Mufungo said:

So what time have you spent trying to understand why and how Droz came to his conclusions before making your judgments here?

---

Judgments about what? Did I comment on the personal nature of Droz, calling him good or bad? What exactly is your question?

---

You quoted Droz and then said "It's funny that some people think it's so easy. Maybe if they would spend more time trying to understand why and how some things happen, they won't rush into judging so superficially."

The two observations a) that some people think it's so easy; and b) that they have rushed into making a superficial judgment due to not spending enough time trying to understand why and how things happen, both seem like judgments you had made, were they not? 

What made it seem like your words were in reference to Droz was that you said them after quoting Droz directly. If your words were not in reference to Droz, then why else did you quote him?

So my question was simply to ask how much time you spent in order to arrive at your judgments (as stated above), because it seemed that you were not spending enough time trying to understand why and how Droz said what he said before rushing in to judge so superficially..


If my understanding of your post was not correct, then how did you intend for your post to be understood?

Jimtown said:

Through meditation and enlightenment?

I'm in way over my head here but I read that somewhere. I'm positive about that, at least.

It's possible that I read Buddha said you could never do a completely selfless deed. Like there was always some shred of your existence that had the thought of some benefit coming your way from a good deed,be it emotional or otherwise.

Maybe that's it alike what I think Icelander said...

---

Quote:

So my question was simply to ask how much time you spent in order to arrive at your judgments (as stated above), because it seemed that you were not spending enough time trying to understand why and how Droz said what he said before rushing in to judge so superficially..

---

What made you think that I didn't take enough time to think about the meaning of Droz's post?

The reason why I said that it isn't that simple is because everything has a deeper explanation, and the reasons why lies and hate exist are very complex. Hate for example is merely a defense mechanism, people that hate do it because they think this hate will somehow protect them from dangers. It is a reaction based in fear and lack of understanding that there are more efficient and healthy ways in which one can protect themselves against the things that threaten their physical of mental integrity. Taking this to consideration, would you say that lack of understanding is bad? If yes, then I'd only have to assume that you might think that mentally retarded people are pure evil because they can't comprehend even a larger part of reality.
I am also curious if Droz (and you too if you share his opinions) thinks that labeling someone as being bad because they hate actually helps the situation or produces a change within the persons who hate.
Another thing I am curious about is how many people who share Droz's beliefs would lie about their drug usage, and if they would have the idea they've done something bad.

All of these and much more is making me think that Droz didn't take enough time to think before jumping to conclusions.

Now regarding me making judgments about Droz's personal nature, you couldn't be more wrong. Just because I have the ability to form an opinion about his actions and ideas, it doesn't mean that I am making an appreciation regarding his personality, since these two things hardly have anything to do with each other. If I were to judge his character as a result of his posts, I'd do the same logic fallacy that he did in his post.

MushroomTrip said:

Quote:

So my question was simply to ask how much time you spent in order to arrive at your judgments (as stated above), because it seemed that you were not spending enough time trying to understand why and how Droz said what he said before rushing in to judge so superficially..

---

What made you think that I didn't take enough time to think about the meaning of Droz's post?

---

Quote:

Relatively yes. Good people IMO, are basically less neurotic then the average. They know and admit to their imperfections and limitations and choose not to blame others for them. They are open about being afraid yet have the courage to challenge those fears when possible. They look to love and good will as a benchmark knowing they will never be perfect and accepting that. They seek inner joy rather than material wealth or control knowing full well they are temporary and cannot stave off impermanence with power over others or the environment. They are basically rational hedonists and like to love and cuddle and have lots of good passionate relationships and passionate non guilt ridden sex.

---

OrgoneConclusion said:

A good person never takes another plant or animal life to ensure his/her survival.

---

Mufungo said:

Icelander said:

No such person exists. We always benefit, if only emotionally from our "selfless" deeds. If you did not think these deeds were "good" and made you feel good you would never consider them.

---

What about people who spontaneously act to help another person without time for fore-thought but with real possibility of mortal danger to themselves? Perhaps this sort of behaviour could be based on a conditioned response that had been earlier shaped by positive reinforcement (i.e. good emotions), but does that really matter or reduce the selflessness of the deed at the time they're risking their life with no guarantee they'll pull through?

---