Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: deCypher]
    #8859614 - 09/01/08 10:13 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

The Cypher said:
Nowhere have I implied that guilt caused by authority is any less real than other kinds of guilt; only that I feel the latter kind is a healthier foundation to base one's actions own than the latter.




There's only one guilt - guilt doesn't arise from and cannot be caused by external situations. The experience of being guilty is solely the product of one's internal processes. It isn't caused by authority.

Quote:


Technically, this is correct--the individual will always have a "choice" to choose to live by a dogma.  But in practice, this is almost never true.  Try being raised in a overly conservative religious family where atheism is strictly frowned upon, or in a fundamentalist Muslim society, and see how well you, as an impressionable young kid, can refrain from having moral beliefs and positions imposed upon you. This is a clear argument for the power of beliefs imposed through the power of an institution like the Church or through the constant dogmatism of a religious family.




I fail to see how this conclusion is based upon anything other than your own personal experience. How are you capable of identifying whether or not other individuals have exercised their ability to choose? You point towards the obvious trends of "their" continuing to adhere to the faith of "their" family and relative environment (I'm referring to them as "they" because the idea of these people is nothing more than an abstraction that you've created), but yet there is no grounds from which to place a conclusion that they haven't made a choice.

In a similar manner, are individuals who are driving vehicles through the city streets not making a choice because they are all adhering to the "institutionalized" set of rules of the road, such as red light/green light - stop/go, that was imposed upon them? As someone who would speed in situations that I knew was safe and per the conditions of the road, despite the signs stating a speed limit that was lower, I didn't feel guilty about it, even after getting pulled over a couple times. :smirk: Seriously, though, there's no basis to suggest that people are not making choices through all of this.

Quote:


A voluntary choice to avoid guilt is even worse than the mere inability to feel guilt, IMO. If you can choose not to feel remorse after raping a young child, this shows that you could care less for human emotions--and this is correspondingly why premeditated murder is treated as a worse crime in our society than violence in the heat of passion.  The former shows cool, collected calmness that can override emotion in favor of amoral intellect, and is seen as worse than the other that merely demonstrates fallibility to our human emotions.




The impression I gain from this statement is that there is an underlying fear present that, if it were not for the experience of guilt and shame to arise when something "bad" is being considered to be done or has, in fact, been done, then there would be nothing to stop someone resorting to violence and evil and that anyone who critically analyzes the ways in which their mind creates their experience of reality and the ways in which they act and realizes that there are more efficient and pleasant ways to live their life and live a life of not inflicting suffering upon others (or themselves, through shitty emotions like shame and guilt) is simply an inhuman killing machine. :lol:

I think this fear simply results from individuals who were raised by people who held this viewpoint and acted accordingly in raising them. If those people couldn't control their children by making them feel bad about doing something that they think is "wrong", then what control would they have? None, because people don't control the lives of others, but can only influence them. Without that illusion of control though, people tend to feel afraid that something could go wrong (since they aren't controlling what happens), so they would employ methods of inflicting suffering on their children by way of negative emotions, which plays into the instinctual fight vs. flight response.

Essentially, guilt and shame are simply the end result in the manipulative means that others seek to use for them to feel more in control of reality. Choosing to succumb to inflicting suffering upon oneself (by choosing to experience guilt) to perpetuate this flawed mode of decision-making because others feel it is more forgivable (as it gives them a sense of control or the feeling that it is okay to not assume personal responsibility because it is "human") is infinitely worse than making conscious decisions without inflicting suffering upon yourself.
We aren't dogs wearing shock collars, and dogs wouldn't wear them either if people understood how to effectively interact with them to create a healthy relationship and a common understanding that isn't centered around dominance-assertion and suffering experiences. :grin:

Quote:


Because serial killers such as Ted Bundy are the main type of people that you'll find who will espouse your view that guilt is wholly unnecessary.




Do you have a link to your poll, or are you willing to admit that you really don't know what you're talking about and you're only alluding to horrible examples that only relate to what was being said due to a fundamental misunderstanding of what was being said? :strokebeard:

Quote:


Try telling your closest friends and family that you don't feel guilt, and then watch their subsequent looks of concern for your amorality.





I thought how others feel about how and when you should feel guilty was not a healthy foundation to base one's actions? :muahaha:


Quote:


I challenge you to give me a good reason for why you should act morally if you don't possess guilt, besides from a vaguely meaningless "making rational decisions, based of the pros and cons that specifically apply to different circumstances."




A.) I'm a sentient living being that has an experience of reality. B.) Other aspects of reality are either similar entities with an experience of reality, or part of the environment that sustains and produces living entities having experiences of reality. C.) Acting in a way that inflicts suffering, directly on other living beings or indirectly through making their environment less conducive to an experience without suffering or freedom, is not a preferred course to take because, not only am I capable of empathy and would not want others or myself to have to be subjected to that, they are also aspects of the same environment as I am, and, inevitably, in some way or another, it would only cause harm to myself.

Thanks for the challenge, although I really wouldn't call it that. :pimp3:

Quote:


One needs a better motivation for morality than simply "I shouldn't kill because I could get caught," which is inevitably what a viewpoint based solely on rationalism leads to.




Inevitably? :muahaha: You're flat out wrong, bud.


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 3 years, 25 days
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: adrug]
    #8859721 - 09/01/08 10:45 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

adrug said:
Maybe you've never felt guilty before or just aren't a very emotional person in general




This is not a discussion about my personal nature, and how often I feel (or don't feel) guilt doesn't mean anything to the topic in discussion. Regardless of how I control my emotions, the fact that shame and guilt are dysfunctional feelings is still standing.

Quote:

but guilt is usually not something that people decide to feel. Guilt comes naturally when you have a set of moral values that were ingrained into you as a child.




No, guilt doesn't come naturally, unless, somehow, you can prove that human beings are predestined to feel guilt when dealing with "moral" values. If it was so, then it would mean that when we're born we already have a set of moral standards and that when we break them we "naturally" start feeling guilty. :lol:

Quote:

Obviously, as we grow up, some of us are able to look past these imposed moral values using logic and rationality, but that doesn't mean that everyone has that capability. Even being a logical and rational person is not a guarantee against being overwhelmed by emotions like guilt.




With the risk of repeating myself, the subject in discussion was not about how many people can control their emotions and how effective, but about how harmless these irrational emotions are to the self, to the others, and how much they slow down real understanding and communication between people. How much they keep of reaching our fullest potential, which, in exchange, will create constructive emotions such as love, acceptance, understanding, deep feelings of inter-connection and happinees. :heart:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleadrug

Registered: 02/04/03
Posts: 15,800
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #8859910 - 09/01/08 11:22 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
Quote:

adrug said:
Quote:

but guilt is usually not something that people decide to feel. Guilt comes naturally when you have a set of moral values that were ingrained into you as a child.




No, guilt doesn't come naturally, unless, somehow, you can prove that human beings are predestined to feel guilt when dealing with "moral" values. If it was so, then it would mean that when we're born we already have a set of moral standards and that when we break them we "naturally" start feeling guilty. :lol:

With the risk of repeating myself, the subject in discussion was not about how many people can control their emotions and how effective, but about how harmless these irrational emotions are to the self, to the others, and how much they slow down real understanding and communication between people. How much they keep of reaching our fullest potential, which, in exchange, will create constructive emotions such as love, acceptance, understanding, deep feelings of inter-connection and happinees. :heart:




Nothing was said about predestination. I specifically said that the feeling of guilt comes naturally when you are ingrained with a specific set of morals as a child. Breaking mental programming regarding childhood morality lessons can be extremely difficult.

I disagree with your statement of 'fact' that guilt is dysfunctional. Some guilt is completely justifiable. Say that Joe Sixpack got into a car wreck after downing some beers and crashed into someone's family car, killing all inside? Would you say his guilt is dysfunctional?

Edited by adrug (09/01/08 11:25 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleCameron
Too Many Words
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/31/07
Posts: 4,437
Loc: Canada
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: fireworks_god]
    #8859933 - 09/01/08 11:27 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

fireworks_god said:
Nice employment of drama, but completely wrong. Debating an aspect of someone's thread in a debate forum and not agreeing with the original poster does not equal thread derailment. :cuckoo:




I was going for 'train-wreck'. :smile:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 3 years, 25 days
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: adrug]
    #8860234 - 09/01/08 12:19 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Nothing was said about predestination. I specifically said that the feeling of guilt comes naturally when you are ingrained with a specific set of morals as a child. Breaking mental programming regarding childhood morality lessons can be extremely difficult.




Yes, I re-read what you previously said.
Anyways, it is hard to determine how hard it is for each and every person to rid their irrational emotions, and unless you are able to present some evidence that sustains that "guilt comes naturally" for those who grew up amongst strict rules of morality, your statement will remain a gross over-generalization.
We can feel whatever we want to feel, we can program our minds to feel anything from deep feelings of regret and sorrow, to deep feelings of joy and acceptance. Why not choose the latter?

Quote:

I disagree with your statement of 'fact' that guilt is dysfunctional. Some guilt is completely justifiable.




The fact that guilt (as well as anything else) can be justifiable, doesn't automatically make it also functional.

Quote:

Say that Joe Sixpack got into a car wreck after downing some beers and crashed into someone's family car, killing all inside? Would you say his guilt is dysfunctional?




Yes, indeed.
Tell me, for what reasonable arguments should he feel guilt? Could guilt possibly bring back the people that he killed? Could maybe guilt heal the sorrow from the hearts of the people that lost their loved-ones? Is it that this negative feeling will have the miraculous power of turning back time and make Joe Sixpack pay more attention to the road? :fairy: :lol:
Obviously not!
Now let's analyze what this bad and dysfunctional feeling can actually do: make Joe Sixpack feel like a worthless piece of shit, maybe along with the impulse of punishing himself, maybe even make him drink more in order to forget the shame that he feels, and other non-constructive actions like these? Yes, he could also decide to stay completely focused when he drives, and never drive when drunk or tired.
But he could reach the same conclusion, and maybe even more valuable conclusions, without having to experience all that guilt-trip. All that energy wasted into a negative and dead-end emotion can be used in a more constructive manner such as him being aware of his mistakes and finding a way to fix his problems for the future.
So how can him feeling bad about what he did be functional?
Ahhh, yes, it can maybe make those who lost their friends or family feel a certain feeling of accomplishment, out of thirst for revenge, which is also a dysfunctional feeling. :smirk:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Edited by MushroomTrip (09/01/08 12:32 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhanTomCat
Teh Cat....
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #8860516 - 09/01/08 01:18 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

So, if you are indeed guilty, and if you are found to be guilty, it is dysfunctional to feel guilty....?    :what:




>^;;^<


--------------------
I'll be your midnight French Fry....  :naughty:

"The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...."

>^;;^<

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLakefingers
Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Re: The best philosophy... *DELETED* [Re: King Koopa]
    #8860660 - 09/01/08 01:43 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Post deleted by Lakefingers

Reason for deletion: "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 3 years, 25 days
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: PhanTomCat]
    #8860911 - 09/01/08 02:30 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Yes! :razz:
Guilt isn't a constructive emotion, for the reasons that I have already stated.
Instead of guilty, one could choose to feel responsible. Which is being aware of one's actions and the results of one's actions, without feeling ashamed by them.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: Lakefingers]
    #8860929 - 09/01/08 02:32 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Lakefingers said:
if the moderators were responsible they'd lock the thread,
it's spreading more confusion among the confused,
really the thread's trolling dressed in the clothing of freedom of choice




Let us know when you come back to reality, because there is nothing in this thread that would suggest that this needs locked.


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibledeCypher
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #8861269 - 09/01/08 03:38 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Sigh.  There usually comes a line between useful philosophical debate and sophistic rhetoric, and this discussion has crossed it, IMO.  :banghead:

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
The were several occasions in which you insisted that there is a difference between the moral dogma of an "authority" and the moral dogma that generates "from the self" .
That somehow it deserves less attention, that it might be less real and important, and that only the personal moral judgments are genuine. And I am saying that all the moral judgments are just as real, no matter what seems to be their "direct" cause.




Of course a moral judgment is just as real as another moral judgment... if one is experiencing neural activity in the form of guilt, then one is experiencing it--I fail to see how this brings anything original to the discussion.  Again, my sole distinction is between the causes of the neural activity.  You seem to think that that I believe there is a experential "difference between the moral dogma of an 'authority' and the moral dogma that generates 'from the self'", when in fact I do not--instead, I stated that personally speaking, I believe that self-generated moral dogma is healthier and a worthier foundation for following when summoning up a base for one's actions.  I am making a value judgment about the use and preferability of a moral dogma as compared with another moral dogma--NOT stating one is any more real than the other, NOT stating that only my self-generated dogma is genuine.  More important in a perspective that tells me how to live my life, yes.  Deserving more attention--in my opinion, yes.  You might differ in your subjective weight of the two types of dogma, but it seems like you're too eager to misconstrue what I'm saying in favor of trying to prove me wrong, when what a skilled rhetoric debater would be doing is trying to show support for why the two should be treated as equally important, rather than attempt to catch me in a supposed factual contradiction.

I do agree with you that all moral dogmas must directly come from the person at hand.  When I refer to the cause of a moral dogma, it is NOT this first cause that I am referring to--I am referring to the indirect, original cause.  Arguing that just because a moral dogma is present in someone's mind, and therefore that mind is ultimately responsible for accepting or rejecting the moral dogma, is technically true but you're completely missing my point.  There will always be that technical choice to choose to believe, and that's the responsibility of the individual--but to claim that there is NO causal difference between a self-developed moral dogma and a dogma that is only adhered to due to societal or familiar pressure is naive.  Unless you've been brainwashed by a cult (and in fact that example only proves my point), one is not going to immediately accept new standards of what is considered wrong or right with open arms.  An outwardly imposed dogma takes time to inculcate in the mind of the believer, and once the believer has finally accepted the dogma, it has made the transition from an outwardly imposed, authoritarian dogma to a dogma based on a personal decision. 

Quote:

The Cypher said:
Technically, this is correct--the individual will always have a "choice" to choose to live by a dogma.  But in practice, this is almost never true.  Try being raised in a overly conservative religious family where atheism is strictly frowned upon, or in a fundamentalist Muslim society, and see how well you, as an impressionable young kid, can refrain from having moral beliefs and positions imposed upon you.  (And in fact, in a country such as Italy where the influence of the Catholic church still reigns so predominantly, almost two-thirds of Italians have the same religious beliefs as their parents.)  This is a clear argument for the power of beliefs imposed through the power of an institution like the Church or through the constant dogmatism of a religious family.




Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
And do you happen to know the practice of every living human in this world? Because otherwise I can't begin to understand where did this statement came from. And of you do know the practice of everybody, please make it public to prove me wrong.




:lol:.  I'm afraid you're using a classic fallacy here.  The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that an individual will always have a perfectly free choice to disregard societal and familial dogmatic pressures, especially when I have already presented my argument for the contrary.  And in fact, your own personal experience proves my point:

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
What I can attest, from personal experience, is that, as long as I was really young and had very limited life experience, I was inclined to believe whatever she told me and take it as being real, even though even back then something felt really rotten.




The perfect example of an impressionable young kid being unable to refrain from believing in what authority in the form of her mother told her.  I'm not arguing that at some point in the future growth from this psychological immaturity is impossible (and I see you've been successful at growing out of it yourself), but you can hardly deny the fact that the imposition of moral beliefs and dogmatism does occur.

Quote:

The Cypher said:
(And in fact, in a country such as Italy where the influence of the Catholic church still reigns so predominantly, almost two-thirds of Italians have the same religious beliefs as their parents.)  This is a clear argument for the power of beliefs imposed through the power of an institution like the Church or through the constant dogmatism of a religious family.




Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
This isn't a clear argument that those beliefs are imposed and that's why the children follow the same dogma, it is a prove that, due to a sum of determining factors, all of them filtered through one's FREE WILL, many people prefer choose to follow the herd because it is what they want to do, for one or another reason, and not because they "have to". like you're trying to imply here.




I'll admit that that statistic isn't a clear argument... but it does provide some compelling evidence in favor of children being swayed by the religious beliefs of their parents.  (Just compare Italy, where almost 90% are Catholic, and where two-thirds of Italians have the same religious beliefs as their parents, to the far less religiously homogeneous America where only fifty percent of Americans have the same religious beliefs as their parents.)  Obviously, further research needs to be done, but I find it ironic how in the same paragraph that you accuse me of implying people are imposed to follow the herd, you instead imply most people "want" to follow the herd.  Do you have any evidence for this claim, or are you merely making idle speculation?  In point of fact, I'd actually argue most people simply don't question their religious faith, especially if they've been brought up in a religious-historical tradition for all their life.  It's much easier to go along with the flow, which is a milder form of imposition (but imposition none the less.)  It would be helpful if there were statistics showing what percentage of people adopted their religious views out of complete free choice, but since there don't appear to be any (and questioning people's deepest subconscious motives through a psychological survey is inherently suspect), all we have to go on is philosophical speculation.

Quote:

The Cypher said:
I challenge you to give me a good reason for why you should act morally if you don't possess guilt, besides from a vaguely meaningless "making rational decisions, based of the pros and cons that specifically apply to different circumstances."




Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
The fact that you can't personally accept and understand a perfectly rational, clear and verified by reality reason, such as making use of one's reason, doesn't mean that the reason doesn't stand on it's own. Also, this is a debate forum, and your inability to understand this reason is personal and irrational, and we are not allowed to discuss the personal nature of the posters, otherwise I would have explained you what keeps you from attainging that understanding.




:yawn:  I see no compelling reason here for acting morally if you don't possess guilt, only veiled personalisms and an ad hominem attack.  Please keep this sort of stuff out of P&S--I'm always happy to engage in a civil debate if you wish to back up your assertions and converse rationally.

Quote:

MushroomTrip said:
Let's say that you want to kill one of your friends (or whoever alse you feel like killikng ). What about, instead of feeling guilty about this impulse, AND fearing that you might go to jail, you choose a third option: analyze your emotions, keep a lucid and open mind, and see what happens? You might find out of the entirety of the reasons why you feel so much hate towars the person you want to kill, in which terms this hate works and how it occurs, and what generates it. This can turn into a great pointer towards your fears, confusions, and irrational emotions that brought you to hate him in the first place, and then you can use all this knowledge to clear your mind, accept all your inner impulses and embrace them, and make the change from the inside? Instead of wanting to kill, now with all that extra new knowledge about youself, you will be able to make a valuable change in yourself, and one of the fruits of this improvement would result in you UNDERSTANDING that there are other, more efficient ways of solving this matter, than killing?




This is possible, but certainly not realistic IMO.  Like another poster said:

Quote:

adrug said:
Obviously, as we grow up, some of us are able to look past these imposed moral values using logic and rationality, but that doesn't mean that everyone has that capability. Even being a logical and rational person is not a guarantee against being overwhelmed by emotions like guilt.




Being able to turn off guilt at the flick of a switch makes you sound more like The Terminator (or, yes, Ted Bundy) than a normal human being.  It might be a worthier alternative to being subjugated by base emotions, but I frankly don't see how this is possible, and I would be very suspicious of someone I knew proclaiming themselves to be "wholly free of guilt."  If you can do this, you display an admirable talent for self-behavior modification.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibledeCypher
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: fireworks_god]
    #8861786 - 09/01/08 05:02 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

fireworks_god said:

Quote:


I challenge you to give me a good reason for why you should act morally if you don't possess guilt, besides from a vaguely meaningless "making rational decisions, based of the pros and cons that specifically apply to different circumstances."




A.) I'm a sentient living being that has an experience of reality. B.) Other aspects of reality are either similar entities with an experience of reality, or part of the environment that sustains and produces living entities having experiences of reality. C.) Acting in a way that inflicts suffering, directly on other living beings or indirectly through making their environment less conducive to an experience without suffering or freedom, is not a preferred course to take because, not only am I capable of empathy and would not want others or myself to have to be subjected to that, they are also aspects of the same environment as I am, and, inevitably, in some way or another, it would only cause harm to myself.




Even though you're not the person to whom my argument was intended, I appreciate the answer to my question.  It still seems a bit suspect, though... do you have any support for your assertion that acting in a way that inflicts suffering would "inevitably only cause harm to yourself?"

Empathy is probably the best solution to this dilemma.  However, how many people will consciously choose to restrain all feelings of guilt and instinct in favor of a more rational, empathetic approach when the heat of the moment is on them?  Not too many, IMO.


--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSophistic Radiance
Free sVs!
Female


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: fireworks_god]
    #8861908 - 09/01/08 05:24 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Cameron said:
(MT has been here.)




:foreheadslap:


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleCameron
Too Many Words
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/31/07
Posts: 4,437
Loc: Canada
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: Sophistic Radiance]
    #8862056 - 09/01/08 05:49 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

:guitarhero: <- I like this one. Nifty, no?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSophistic Radiance
Free sVs!
Female


Registered: 07/11/06
Posts: 43,135
Loc: Center of the Universe
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: Cameron]
    #8862078 - 09/01/08 05:54 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

:lol: There are so many hilarious smileys I don't know about.


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleblewmeanie
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 28,984
Loc: Flag
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: Sophistic Radiance]
    #8862099 - 09/01/08 06:00 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

:homealone:


--------------------
The Prophecy!

Learn To Code

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineExplosiveMango
HallucinogenusDigitallus
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/12/05
Posts: 3,222
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: blewmeanie]
    #8862128 - 09/01/08 06:07 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

What is being pointed to in that avatar brain of yours?


--------------------
Know your self.
Know your substance.
Know your source.

The most distorted perspective possible is the perspective that yours is not distorted.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleCameron
Too Many Words
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/31/07
Posts: 4,437
Loc: Canada
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: ExplosiveMango]
    #8862312 - 09/01/08 06:52 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

The steering wheel.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleblewmeanie
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 28,984
Loc: Flag
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: Cameron]
    #8863526 - 09/01/08 10:50 PM (15 years, 6 months ago)

The amygdala


--------------------
The Prophecy!

Learn To Code

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLakefingers
Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: fireworks_god]
    #8864052 - 09/02/08 01:16 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

tough crowd as usual

have some sense of satyr and drama

actually try to under...stand

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 3 years, 25 days
Re: The best philosophy... [Re: deCypher]
    #8864413 - 09/02/08 05:49 AM (15 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Sigh.  There usually comes a line between useful philosophical debate and sophistic rhetoric, and this discussion has crossed it, IMO.  :banghead:




Just because your points are being contradicted doesn't mean that this discussion has passed beyond the point of "debate", as there isn't any time-limit in which the debaters have to agree with each other.
I am sorry that you find this discussion useless and that you refuse to take to consideration any of the valid points that I have made, and you can stop replying to me at any time if you don't know what to say anymore. :shrug:

Quote:

Of course a moral judgment is just as real as another moral judgment... if one is experiencing neural activity in the form of guilt, then one is experiencing it--I fail to see how this brings anything original to the discussion.  Again, my sole distinction is between the causes of the neural activity.  You seem to think that that I believe there is a experential "difference between the moral dogma of an 'authority' and the moral dogma that generates 'from the self'", when in fact I do not--instead, I stated that personally speaking, I believe that self-generated moral dogma is healthier and a worthier foundation for following when summoning up a base for one's actions.




And again, I am telling you that I fail to see the difference the distinction you insist on making (because obviously you're making one, otherwise you wouldn't be talking about self-generated moral dogma and authority-generated moral dogma :lol: :nut:), because, no matter what the moral dogma is (even if it is one that the Catholic Church strongly sustains or not), it is still the individual that agrees with it or not, therefore, all moral dogma IS self-generated, it doesn't matter how many other people are self-generating it as well.  :backflip:
You imply that people who adhere to authority-generated moral dogma (whatever the fuck this means, because you still haven't been able to explain this properly) are "blindly" following it, as if someone would have a brainwave generating device by the aid of which they make "the herd" follow the dogma. :mindcontrol:
And each time I asked you to back up your claims, you say that I should be the one to back up my claims, even thought it is you who are making a totally flawed and unsubstantiated claim. I don't have to bring any extra evidence to sustain the existence of critical thinking and the existence of self-control and awareness of one's emotions, because the examples I already provided throughout this discussion are standing on their own and you still haven't able to deconstruct them (saying "I don't see a lot of people dong that is not proving me wrong :rofl:)

Quote:

You might differ in your subjective weight of the two types of dogma, but it seems like you're too eager to misconstrue what I'm saying in favor of trying to prove me wrong, when what a skilled rhetoric debater would be doing is trying to show support for why the two should be treated as equally important, rather than attempt to catch me in a supposed factual contradiction.




No, it is not no my subjective weight, it is rational thinking that points out that people make their own choices, even if the choice is to follow the herd. :imslow:
Also, my intention is NOT to prove you wrong for the sake of proving you wrong, but because I honestly you are wrong and that the affirmation you have been making in this thread lack any kind of critical thinking and touch with reality. The rate at which the conviction that people are NOT in direct control of their own emotions thoughts and choices is being presented in this thread is alarming and dumbfolding.

Quote:

There will always be that technical choice to choose to believe, and that's the responsibility of the individual--but to claim that there is NO causal difference between a self-developed moral dogma and a dogma that is only adhered to due to societal or familiar pressure is naive.




There is always a casual difference between ANY kinds of decision, no decision has exactly the same cause, be it self-generated or the so-called authority-generated. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Unless you've been brainwashed by a cult (and in fact that example only proves my point), one is not going to immediately accept new standards of what is considered wrong or right with open arms.  An outwardly imposed dogma takes time to inculcate in the mind of the believer, and once the believer has finally accepted the dogma, it has made the transition from an outwardly imposed, authoritarian dogma to a dogma based on a personal decision.




Brainwashed? :rofl2:
Care to explain how this process works? :strokebeard:

Quote:

The perfect example of an impressionable young kid being unable to refrain from believing in what authority in the form of her mother told her.  I'm not arguing that at some point in the future growth from this psychological immaturity is impossible (and I see you've been successful at growing out of it yourself), but you can hardly deny the fact that the imposition of moral beliefs and dogmatism does occur.




So what you are saying is that people are all impressionable young kids and that they never pass the age of 10, and that's why they just take everything's that they're being told for granted? :sherlock:
Because otherwise I fail to see what the fuck you're talking about.
Of course, while we are kids we have limited discernment (even though this is debatable too, but I'll save it for another time :wink:) and limited life experience. All or most of the examples that we get while we're kids is from our parents, relatives, and the few friends that we have that are also kids with barely no true life experience. Our instinct as kids is to absorb any kind of information that we see around and copy the behavior of our parents or the people that are closest to us (which usually are our parents), in exchange for the feeling of safety and affection that children so much need. Once we start growing and coming more and more in contact with different kinds of situations and reach new levels of knowledge (which comes from plenty of direction not only from the family), the situation begins to change and we're starting to make more & more aware choices. The fact that some people choose to remain ignorant to the facts of life doesn't in any way mean that their choice was blind. It only means that this is the situation that appealed most to them, and they made their deliberate choice accordingly. :yesnod:
Care to explain how does the "impressionable young kid" still applies to fully grown and mature people, in direct contact with the outside world, surrounded by millions of kinds of information, people and circumstances? :strokebeard:

Quote:

I'll admit that that statistic isn't a clear argument... but it does provide some compelling evidence in favor of children being swayed by the religious beliefs of their parents.  (Just compare Italy, where almost 90% are Catholic, and where two-thirds of Italians have the same religious beliefs as their parents, to the far less religiously homogeneous America where only fifty percent of Americans have the same religious beliefs as their parents.)  Obviously, further research needs to be done, but I find it ironic how in the same paragraph that you accuse me of implying people are imposed to follow the herd, you instead imply most people "want" to follow the herd.  Do you have any evidence for this claim, or are you merely making idle speculation?




Again, it is not in my responsibility to bring evidence to the fact that people make their OWN choices, it is your duty to show exactly how people are being "forced" to follow the herd.
Just for the sake of this argument, let's imagine imagine a scenario in which someone is putting a gun at their heads in order to become Catholics, it is still their choice when they submit, as they also have the choice of NOT submitting even at the risk of having their brains blew in the air, they have another choice in which they could try to fight back and so on. See? Far from having only one choice.
It is true that some people use the line "I had no choice", but it is rather an emotional and false affirmation made with the purpose of justifying their own weaknesses, fears and frustrations regarding the decision they have freely taken, :lol: when, in fact, a more accurate description of the situation would be "this was the most favorable option, from the multitude of the options that I had in this specific case".
:shocked:

Quote:

In point of fact, I'd actually argue most people simply don't question their religious faith, especially if they've been brought up in a religious-historical tradition for all their life.




Maybe, maybe not.
And ever if is so, not questioning one's religion is STILL their personal choice, as nobody is keeping them from questioning it at any time and at any rate. :eek:

Quote:

It's much easier to go along with the flow




Exactly!
For some people it is much easier to go with the herd. Look no further, you answered your own question: the reason why people go with the herd is because it is much easier for them to do so, and since this judgment has been made by them, it means that a personal, free decision has been taken. :grin:

Quote:

which is a milder form of imposition (but imposition none the less.)




Again with the logical leaps and inconsistencies. :tongue:
How does the claim: "It's much easier to go along with the flow" equate in any way with the claim: "which is a milder form of imposition (but imposition none the less.)" :wtf:
Just because something is "easier" doesn't mean in any way that it is being "imposed" :lol:
Are you being "imposed" to breathe just because it's easy? :smirk: Are you being "forced" to speak English because it is easy, as opposed to Japanese or Korean? In case you didn't know, you can always decide to STOP breathing, or to Start learning Japanese. :whoa:

Quote:

This is possible, but certainly not realistic IMO.




You're right.
How dare I even suggest that we are the masters of our feeling and emotions and that free choice is more than attainable, it is already happening on and on, even though some feel safer to think that their choices really belong to someone else? :lol:
Shame on me! :smirk:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Edited by MushroomTrip (09/02/08 05:59 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* a long story about drugs and philosophy. Madtowntripper 2,927 7 10/11/04 02:49 PM
by Todcasil
* does existentialism support relativism or absolutism?
( 1 2 all )
Malachi 22,762 28 07/02/03 02:43 PM
by Malachi
* What is philosophy? / Have you studied academic philosophy? *DELETED* *DELETED*
( 1 2 all )
Lakefingers 4,977 35 11/15/05 11:01 AM
by CosmicJoke
* Existentialism, Philosophy, and Religion Just Crutches for the Weak?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Huehuecoyotl 5,843 62 11/29/04 02:09 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* A philosophy degree?
( 1 2 3 all )
rogue_pixie 7,408 57 11/30/04 05:05 AM
by rogue_pixie
* Theists and their understanding of Existentialism
( 1 2 3 all )
Sclorch 6,146 45 10/28/02 10:56 AM
by Anonymous
* Who actually takes philosophy?
( 1 2 all )
manna_man 2,702 21 10/02/03 10:19 AM
by fireworks_god
* is tripping a cure for existential anxiety? Malachi 1,323 15 05/14/03 08:51 AM
by CosmicJoke

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
8,436 topic views. 2 members, 11 guests and 34 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.