Meaning in life - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-29-2005, 01:50 AM   #31
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,349
Local Time: 07:52 PM
and a pefect form of Goodness sounds a lot like God
__________________

__________________
blueyedpoet is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 08:27 AM   #32
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

Universally recognized? It still had tohave a beginning, or it wouldn't be around to be recognized. Did man create the axioms of right and wrong? If so, upon what did he base it?

Where did the basic principles come from? How do we know, really that it's wrong to murder someone who stole from you?


why can't the beginning of such an axiom come from human logic? a human spoke it, and probably long before Christianity took note of it (and rightly so, i've always love that about what i understand to the the Christ message), so why couldn't it have been derived from rationality? i find it much more powerful that a human came up with it than if it were imprinted onto a stone tablet and delivered from heaven.

i know that it's wrong to murder someone who stole from me not because the 10 commandments tell me so, but because i know that one murder will lead to more murders, and with more murders i will be less safe. God doesn't tell me that being a vigilante is a bad thing, my own brain did.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 11:05 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




why can't the beginning of such an axiom come from human logic? a human spoke it, and probably long before Christianity took note of it (and rightly so, i've always love that about what i understand to the the Christ message), so why couldn't it have been derived from rationality? i find it much more powerful that a human came up with it than if it were imprinted onto a stone tablet and delivered from heaven.
People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 11:06 AM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
42
Douglas Adams! WOO HOO
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 11:34 AM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 02:52 PM
what further meaning does life require beyond that we should seek to provide for each other?
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 11:41 AM   #36
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?


this is why we have laws, and laws are created by humans based upon a combination of logic, rationality, and evidence. humans also enforce these laws, and humans can also changese these laws as they evolve over time.

God doesn't strike down a murderer or someone else who violates "his" laws. mechanisms of government -- law enforcement, courts -- which are of, by, and for human beings are the ones who enforce these laws.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 01:54 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




this is why we have laws, and laws are created by humans based upon a combination of logic, rationality, and evidence. humans also enforce these laws, and humans can also changese these laws as they evolve over time.
So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 01:59 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?

exactly,

that is why we had slavery, and child labor, etc

the lawmakers are supposed to be held accountable by the voters
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 02:07 PM   #39
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


So, in other words, we follow laws based on the moral code that certain people over time have set.

But why when you get right to it, do the lawmakers have any more credible grasp on what is right or wrong, than any otehr person, since all humans are flawed?


i don't totally endorse this viewpoint, but it strikes me as plausible that God is every bit as invented as law and every bit an arbitrary idea weilded by those in power to control others.

lawmakers have more credibility than others for a few reasons.

1) they are supposed to be educated in the history and process of making laws, and as such they are more qualified than your average layman. i'm not a mechanic, so i hire one when my car is broken; same thing applies to the process of making laws.

2) lawmakers are either elected by constitutents via a democratic process (i.e., congress) or they are judges who have been appointed by those who have been elected (i.e., judges) via a democratic process and undergone an elaborate confirmation process conducted by those who have been elected.

following the law is a voluntary process. we all agree on certain rules, and these rules and expectations are drilled into our heads from the very beginning of our lives so that the become more working assumptions than agreed-upon, consented-to rules.

however, like all institutions, the State is concerned with it's continued existence. as such, it has methods of punishment for those who break the laws created by the State's lawmaking apparatus, and these methods are also consented to by a majority of the citizens who would be affected by these methods of punishment. and it's also about power -- if you resist arrest, you will be subdued; if you fire upon an officer, you will be shot. there's also a system in place to change laws and punishments not because it's the right thing to do, necessarily, but because the State knows that such mechanisms ensure it's continued existence.

we all consent to be governed, we all consent to be ordered and controlled. there is free will to break the rules, but there are also consequences to breaking the rules.

and it's all done by people, not God.

the threat to the State, and then the people, is the claim by lawmakers to know the will of God and to then seek to impose "God's will" via the corruption of a legitimate process.

like in Saudi Arabia.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 07:45 PM   #40
The Fly
 
Tinybubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 60
Local Time: 07:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


People have different ideas of what is right and wrong, so if there is no standard set by an objective entity (higher power) how can any person's view of right and wrong be any more credible than anyone else's?
oh my goodness! You might possibly be turning into an anarchist! Carefull there with your revolutionary thinking...
__________________
Tinybubbles is offline  
Old 04-29-2005, 09:22 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Tinybubbles


oh my goodness! You might possibly be turning into an anarchist! Carefull there with your revolutionary thinking...
I'm no anarchist. I do believe is a higher power that set a standard moral code. I'm just stressing my belief that if there is no God, then all morality is relative.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-30-2005, 02:51 AM   #42
Refugee
 
Anthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,538
Local Time: 07:52 PM
Quote:
then all morality is relative.
All morality is relative.If history has taught us anything, it is exactly that.

Ant.
__________________
Razors pain you; Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you; And drugs cause cramp.
Guns aren't lawful; Nooses give;
Gas smells awful; You might as well live.

Dorothy Parker, 'Resumé'
Anthony is offline  
Old 04-30-2005, 03:27 PM   #43
The Fly
 
Tinybubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 60
Local Time: 07:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I'm no anarchist. I do believe is a higher power that set a standard moral code. I'm just stressing my belief that if there is no God, then all morality is relative.
Oh, I have read enough of your posts to know you are not an anarchist. I was just making a joke... because both of your "what ifs" describe perfectly what many people believe and live their life by - be they anarchist, agnostic, witches whatever.
I believe all morality is relative to the individual... and when we talk about more than one person we have to talk ethics. I also think that the only true law is natural law and that anarchy is a preferable state for us humans to live in... however, given the current level of awareness of "us humans" we most likely have alot of work to do before this happens.

Merry May Day to you all!!
__________________
Tinybubbles is offline  
Old 04-30-2005, 05:26 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Tinybubbles

Oh, I have read enough of your posts to know you are not an anarchist. I was just making a joke... because both of your "what ifs" describe perfectly what many people believe and live their life by - be they anarchist, agnostic, witches whatever.
I believe all morality is relative to the individual... and when we talk about more than one person we have to talk ethics. I also think that the only true law is natural law and that anarchy is a preferable state for us humans to live in... however, given the current level of awareness of "us humans" we most likely have alot of work to do before this happens.

Merry May Day to you all!!
Since I believe in God, I don't I don't agree with you at all.

But if no God existed, I would say you were right on the money.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-01-2005, 10:47 AM   #45
The Fly
 
Tinybubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 60
Local Time: 07:52 PM
Well, 80's, then that settles it!
You truly gave me a laugh today with that reply. It's not often christians get me to giggle! Thanks....
__________________

__________________
Tinybubbles is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com