Jedi views on homosexuality

Moderators: Desolous, tzb

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 02 May 2012 04:03 #58645

My 2 cents on this would have to be:

I no longer believe that the United States, or possibly any other country, creates laws specifically for unity, general safety, and morality. Whether it be against homosexuality, or something else harmless, the government seems to exceed expectations on making laws just to simply--well, make laws!

And on the note of YthanH, I agree completely. Another good example is The bible was translated into English from Hebrew way before we even had a complete grasp on original hebrew. They have since corrected a few things but not all is complete, and not all is original.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Megan4506

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 02 May 2012 11:01 #58669

@ bornofosiris: You're right. The Bible has been changed and things have been forged by peolpe many times, so (in my opinion) not every thing that's in the bible should be trusted, such as the views on homosexuality. No offence intended to any "bible-lovers".
Show compassion to all living beings.
Live to serve life.

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 02 May 2012 11:28 #58675

  • NickCB
  • NickCB's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Novice
  • ID: 10295
On the Bible but, the one we normally read now was translated from Greek normally which was how it was written and some hebrew and there are a lot of miss-translations in it so it is possible that Jesus was gay or had a relationship with Mary just depends which translation you take and into how of it you read

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 02 May 2012 19:24 #58757

  • Mark Anjuu
  • Mark Anjuu's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Knight
  • Priest
  • ID: 4373
Saw this on Facebook and thought it was appropriate (apologies to those that can't see it):
www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150833...28349&type=1&theater

A great argument against all those that quote the Bible (Old Testament) when discriminating.
Here for almost 4 years, gone for just over 2 years, back again. Merry met :)
The following user(s) said Thank You: Akkarin, Viskhard, Darren, Kimla Daalm, Luthien, Kalkho

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 02 May 2012 19:41 #58762

  • NickCB
  • NickCB's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Novice
  • ID: 10295
Mark Anjuu wrote:
Saw this on Facebook and thought it was appropriate (apologies to those that can't see it):
www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150833...28349&type=1&theater

A great argument against all those that quote the Bible (Old Testament) when discriminating.

Love that letter, always makes me cack up when i see it :D

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 03 May 2012 08:56 #58829

  • Kalkho
  • Kalkho's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Apprentice
  • ID: 9870
To all Christians opposing homosexuality: Jesus clearly stated, that there are no Commandments greater than the Two Commandments of Love. You're not exactly loving your fellow men by hating them, do you?

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 03 May 2012 09:11 #58830

  • Jestor
  • Jestor's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Councillor
  • Bishop
  • ID: 3682
I can't say it enough, I love this comic strip!


coffeewithjesus65.jpg
Rite: PureLand
Master: Master Jasper_Ward
Graduated Apprentices: Knight Learn_To_Know, Edan, Knight Brenna, Senior Knight Firewolf
Apprentices: Viskhard, DanWerts, Elizabeth, Llama Su, Trisskar

Life is just a party, and parties weren't made to last..." ~1999 by Prince~

"Questions and answers, sometimes there are no answers and sometimes the answer is yet more questions." ~Elizabeth~

"I don't have any answers, only more questions..." ~me~
The following user(s) said Thank You: Akkarin, Viskhard, Darren, Morganna

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 03 May 2012 16:09 #58865

  • Akkarin
  • Akkarin's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Councillor
  • Priest
  • ID: 484
We were talking in chat and this was brought up:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." - Mahatma Gandhi
Never ask more of another than you are prepared to offer of yourself.

Apprentices: discordor, hellisforhorses, Red Lila, Xaii
Former Apprentices: Desolous
Former Master: Br. John

Councillor
Public Relations and Marketing Assistant
Librarian
Associate Pastor
The following user(s) said Thank You: PloKoon, Darren

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 03 May 2012 17:27 #58876

@akkarin

What I said before about age of consent, I am merely trying not to encourage breaking Laws that for the most part, do protect the people without taking away a disproportinate amount of freedom. There can be no arguement that laws about legal age of consent do more bad than good. Do I think there should be a way to work around them whento individuals do consent with at least a decent idea of what they are getting into, yes. Legitimate protection good, tyranny bad.
Peace be with you.

Also, keep being awesome.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Akkarin

Re: Jedi views on homosexuality 05 May 2012 16:09 #59172

same here Akkarin i fall in love with people
Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • World Trade Center Steel (Last post by Rickie)
    • The local Fide Department had a set up a 911 memorial. They had a section of a steel girder standing in front of their Fire Station. I walked up and touched it, noticing how rough and rusty the surface was. I was immediately slammed with sorry, my eyes welled up with tears, I got dizzy and had to sit down. I was completely over come with emotions. I don't know if it was their spirits or souls embedded or energy impregnated in the steal or what. I've only had an experience like this once before on a Gettysburg battlefield.
    • The Avengers and Phil Coulson endorse Hillary. (Last post by Goken)
    • Honestly, I don't care at all about who they are or aren't endorsing and I'm still not sure I believe them that voting actually matters all that much (thank you electoral college system). But I did enjoy this ad a lot simply for Mark Ruffalo's reactions at the end. "What? I never agreed to that." "No, guys. They should just vote because it's important." :laugh: He's great. :laugh:
    • Can a force senstive person train themselves (Last post by carlos.martinez3)
    • If you asking movie style can we have that specific trade, then sadly I'm afraid it only exist in the movies. Force sensitive. That's a big idea with a great answer. What is force sensitive. Real, not movie fake. If I believe in the Force( I totally do) how can I be sensitive to it? That is a very common question here. How do I become a part of it, how does it become a part of me. When do I feel it. Sadly, we live in real life so the only thing we Can and WILL experience is what we seek to find. Hopefully that's what you will find here. We share a lot of fan based ideas, but over time, there is noticed a connection. Some are more sensitive to the connection. How is your connection? To the Force? Check it lately? Do some pass and review, some dress right dress some good old fashioned check on your lines... see what you find friend!
    • The Block (Last post by carlos.martinez3)
    • Carlos Temple secret : work a break in the process as often as possible. Helps for good form, sanity and focus!
    • Cultural Sensitivity/Appropriation and Anger (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • found an interesting article which talks about the appropriation of jazz music from black artists and culture, and i wanted to share it because its worth reading regardless of what "side" of the issue you take from www.york.cuny.edu/academics/writing-prog...cial-effects-of-jazz Spoiler: The Social Effects of Jazz Zola Philipp Abstract This paper’s purpose is to examine the social effects of jazz music. It focuses on the exploitation of black jazz musicians by whites in the industry and looks at whether black musicians benefited at all from their innovations. Many of today’s African American musicians are faced with similar social circumstances as those of past jazz musicians and as a result, the importance of the African American culture is still being ignored. Despite the negative social conditions that blacks faced, some blacks were still able to benefit and gained respect, stardom, and recognition for being the inventors of jazz music. Where words fail, music speaks,” says the poet Hans Christian Andersen. This message is profoundly expressed in jazz music. In the 1920s, jazz experienced a rise in popularity when the music began to spread through recordings. Some black jazz musicians believe that they were ripped off financially and that they did not get full recognition and compensation for being the inventors of jazz as African American culture. Furthermore, some people oppose the idea that jazz was invented by blacks. Jazz music as such became more of a commodity than an art and the highest achievers were white. Music is essential to the African American experience in the United States. Faced with racism, discrimination, and segregation, blacks have always found comfort and a sense of peace in their music. Music continues to be a means by which the anger, grief, compassion and desire for change is transformed into positive energy for blacks (Dawson, 2001). Today, the social conditions facing American popular music, especially rap, are analogous to those faced by jazz music, and many musicians have similar experiences. Despite the fact that jazz music has created some positive social effects, it has created more negative ones for black jazz musicians, such as exploitation and jazz appropriation, some of which are still occurring today. In order to understand the social effects of jazz music, there must be an understanding of how this music came into existence. I will then discuss the positive and the negative effects jazz had on black jazz musicians. Jazz developed from Afro-American music which included: Work songs, spiritual music, minstrelsy (a stage entertainment usually performed by whites with blackened faces who performed songs, dances and comedy ostensibly of black American origin), and other forms (Wheaton, 1994). Dorsey (2001) believes that black music and black musical accomplishments have been rooted in the continent of Africa. Jazz’s relationship to African music can be demonstrated in “the dominance of percussion in African American music…and bending the notes expressed in improvisation” (p. 36). The same way Africans were able to spontaneously invent a piece of music or beat, sometimes without any instruments, black jazz musicians are able to incorporate some of these features in their music. The improvisational style of the latter is very much influenced by the former, and is a unique feature of jazz music. Furthermore, jazz is considered an integral part of African American culture. Though there has been great debate about a standard definition of jazz, Wheaton (1994) believes it “can be defined as a combination of improvisatory styles with western European form and harmony” (p. 90). In other words, despite jazz’s African roots, it also has many European features such as composition, internal structure, and harmony. Peretti (1992) too states that jazz obtained its musical identity from the African and European traditions. Jazz music emerged out of “hot music” from New Orleans at the turn of the twentieth century and some of the structures were inherited from Africa and passed down to blacks from slavery to freedom (Dorsey, 2001). Jazz categories include Dixieland, swing, bop, cool jazz, hard bop, free jazz, Third Stream, jazz-rock, and fusion (Wheaton, 1994). The first jazz-style to receive recognition as a fine art was bebop, which is mainly instrumental and was formed by serious black jazz musicians who experimented with new ideas in the late night jam sessions (Wheaton, 1994). Bebop evolved in the 1940s and was said to have been created by blacks in a way that whites could not copy (Gerard, 1998). The history of jazz proves that black musicians are the inventors and innovators of jazz, and that has been a major accomplishment of blacks. According to Wheaton (1994), an innovator’s “job is not to entertain, but rather, to make the listener aware and to force the audience to confront often disturbing realities and hidden truths about themselves, their society and their world” (p. 143). Jazz is often referred to as “Black classical music.” Gerard (1998) cites Amiri Baraka, who first argued that jazz is an African American music in his book Blues People (1963), and also called jazz “Black music” in books he wrote later. In fact, one of the first musicians to label his music “Negro music” was Duke Ellington, who made it a priority to express the African American culture profoundly in it (Gerard, 1998). Mackey (1992) believes that blacks were cheated out of their invention of jazz music. In other words, commercial success was only obtained by whites. Blacks were basically locked out of it. Yet most white jazz musicians did not have the improvisational skills or originality that the black musicians displayed in their music. Malcolm X says that whites simply replicate what they heard in the past, whereas blacks “could spontaneously invent.” He states: I’ve seen black musicians when they’d be jamming at a jam session with white musicians—a whole lot of difference. The white musician can jam if he’s got some sheet music in front of him…But that black musician, he picks up his horn and starts blowing some sounds that he never thought of before. He improvises, he creates. (qtd. in Gerard, 1998, p. 78) However, there are opposing points of view when it comes to who invented jazz. Textbook writer Frank Tirro writes: “contrary to popular belief, jazz does not owe its existence to any one race” (qtd. in Gerard, 1998, p.88). Because of the western influences and American band traditions in jazz, some people believe that it does not simply belong to African Americans. In addition, in response to the statement that whites stole the music, Jim Hall says, “I’ve always felt that the music started out as black but that it’s as much mine now as anyone else’s. I haven’t stolen the music from anybody—I just bring something different to it” (qtd. in Gerard, 1998, p. 90). Hall is indeed acknowledging that blacks invented jazz, but he does not feel that whites have stolen it, even if whites imitated the various jazz styles created by blacks and became wealthy as a result. Upward social mobility among black jazz musicians is a very significant factor, though it was not common. Opportunities were given to black musicians by the radio and recording industry and popular black bands were promoted as long as there was a demand for jazz music by white Americans (Gerard, 1998). However, Mackey (1992) believes that there was a containment of black mobility on the political level and that the social and economic progress blacks might have accumulated because of their artistic innovation was blocked by whites. Black jazz musicians were primarily from the lower class. As Means (1968) points out, despite their social background, “some of these jazzmen received recognition as serious composers and several conducted well-known symphony orchestras and were invited to give concerts in Carnegie Hall (p. 18). Benny Goodman, a white jazz bandleader, brought to stardom Teddy Wilson, Lionel Hampton and Charlie Christian, but still encountered criticism for benefiting from their talents; a few other black jazz musicians, including Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, made a lot of money (Gerard, 1998). Jazz music has created a sense of integration between blacks and whites in the industry. Buster Bailey, a black jazz musician said, “One thing I’m happy to see is the integration that’s happening among musicians” (qtd. in Means, 1968, p. 22). Discrimination still existed, but in the jazz community, musicians were somehow considered as equals. Whites were hired to perform in several black bands and the white trombonist Roswell Rudd was introduced to jazz audiences by Archie Shepp (Gerard, 1998). Means (1968) cites Monroe Berger who notes that jazz music created black-white contact where a black musician received full acceptance as an equal and was “(often admired as superior) without condescension” (Means, 1998, p. 17). Jazz music has not only integrated people in the United States, but also brought them together internationally. It has been influenced by third world countries such as Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and India (Wheaton, 1994). Great jazz musicians integrated international ideas into their music; for instance, Duke Ellington has an album named Far East Suite, and two of Coltrane’s albums are named Africa and India (Wheaton, 1994). Today, jazz music is progressing in many ways. Despite its economic decline and struggle to survive because of the developed wealth of rock and pop, there have been many opportunities for the survival of jazz. Jazz began to penetrate the music programs of high schools, colleges and universities right after World War II, and in 1968, the International Association of Jazz Education was formed (Wheaton, 1994). Ron Dewey Wynn, co-founder and executive director of the Mill Street Jazz and Culture Society in Philadelphia, teaches inner city kids to appreciate the history and training in jazz music and calls jazz “African American Classical Improvisational Music” (Dawson, 2001). He contends that African American children won’t experience jazz culture as music programs decrease in schools around the country (Dawson, 2001). Jazz has also gotten much recognition in the United States and around the world through jazz festivals. Overseas festivals have been more successful than festivals in the United States; in places like Switzerland, the Netherlands and Italy, jazz festivals have all broken records for attendance (Wheaten, 1994). Now that the positive social effects of jazz have been clarified, I will present the negative effects. The recording industry has played a major role in the commercialization of jazz music, which has led to uniformity. Jazz music would not have been widely distributed to the general public without the recording industry, and it provided a perfect opportunity for making the music more marketable. As a result, blacks were socially affected, and according to Means (1968), they had limited opportunities to showcase their originality and were forced to create music that appealed only to whites. However, white bands had a sense of sameness that was more marketable. According to Mackey (1992), swing music lacked improvisation, and the soloist’s creativity was not relied upon as much because of the commercialization of the music. Jazz became so commercialized that the industry was less dependent on black innovation, but rather produced a music that was lacking the essence of jazz—its improvisation. Baraka quotes Hsio wen Shih’s “comments regarding the anthology album The Great Swing Bands, a record Shih refers to as ‘terrifying’ due to the indistinguishability of one band from another” (qtd. in Mackey, 1992, p. 60). Swing music basically lacked creativity and distinction and as a result, swing bands sounded alike. Black jazz musicians were less credited for their invention and innovation of jazz music. Jazz music created a sense of identity, originality, and social cohesion among black musicians, but they were seldom credited with inventing it. Kofsky (1998) believes that this refusal of whites to credit blacks is because they refused to equate anything valuable with African Americans. According to Miles Davis, this is the case because “the white man likes to win everything. White people like to see other white people win…and they can’t win when it comes to jazz…because black people created this” (qtd. in Gerard, 1998, p.16). In addition, whites became more famous than blacks because of their unwillingness to give blacks credit for their talents. Means (1968) too believes that black jazz musicians experienced a lot of resentment because they felt that they did not always receive acknowledgement for their accomplishments, while whites were granted titles such as “King of Swing” and “King of Jazz” (p.18). Again this social effect of jazz was a result of greed by whites, and it created anger, fear and resentment among black jazz musicians. While whites in the jazz music industry got rich, black musicians did not reap equal benefits. The industry caused a great deal of exploitation and discrimination by whites against blacks. Rex Stewart says, “Where the control is, the money is. Do you see any of us running any record companies, booking agencies, radio stations, music magazines?” (qtd. in Kofsky, 1998, p. 19). In other words, the recording/distribution industry was in complete control, not black musicians. Because of this power and contempt for black art, blacks were likely to suffer and the recording industry basically determined the economic success or failure of an artist. White musicians who benefited from the talent of black musicians were labeled exploiters and for the financial gain they drew from the music, they were called thieves (Gerard, 1998, p. 14). For instance, arrangements were purchased from black musicians by Benny Goodman, a white jazz musician known as “King of Swing.” However, the majority of black musicians, despite their invention of the music, experienced very little success (Mackey, 1992). Mackey (1992) further states that “the most popular and best-paid bands were white” and with the development of radio, which was an excellent form for publicizing the music, the best paid studio jobs were predominantly secured by whites (p. 52). In other words, because of race, black jazz musicians have experienced great disadvantages throughout the history of jazz music (Means, 1968). Furthermore, the jazz music industry contributed a great deal to the continuous victimization of blacks. Whites continued to exploit black jazz musicians for financial gain, even in death. For instance, a month after Bessie Smith died, John Hammond, an employee of Columbia Records, wrote an article in Down Beat magazine saying that “a special Bessie Smith memorial album will be released…and this will be the best buy of the year in music” (qtd. in Kofsky, 1998, p. 33). Evidently he was more interested in promoting his fame and fortune than paying respect to the dead. However, Hammond frequently referred to himself as being the protector of black artists to increase his reputation (Kofsky). Another social effect that was pivotal in jazz was the social stigma associated with the music, not only by whites, but also by blacks. This stigma created an environment for black exploitation because jazz was considered black folk music. The stigma consisted of a belief held by whites that the tradition of African American music was not art, but was rather artistically worthless, trivial and only tolerated for profitability (Levine, 1989). For instance, “Jazz Must Go,” was the title of an article published in 1921 in the Ladies Home Journal (Means, 1968). Peretti (1992) also states that the exploitation of that era was typical and was only for the purpose of profitability. However, in the twentieth century, while jazz was being rejected in the United States, African American jazz musicians received many opportunities overseas. Their artistic ability was acknowledged and encouraged and they discovered that segregation was not widespread (Ross, 2001). Ross further states that though the music had originated in the United States, because of its carrier, “the so-called negros,” the dominant group (whites) quickly condemned it. Likewise, in the 1920s, jazz was thought of as “a backward, low form of expression” by reputable blacks from Oklahoma City, said the black novelist Ralph Ellison (qtd. in Means, 1968, p. 334). For instance, C.J. Handy’s father told him “he would rather see him dead than become a jazz musician” (Means, 1968, p. 334). One must wonder what brought on this negative view of jazz among blacks. Was it the race factor? Yes, it was. Means relates the views of E. Franklin Frazier and LeRoi Jones, who believed the main reason was that middle class blacks wanted to fit into white society. They repudiated jazz because they thought it was too much a part of black slave heritage (Means). Individual blacks have tried to assimilate into the American mainstream by achieving high levels of education; however, assuming the mainstream culture meant abandoning or destroying their own culture (Baskerville, 2003). Gerard (1998) adds that black musicians and the black middle class ceased to be ashamed of their culture with the civil rights movement and became proud of jazz music. Jazz music has not only created negative social conditions, but has also been a force for racial integration, respect, and social mobility. Social mobility proves to be a very significant factor because it showcases a similarity between black jazz musicians and black rap artists in terms of their accomplishments in obtaining wealth and stardom because of the invention of their music. Jazz should be given more recognition and should be studied in more high schools and colleges in the United States so that students, particularly black students, can be educated about its origins. The origins of jazz music have been in much dispute and have caused many controversies. Though people may argue that jazz music was not exclusively invented by blacks, the fact remains that the great innovators of the music are indeed blacks. Gerard (1998) notes that African-American ideologists become offended “that each style of jazz—and each variety of blues, rhythms-and-blues, and rap, for that matter—have been appropriated from the African-American community almost the day after it was first heard there” (p. 14). As classical music is clearly European, jazz music should undoubtedly be considered African-American music. References Baskerville, J. D. (2003). The impact of black nationalist ideology on American jazz music of the 1960s and 1970s. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press. Dawson, N. J. (2001). Can you sing jazz? Perception and appreciation of jazz music among African American young adults. In J. L. Conyers, Jr. (Ed.), African American jazz and rap: Social and philosophical examinations of black expressive behavior (pp. 201-210). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Dorsey, L. (2001). “And all that jazz” has African roots! In J. L. Conyers, Jr. (Ed.), African American jazz and rap: Social and philosophical examinations of black expressive behavior (pp. 35-54). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Gerard, C. (1998). Jazz in black and white: Race, culture, and identity in the jazz community. Westport, CT: Praeger. Kofsky, F. (1998). Black music, white music: Illuminating the history and political economy of jazz. New York: Pathfinder. Levine, L. W. (1989). Jazz and American culture. The Journal of American Folklore, 102(403), 6-22. Retrieved October 23, 2008, from JSTOR database. Mackey, N. (1992). Other: From noun to verb. Representations 39, 51-70. Retrieved October 28, 2008, from JSTOR database. Means, R. L. (1968). Notes on Negro jazz: 1920-1950: The use of biographical materials in sociology. The Sociological Quarterly 9(3), 332-342. Retrieved November 5, 2008, from JSTOR database. Peretti, B. W. (1992). The creation of jazz: Music, race, and culture in urban America. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Ross, L. (2001). Jazz musicians in postwar Europe and Japan. In J. L. Conyers, Jr. (Ed.), African American jazz and rap: Social and philosophical examinations of black expressive behavior (pp. 90-116). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Thomas, R. (2001). The rhythm of rhyme: A look at rap music as an art form from a jazz perspective. In J. L. Conyers, Jr. (Ed.), African American jazz and rap: Social and philosophical examinations of black expressive behavior (pp. 163-169). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Wheaton, J. (1994). All that jazz! New York: Ardsley House. when i have more time i will come back and give some of my thoughts on the article, but for now let me just say that it will likely convince you that you are right, whatever you might believe lol
    • A World Without Ageism | Ashton Applewhite (Last post by Zenchi)
    • Wonderful video Alex, thank you for sharing it! Wonder if I just admitted to being "old"? :dry: We do live in a society obsessed with youth, and the youth run with it as far as they can in most cases, unless their parents are well grounded anyways. It certainly sheds light that we are still as a whole, rather unawakened and egocentric in regards to our outlook on longevity and the aging process. I'm at that place where most of the people I socialize with are either older than me, or quite a bit younger. That in itself can create a bit of friction as the younger crowd look at me as if I'm clearly over the hill, and the older crowd laughs when they remind me how young I am while calling me "kiddo." :unsure: So the question I suppose that begs to be asked, is why do we perpetuate all the stereotypes, not just with age, but with race, culture etc? Ingrained belief structures centering around certain stigmas? That's understandably acceptable as an answer for those younger who don't know any better, (quite possibly a result of the following) but what about older generations? Are belief structures still to blame, or are people just lazy and stubborn to admit there's an underlying issue beneath it all, and that is a fear from breaking from the norm and treating people as individuals instead as simply little more than a member of a certain group. Treating people as individuals requires time, it requires us to care enough to get to know someone enough to treat them as Individuals, and time is one thing many seem to lack. Perhaps it's not time that's the problem, perhaps people for the most part, just don't care enough to move past these stigmas in order to break the cycle. That would require work and energy spent, and treating people as Individuals means less time obsessing over the self. And then we wonder why some become anti social... :lol:
    • What would happen if humans disappeared? (Last post by Hrafn)
    • Quote: In my opinion, the planet (and / or entire sector) will be barren once humans are gone. I am not so sure of that, unless we upload our consciousness in a computer (Transcendence style) and turn the entire planet in a machine, life (even bacteria or fungi) will adapt to our absence and will go on starting a new evolutionary path. Moreover, even if we "computerise" all the surface area of the planet and sterilise it natural events such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and meteorite impact will occur. This events bring complex chemicals, heat and so on and can make the life cycle start again in the same way it started in the beginning. So I don't think the end of humankind will be the end of life in out system. Quote: Earth is already a relatively old planet in terms of the development of life. Most other planets in the universe are considerably younger in this respect (which is now a theory for why we haven't been able to detect other intelligence - there simply hasn't been enough time for it to evolve on other planets yet). Slooow down Cyan ahahah The theory your are quoting exists (is by Dimitar Sasselov if I remember correctly) but is just an hypothesis with very little support to it. We have discovered around 2100 exoplanets (number of exoplanet confirmed in 2015, but there are other 700 candidates). Around 350 of them are Earth-like planets or supearths. I'll do not take into account exomoons. Of these 350 exoplanets we have calculated the age of less than 10 and every result is around 3.5 Gyr or so. The Earth, in comparison, is 4.5 Gyr old (1 Gyr = 1 billion years). If every one of these planet have earth-like life on it probably there is just some multicellular organism and nothing more and your theory would be true. We have to notice, by the way, that we have the age of less than 10 planets and looking at the results I suppose is really unlikely not to find a planet (or many) older than the Earth. Anyway, no one know at the moment, we can be the oldest or the youngest planet, we don't have enough data to establish that. Quote: And this might sound arrogant: will it matter if there's life on Earth if there are no intelligent, self-aware beings? Who will be able to reflect on it? Not arrogant, maybe just playing the devil's advocate and it's a good thing. We weren't intelligent life forms. We were monkeys. And before being monkey we were unicellular organism. So yes, I think it really matters because some other life form can evolve, become self-aware and reflect on these things. If what you say is true then 4'499'800'000 years of 4'500'000'000 would have no sense; but is because of that gigantic number of years that we are here today, so I think they matter.
    • General Economics Discussion (Last post by Zenchi)
    • Quote: Hey TOTJO! In response to a skype convo in the knights group, I thought I would start a thread on a subject near and dear to me, Economics. To begin, I would like to ask if anyone here has read French economist Thomas Piketty's work 'Capital in the 21st Century?' I would like to start with that. Full disclosure, I have not finished reading it yet (on page 200 something). Dr. Piketty's central thesis is ' that when the rate of return on capital (r) is greater than the rate of economic growth (g) over the long term, the result is concentration of wealth, and this unequal distribution of wealth causes social and economic instability.' Dr Piketty goes on to exhaustively analyze why this seems to be the case as evidenced by centuries of economic data, and goes on to assert that the present state of inequality worldwide 'is not an accident, but rather a feature of capitalism'. This assertion gave me pause. I had never thought that to be the case, until I began reading Piketty's book. What do you guys think? Is inequality built into the workings of modern capitalism? And if so, is this beneficial to society as a whole? If not, how can we as Jedi address this inequality? Knights group huh? Been wondering where you spend all your free time here, lol. Thanks for the suggestion, ill definitely add this book to the pile I have waiting on me...
    • Marijuana and its use (Last post by Sephiroth_deus)
    • I have nothing to add regarding whether one should or should not use marijuana that hasn't been said here and on a million other message boards. However I was wondering about people's experiences with its use and how it effected one's meditations and/or spiritual connectivity (IE does it make this or that meditative exercise easier? Harder? If you feel the Force on a day to day basis does its use inhibit or improve that connection?). My personal understanding and experiences with such things (meditation/spiritual awareness) is extremely limited and I would be interested in reading other people's experiences and insights regarding such things and how they combine with marijuana.
    • Dreams...visions? (Last post by Adder)
    • I've been really into my dreams since a teenager as well, and had a few dooozies. So much potential power in dreaming its spooky. Last night I graduated naval aviation pilot training, and got a shiny red pilot wings badge :woohoo:
    • What do you think comes after death? (Last post by Khaos)
    • I think lots of things come after death. I just don't think said dead individual is around for it in any way natural,or supernatural. Life goes on though. My motto is that of Syrio Forel.
    • Conversations in Chat!! (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • Quote: Today's discussion was on good/evil and moral relativism Spoiler: (18:52:42) Lykeios: okay, my topic begins with a question... do you believe in evil? do you believe that it exists? (18:54:01) FAT: I believe that evil has to exist in an equal portion to good. An imbalance of one will reverse their polarities. (18:54:50) Parnerium: I don't think evil exists as an external entity or polluting force in the world (18:54:57) Lykeios: so yes, you do believe in evil. in that case what qualifies as evil? (not EVERYTHING that might qualify but just...a few basic things) (18:55:16) Lykeios: I don't either, Par (18:56:10) Rosalyn_J: oooh thats a good one (18:56:24) FAT: Evil = malicious. Anything done by someone or something with malicious intent is influenced by evil. (18:56:52) Parnerium: "Does style exist?" Well... there are things I see that I would describe as stylish. But it's an adjective that I use to explain a judgement as opposed to something that exists outside of that. (18:56:57) FAT: Cats are evil for chewing the legs off mice and leaving them on your pillow (18:57:11) Rosalyn_J: I think evil begins to exist at the time that we define good (18:57:17) Lykeios: good answer, FAT...I've never heard that definition (18:57:17) Rosalyn_J: See Tao te ching 2 (18:58:10) Lykeios: See that's why I don't believe in a moral "good" either...I think our actions stand for themselves without such judgements, they're just things that we do (18:58:56) FAT: But doing too much good encourages corruption. Every charity has corruption issues. (18:59:03) Lykeios: any judgement of good or evil will be completely subjective based on the person making the judgement (18:59:13) Aco: I would have to agree with Lykeios.. (18:59:19) Rosalyn_J: I think that at some point, in order to live together with a group of people, we have to create a set of guidelines (18:59:28) Rosalyn_J: its like reality (18:59:41) FAT: Mother Theresa did most of her visits to help the poor....but also spread the word of her religion. (18:59:47) Rosalyn_J: subjective, but in some areas agreed upon (19:00:57) Lykeios: well I think there are things that are conducive to living together in a society and things that aren't conducive to living in a society...there are things that should be avoided, but there is no "good" and no "evil" except in our minds (19:01:06) FAT: The Pope doesnt go anywhere ever to do anything unless there is a political message attached to it. Absolute Good corrupts. (19:01:31) Parnerium: Driving on the wrong side of the road isn't conducive to living in society, but I doubt many people would call it "evil" (19:01:55) Lykeios: right. a good example (19:02:59) Rosalyn_J: harm to another person within the group is the only thing that I might consider evil (19:03:17) Rosalyn_J: I was going to broaden it to animals, but we eat them (19:03:36) Parnerium: Tell that to PETA (19:03:40) Lykeios: can an animal do something evil? 0.o (19:03:58) Lykeios: oh wait...I know what you mean now...lmao. nevermind (19:04:30) Lykeios: but that is a good question anyway...can an animal be evil? or do something evil? (19:04:49) Rosalyn_J: hmmm (19:05:04) Rosalyn_J: its not held to the same standards as members of the group (19:05:58) Aco: an animal would have no sense of human subjectivity. (19:05:58) Parnerium: I'd call an animal evil if it plotted to torture it's brother and felt joy in seeing it suffer, but I'll never know if any of those thoughts or emotions are behind the actions of an animal (19:06:21) Rosalyn_J: it has its own standards related to its own group and species (19:06:55) Rosalyn_J: something that we might consider evil were the standards upheld for humans, for animals is quite normal (19:07:22) Rosalyn_J: consider for example how the lion chooses its prey not of the strong, but of the vulnerable (19:07:43) Rosalyn_J: it thins out the heard by killing off the weak and the left behind (19:08:03) Rosalyn_J: but it strengthens the herd as a whole (19:08:16) Rosalyn_J: something like Euginics (19:08:37) Rosalyn_J: or genocide would be on par with that idea (19:08:52) Rosalyn_J: or something like the greeks did (19:08:56) Rosalyn_J: you know (19:08:58) Lykeios: right...but the lion isn't evil for hunting the weak (19:09:12) Rosalyn_J: leaving their baby to die on the mountain (19:09:21) Rosalyn_J: I think they had a place for it (19:09:58) Avalonslight: I would say that evil is a moral, and therefore subjective.... (19:10:59) Rosalyn_J: if everyone decided what was evil in their own heart then someone could decide that murder is not evil (19:11:32) Lykeios: right, exactly. that's why I don't think evil exists...everyone can decide for themselves what is evil and what is not (19:12:13) Avalonslight: thus subjective... (19:12:18) Rosalyn_J: but the committing of murder, the killing of another individual, is it wrong? (19:12:28) Avalonslight: subjective to the moral standards of that particular culture and society (19:13:10) Rosalyn_J: subjective within the bounds of a group. is that truly subjective? (19:13:21) Parnerium: Evil is an adjective, not an entity (19:14:06) Lykeios: is killing wrong? It depends (19:14:22) Lykeios: it depends on the circumstances...on who you're killing...on why you're killing them (19:14:41) Rosalyn_J: Ah so it is case by case (19:14:49) Rosalyn_J: it also depends on perspective (19:14:50) Avalonslight: Certainly Ros... It may be an absolute within that particular group due to that particular group's morals, but in the interactions of that particular group with other groups, it becomes subjective. (19:15:13) Avalonslight: therefore, the moral itself is subjective, and thus whether it is evil or not subjective (19:15:41) Lykeios: yes, it does also depend on perspective (19:16:05) Parnerium: I've got to go for the night guys. It was nice talking with you all (19:16:16) Lykeios: and yes, it is case by case. for the most part though...killing is destructive to society and therefore undesirable (19:16:18) Temple Bot: Parnerium has left the chat. (19:16:18) Lykeios: good night Par (19:17:13) Temple Bot: FAT has left the chat. (19:17:27) Rosalyn_J: so evil and not evil depends not only on the rules set down by the particular group, but also the motivation behind the act? (19:17:37) Rosalyn_J: I think the same can be said for good (19:18:36) Avalonslight: Certainly I would not attempt to condone the acts of say... the US government on Hiroshima or Nagasaki... or even the Holocaust as a whole. I certainly wouldn't justify it or attempt to support it or anything of the sort. But if you stop and put yourself in your shoes at the time... From the perspective of the one, there was no other better way to end what was already a very costly, bloody war. From the perspective of the other (and perhaps terrifyingly so given some current modern political rhetoric), there was the perspective that those individuals were responsible for a great many wrongs and troubles in their society and there needed to be an "cleansing" to help put society back together. By today's "modern standards" we would tend to agree that both acts were "evil"... but. . . well... Again, I'm neither condoning nor justifying either event. (19:20:49) Avalonslight: And yes, I know and recognize that that was an extreme example which global society as a whole recognizes as a moral and ethical atrocity... But at the time, things were quite different on both sides. Or so I would like to think... (19:22:16) Rosalyn_J: I suppose that's why the doctrine is there (19:22:25) Rosalyn_J: because things like this can get messy (19:23:19) Avalonslight: I think that in 45 years, global society is going to judge us as harshly as we judge those of 45 years ago, simply because of changing morals.... (19:23:35) Rosalyn_J: the thing is that we cannot know the mind of a person committing either good or evil (19:23:43) Lykeios: hmmm...good point Ava (19:23:48) Rosalyn_J: oh for cetrtain (19:24:01) Rosalyn_J: consider the conflicts we are engaged in (19:24:22) Avalonslight: and that is why I say "evil" is subjective.. (19:24:30) Rosalyn_J: people are going to see a fuller picture of them because they will be emotionally removed (19:26:39) Avalonslight: I wish I were able to think of a less polarized example off the top of my head, but I'm finding it a bit hard to, simply because any other example would be one that is currently on going today, and we're in the middle of it, rather than removed from it like we can be of the events of the past. (19:27:22) Lykeios: I thought it was a fine example (19:28:29) Avalonslight: I'm not even certain I like to call something "evil" for that same reason. Certainly morally reprehensible, or ethically inappropriate... (19:30:11) Rosalyn_J: I think there is also the matter not only of looking at the person committing the act, but also the person on the recieving end (19:30:23) Rosalyn_J: do we take their view into consideration? (19:30:27) Avalonslight: I suppose another example would be something like.. I dunno... a political ideology. Say socialism. I've got family members who consider socialism to be the devil's work, and by virtue of that, inherently evil. (19:30:32) Lykeios: I don't call things evil anymore at all...unless I'm joking (19:31:05) Avalonslight: I still do... but I don't do it often. (19:31:13) Lykeios: I'm a socialist...lol (19:31:30) Avalonslight: And certainly we ought to, Ros. But it's a good question of whether or not we actually do. (19:32:16) Avalonslight: Well according to these particular family members then Lyk, you're doing the devil's work, unpatriotic, and a danger to the country, adn you should be either imprisoned or thrown out of the country... (19:32:20) Avalonslight: ;) (19:33:08) Rosalyn_J: wow (19:34:14) Avalonslight: I think it might be safe to say something along these lines: Just like the events of history are written by the victors, the morals of society are determined by the powerful. In the end, it is they who determine right and wrong, and good and evil, only with regard to their own personal viewpoint, and without regard to those around them. (19:34:36) Avalonslight: I have some pretty extreme fundamentalist family members. (19:35:37) Lykeios: I'm only a socialist because anarchy seems so unlikely (19:35:43) Lykeios: :P (19:36:40) Avalonslight: Maybe you're the devil incarnate himself then ;) :P (19:36:45) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat. (19:36:49) Lykeios: hahaha. maybe I am (19:36:57) Avalonslight: the Anti-Christ! that's it! I'm speaking with the Anti-Christ!!! (19:37:01) Avalonslight: lmao (19:37:21) Lykeios: perhaps you are ;) (19:37:28) Lykeios: how would you know? (19:37:39) Avalonslight: Hi Pro :) (19:37:50) Rosalyn_J: hey E (19:37:54) Avalonslight: I wouldn't, of course. And it's not like you would tell me if I were so... (19:38:01) Avalonslight stares at Lyk. (19:38:05) Rosalyn_J: we are talking about evil (19:39:20) Lykeios: hehehe. indeed (19:39:49) Lykeios: and hello Pro (19:40:50) Avalonslight: any way that is about as good of an answer i can give that one lyk (19:41:21) Lykeios: :) and a very good answer it was (19:41:31) Rosalyn_J: it was really good (19:42:00) Rosalyn_J: I think a good follow up question (19:42:09) Temple Bot: Proteus has been logged out (Timeout). (19:42:09) Rosalyn_J: knowing that evil is subjective (19:42:36) Rosalyn_J: how do we go about living that truth out? (19:43:50) Avalonslight: the same way our ancestors did before us.... acting the best we can with what we know and the knowledge of our current morals and acting within those current morals. I wouldn't say it's right to second guess what we currently call right or wrong based on the possibility of a future change due to forces we can't possibly begin to predict. (19:44:29) Reacher awakens. (19:44:29) Lykeios: I think it's always right to question what we call right and wrong...I think it's always right to question just about everything (19:44:36) Lykeios: hey Reacher! (19:44:54) Avalonslight: Hey Reacher (19:44:55) Reacher: Are we making a case for moral relativism? (19:45:37) Lykeios: I believe so (19:46:05) Reacher: That is a dangerous proposition. (19:46:44) Lykeios: morality is always relative (19:47:20) Reacher: I disagree, but I don't think in the way you imagine. (19:47:32) Reacher: *you might imagine. (19:47:54) Lykeios: so you're saying there is an objective morality? (19:48:10) Avalonslight: moral relativism and the subjectiveness of the concept of "evil" as a whole (19:48:39) Reacher: In the end it doesn't really matter if there is objective morality or no...the only thing that matters is the morality you're willing to accept. (19:49:47) Avalonslight: I woudl say that that in itself is a level of relativism... (19:50:30) Reacher: Perhaps...it is in keeping with the sentiment you wrote of earlier - that the powerful set the conditions for morality. (19:51:05) Reacher: Because if we have a different view of morality, and you're more powerful...well objectivity isn't really a factor, is it? (19:51:32) Avalonslight: No it's not (19:52:14) Avalonslight: I'll brb (19:52:18) Avalonslight: going to reset my chat window.... (19:52:23) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has left the chat. (19:52:25) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat. (19:53:25) Reacher: I've definitely seen evil...and if it isn't evil, then the fact that it isn't evil means little to me. Everything in me defines it that way. (19:53:55) Rosalyn_J: go on please (19:54:37) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has been logged out (Timeout). (19:55:30) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat. (19:57:33) Reacher: I do think I ascribe to relativity in most things...but I found that I have my limit in that as well. Usually related to the enjoyment of suffering. (19:59:21) Lykeios: There may be a few people I would enjoy seeing suffer... just being honest (20:00:05) Lykeios: but as a general rule I don't enjoy suffering (20:00:11) Reacher: Moral objectivists certainly run the risk of pressing the easy button on morality...but so do total relativists - in terms of consequences. (20:00:29) Rosalyn_J: I'll bbiab (20:02:20) Reacher: So perhaps I'm a moral consequentialist :D (20:03:09) Lykeios: interesting (20:07:22) Lykeios: morals based on the consequences of actions? (20:08:31) Reacher: Not solely... (20:08:52) Reacher: But weighted heavily in that direction. I'm not making a case for ends justifying means. (20:10:48) Lykeios: ahh, right (20:17:57) Reacher: I think I would've been a moral relativist had I not seen some REALLY messed up stuff a few times. Beyond politics and ideology. I when I found something I couldn't abide...I spent a lot of time thinking about it. What I concluded is that it didn't matter if it was objectively or subjectively amoral - I simply couldn't abide it. Perhaps that says more about me than my assessment of it...but there it is. (20:18:16) Reacher: -I (20:19:11) Avalonslight: Yeah I get that (20:19:34) Lykeios: makes sense to me... (20:20:30) Avalonslight: I would have to say that in general, I think those who are current or former military, particularly deployers, have a firmer set of morals than other segments of the population. Simply because they get exposed to so much more than your average individual (20:21:10) Lykeios: that sounds about right to me. I can see that (20:22:26) Reacher: I feel like it made me a bit more sensitive to when I think I see something amoral. 99.9% of everything I see I don't think of as 'evil' but when I do I really can't get it out of my head as anything but. (20:23:20) Temple Bot: Kahn_Xander has joined the chat. (20:23:36) Avalonslight: I'm not sure I would say that moral relativism makes it impossible to see something as 'evil' or 'morally reprehensible' though... Just because you accept that morals can vary, doesn't mean you have to accept the variation from your own. (20:23:58) Temple Bot: Proteus has joined the chat. (20:24:10) Rosalyn_J: I think there was a good point made recently (20:24:22) Rosalyn_J: about the people in power making the rules (20:24:26) Avalonslight: wb Ros (20:24:34) Rosalyn_J: we can shout subjectivity as we like (20:25:04) Rosalyn_J: but its the people in power, not ourselves, that determine the morality of our actions (20:25:19) Rosalyn_J: and I think this goes in spheres (20:25:32) Rosalyn_J: there is a small sphere which you control (20:25:47) Rosalyn_J: mainly those things that you do that don't harm others (20:26:08) Rosalyn_J: if its not against the law, its within your right to decide whether to do it or not (20:26:17) Rosalyn_J: and then you have your familial group (20:26:43) Rosalyn_J: a microcosm of society with views that are held by those in power within that small group (20:26:59) Rosalyn_J: parents, aunts, uncles etc (20:27:11) Rosalyn_J: and then you have your social group (20:27:22) Rosalyn_J: individuals you choose to associate with (20:27:31) Rosalyn_J: whose opinion you value (20:27:41) Rosalyn_J: there are morals there too (20:27:53) Rosalyn_J: lastly you have the "society" (20:28:14) Rosalyn_J: for ease lets just call that "government" (20:28:29) Reacher: Mmm...careful there. (20:28:37) Avalonslight: Very true, but typically you're raised within the morals of that sphere determined by that majority, so your morals end up aligning with those who are in power. It's why it takes so long for morals to change in the first place... why things like like slavery were morally acceptable for so long, or male civil superiority (ex: men having the right to vote but women not), and more recently, the morals related to marriage relationships and the treatment of unborn children/fetuses/whatever you want to call them... (20:28:53) Rosalyn_J: because when you commit acts outside of the bounds of society" you are tried by the government large or small (20:31:36) Temple Bot: Kahn_Xander has been logged out (Timeout). (20:32:28) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has been logged out (Timeout). (20:33:00) Lykeios: I can agree with all that...there are certainly various spheres that we fit into (20:33:34) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has joined the chat. (20:34:06) Temple Bot: Avalonslight has joined the chat. (20:35:22) Arthur_H.: Are we still talking about morality (20:37:40) Avalonslight: I think that those spheres though are why it's important to recognize that morals are subjective and will vary from sphere to sphere.... Certainly in order for the better good of the one sphere as a whole it is probably best to make rulings off of the prevailing morality of that sphere. But is it morally or even ethically acceptable to force a set moral of another unrelated sphere simply because that sphere has a differing moral regarding that same topic? Who gets to make those judgments... (20:39:04) Temple Bot: Arthur_H. has been logged out (Timeout). (20:40:04) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has joined the chat. (20:40:21) josephbrotzman19: Philosophical discussion? (20:40:49) Rosalyn_J: We are talking about evil and moral relativism (20:41:29) Rosalyn_J: that is a good point Ava (20:42:17) Rosalyn_J: I'm torn (20:42:31) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has been logged out (Timeout). (20:42:49) Rosalyn_J: because I think by us engaging in something completely subjective we may rend the fabric of social cohesion (20:43:02) Rosalyn_J: but I can see where you are coming from (20:43:13) Rosalyn_J: maybe I am just fatalistic (20:43:28) Rosalyn_J: I wonder what would happen if we had no forced moral code? (20:43:47) Reacher: I think it's vitally important to have an agile sense of morality and ethics. Whatever we decide to do, and whatever we believe does not excuse us from our responsibility to think. (20:43:52) Rosalyn_J: if nothing were good or bad would people still be able to live in harmony (20:45:06) Avalonslight: Please understand I am partially playing devil's advocate in my rhetoric here. If only because I think it's important for people to realize that what they determine to be good or wrong is going to be based upon their own raising. And we need to stop and think "is it right for me to apply my morals to this situation?" (20:45:46) Rosalyn_J: I think that it would only be right if it directly affected you (20:46:01) Lykeios: alright guys, I hate to leave in the middle of this wonderful discussion but I've gotta head off to bed so I can get up for work tomorrow (20:46:12) Lykeios: good night everyone! (20:46:17) Reacher: I think we have to consider values, obligations, and consequences. (20:46:20) Reacher: Goodnight! (20:46:22) Rosalyn_J: Lyk would it be ok to post this? (20:46:30) Lykeios: of course, feel free :) (20:46:40) Rosalyn_J: well I might as well ask everyone engaging lol (20:46:51) Reacher: Please do, Ros. (20:46:52) Rosalyn_J: how does everyone feel about having this posted? (20:47:09) Rosalyn_J: we don't have to stop the party (20:47:16) Proteus: i would partake, but i feel like there is a book i should have read before attending this :P (20:47:25) Rosalyn_J: haha (20:49:07) Temple Bot: Lykeios has been logged out (Timeout). (20:49:45) Reacher: Moral values, subjective or no, play a part in ethical decision-making. Our obligations do as well...if I am a teacher, do my morals have any place in the classroom? Even if objective (by my judgment)? What about the obligation I have to the institution I teach at? What if it's a Catholic School and I disagree with their teachings? If I believe in objective morality do I have a leg to stand on in terms of deviating from their curriculum? The last is consequences...do I hold to my morals and obligations even if the consequences are absolutely terrible? (20:50:04) Reacher: Do consequences have any place in ethical decision-making? (20:51:17) Rosalyn_J: good point (20:51:32) Avalonslight: I think k they have to play a part in that. (20:52:18) Avalonslight: And to be fair, I would say that there are some universal morals that cannot be varied from culture to culture... But perhaps that's idealistic of me. (20:52:43) Reacher: Then in relativist terms, why not just weight entirely upon consequences? (20:52:52) Rosalyn_J: And I wonder if this idea that I only have the right to exercise my morals when something directly affects me, I don't know if that will make me selfish (20:52:58) Rosalyn_J: or blind or what (20:53:26) Rosalyn_J: if there is a starving child in the street, can I give it food? (20:53:35) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has joined the chat. (20:54:52) Avalonslight: I would personally say you're morally obligated to... (20:55:07) Rosalyn_J: why (20:55:09) Avalonslight: But that's just me. (20:55:15) Rosalyn_J: it doesnt affect me (20:55:23) josephbrotzman19: Avalonslight I disagree but that's cool (20:56:09) Reacher: rarehistoricalphotos.com/​vulture-little-girl/ (20:56:37) Avalonslight: Because that would fall into my idea of "universal morals"... In this case a moral obligation to preserve an innocent life where one is capable. The child starving may not directly affect you, but it is within your capability to ease it's suffering. To ignore it would be wrong. (20:56:39) Rosalyn_J: I saw that (20:56:56) Rosalyn_J: now see? (20:57:00) Reacher: I think it's an interesting case to explore some of what we're talking about. (20:57:17) Rosalyn_J: why should there not be a law that says there ought to be no starving child? (20:58:05) Avalonslight: I would ask why isn't there one already. (20:58:31) Rosalyn_J: because people have different views on who ought to feed the child (20:58:43) Avalonslight: Why do we sit back and watch when it is well beyond our capacity to ensure that every child is well fed. (20:59:10) Rosalyn_J: consider social welfare programs and the unbelievable idea of the "welfare mother" (20:59:12) Avalonslight: That's a different matter all together though. (20:59:27) Rosalyn_J: how so? (21:01:44) Temple Bot: josephbrotzman19 has been logged out (Timeout). (21:01:57) Avalonslight: Moral right vs active responsibility. No one is going to willingly take active responsibility for something when someone else exists to do so, simply to save themselves the cost of effort and money. That does not mean the moral obligation ceases to exist purely because there is argument over who holds the active responsibility. (21:02:27) Avalonslight: We get very selfish when we can place active responsibility onto someone else, as a general rule. The moral obligation still exists. (21:02:37) Rosalyn_J: but then what not pushing the morals of myself on others (21:02:54) Rosalyn_J: what about if someone else's morals relate to the survival of the fittest (21:03:06) Rosalyn_J: and pulling oneself up by their bootstraps (21:03:13) Rosalyn_J: and not giving handouts this was a great conversation! moral relativism is useful and not just ridiculous and socially destructive when you understand it as being about understanding, motives, and circumstances is it wrong to steal? who is stealing what, and why? are you feeding a staving baby the only way you can? are you stealing the plans to the death star? have you just conned the old lady that likes to feed the ducks out of her life savings? every act has a motive and impulse underneath it, and this is what distinguishes good from evil in the broadest strokes, "evil" is selfishness developed to the point of predatory malevolence this guy is a good example you dont have to use the word "evil" if you dont like, any number of words or phrases might be used instead but it is easy to understand how such a person is a danger to those around him regardless of what culture you place him in, and from that its clear that the word describes a type of thought and behavior that is very real i would add that just because an evil person tells you that they believe they are doing good (like isis murdering and raping their neighbors in the name of allah) does not at all at mean that you as a decent person are obligate to acknowledge that assertion as having any kind of merit whatsoever regarding some things that were said in that conversation: you cant compare us to other animals it would be absurd to expect a giraffe to navigate the internet or file a tax return right? well, so too is it silly to think that we can interact with reality and relate to each other with the simplicity of giraffes we have the most complex society of any earth species and sophisticated cooperation is integral to our survival also, people get confused with morality and assume that it is a top-down imposition of the ruling class or the religious leadership i blame marx for this misunderstanding and caution people not to be too impressed with sociologists oppression certainly exists but thats not all there is to it by any means and maybe not even most of it but all that is another discussion, for now let me just saythat civilization works better with an administrating class than without potentially dangerous as they are, the police are useful, military is useful, government is useful, ect generally, the morality of a culture the deference to transmission of the prominent lessons contained within that cultures historical memory sometimes humans dont learn well or dont interpret well, or hold on to things way beyond their usefulness- well basically human beings have a kooky streak a mile wide- so theres a lot of backward stuff in the world but the essence of morality is "acting in such a way so as to respect my own best interests as well as the best interests of my society in general and those i encounter in particular, to the greatest extent to which this is possible" and while different cultural circumstances, norms, and hierarchies will require or allow for different ways to express that theme, and different cultures place more or less emphasis on the individual vs the collective, morality everywhere is humankinds effort to live out that basic ideal
    • What we can learn from KOTR (Last post by JamesSand)
    • Never played it :) But in support of "video games as legit media" - I quite enjoy the morality of early Fallout games (Help the Sheriff kick the casino boss out of town? Whoops, Sheriff becomes a tyrant! Help the small town fix a powerplant? Whoops! Nearby town invades and wipes them out to steal their power. Lessons in trying to be a "hero" all the time >_< )

There are 342 visitors, 5 guests and 42 members online (one in chat): Akkarin, Br. John, Grom Fett, steamboat28, Jestor, J_Roz, Wescli Wardest, Proteus, V-Tog, rugadd, Alexandre Orion, Rosalyn J, Rickie, rrhodes67, Kit, Avalonslight, tzb, Zenchi, peace, Goken, GalUnDrux, Loudzoo, Atticus, Tellahane, Hyrum Tigerprice, Ke JinnDakken, Jack.Troutman, Kyrin Wyldstar, Snowy Aftermath, Codama, Leah Starspectre, Albekl, mfayj, Arisaig, Jaxz, tanco135, Assassin@Buell, Genoe Jhalam, stoneoxmike.

Follow Us