Posts by recordari
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
It's a sport.
Yeah but the crickets on and we might win, and then there's family, work, some other discussions on morality and the like. I think a bit of DID might come in handy, if 'they' could exist in parallel universes, and then jump back together into this one when appropriate.
Like the latest Ian Banks novel 'Transition.'
-
Wow you really have to pay attention to these things.
I don't know how you all do it.
Should have skipped the B52s and watched some more 'discourse' in action. Was great fun though. 'Planet Clare' was a highlight.
-
Surely the evolutionary stance on this is that we are by nature moral because its, in the end, advantageous as a society and a species, for us to be so.
But are 'we' in fact moral? I mean has the evolutionary process, along with the religious underpinning of many western societies, lead to a state of exemplary moral fortitude?
It is hard to see it when, if you take the personal agenda (e.g. oil, power, greed) away from almost every conflict in the world, the US, and the rest of us, wouldn't get involved, and the Muslim radicals would have less reason to feel aggrieved. I've yet to see an example of a perfectly 'moral' war, on either side.
While it is difficult to accept that there is no alternative to terrorism, it is equally difficult to accept that it is 'morally' Ok for UN peacekeepers to rape the people they were sent to protect, or the US and British Armed services torturing prisoners at Abu Ghraib. These extreme versions of moral bankruptcy are the obvious ones, with many more insidious, and corrupt, forms of moral turpitude hidden under the heading 'for the greater good', when in fact it's just conflict of interest and vested interest lining the corporate pockets.
And is it 'moral' for the developed west to expect the developing countries to compromise their dream of being 'global participants' to help clean up the mess we've created in our recent industrial history?
Of course, in case you think I'm hinting at it, there is no more evidence of a moral compass in religion than in other arenas. The starting point of 'my belief system is superior to yours' as an obvious example.
In the face of all this, how do we guide our children through the minefield of 'morality' as depicted in media and 'official history' books? My aim is that by participating in a diverse community they see that other opinions are valid, and if not valid then they should enter into a discussion, based on sound reasoning, and if that doesn't work, smile and breath through the nose.
As a final point, Islander talks about being in touch with the land, among other things, and I fully agree that we, as humans, need to see ourselves as part of an ecosystem, and stop believing it is our 'god given' right to be in control.
PS Seems this bloody bus has been more thought provoking and 'generative' than my initial cynical self would allow.
-
Our individual perceptions are so unique, why attempt to broach the untenable?
Seconded. Just noticed on Stuff.co.nz that of 160000 voters, 58% voted 'no' to 'Is there a god?
Does anyone feel vindicated, or otherwise?
Nice cupcakes by the way.
-
See, there is clearly a role for the innocuous gnome. You're all having fun defining the concept of PAS, and I'm learning some more about 'the way things are done round here'.
For some reason I'm reminded of the notions of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft. Community and Society. Is it useful to define the participation in both broader 'society', and these microcosms, in these terms? Acknowledging that it is a continuum.
-
And that does deter people from entering, I know. People can feel a bit intimidated by it. I do always like seeing "Posts: 1" in the left-hand column and knowing that someone's taken the plunge.
Yes, and having survived the bFm initiation gauntlet of the late 80s, I wonder if I can be bothered. I must admit though that am feeling more 'stable' about the fear after some of these words of encouragement. This particular string has sure been an interesting place to dwell, but now it's time for something else.
If there aren't already 'gnomes' in blogs, maybe I'll be one of those.
Gnome me, before you judge me...
-
If other people feel the same way, then there might be less diversity of viewpoint in some threads because only a few commenters have the logical chops, the information, and the fortitude to put a sound case.
That's what I wanted to say. But you said it way more eloquently. Bringing your A-game from the get go means you don't have the chance to cut your teeth.
As for using real name bit, if I thought others could respect peoples privacy, or not get personal, I would, but I don't so I won't.
-
I'm not sure what I was looking for when I signed on, but I can't say I've found it yet. Perhaps apart from being told to 'take a look in the mirror'. I looked. Yip, it's still me, and happy for it.
It seems that it is important to assess the 'status quo' opinion from the original, or sentinel, blog post and then take sides. If you pick the opposing view of the 'Opinion Leaders', be prepared for them to shout you down, or de-construct your post at a semantic level. And god help you if you attempt impartiality. Oh yeah, he doesn't exist, so you're on your own. Since we get little impartiality from mainstream media these days, bit hopeful to expect it in a blog. That's my naivety I suppose.
As for this 'flame war', trolls and gnomes (are there gnomes? There should be gnomes. I like gnomes), what's the bloody point?
It's like an uninvited guest at a party, who throws up in the kitchen, hits on your wife (partner/ girlfriend/ teenage daughter/ son), breaks your favourite vase, then just when you think they've been ejected, you wake up to find them sleeping in the flower bed out front. Sheeesh. Get a hobby...
The premise of this is good, and RB and co clearly have some skill and ability in the field of journalism and highlighting topics of interest and import to 'us kiwis'. There I go all kiss arse again... Oh well, my forebears raised me to bring chocolates and flowers, not hooks and barbs, when visiting folk.
Perhaps I either need to take it more seriously, and spend hours editing my 'brain dumps' (but isn't this supposed to be spontaneous?) or less seriously and just drop one liners.
Are Tiger Woods jokes allowed?
Ducks to avoid flying hyperbole...
-
But extrapolating the atheists are a bunch of whiney babies when you consider yourself one.....Well I'll leave that in your hands.
Thanks. I like my existential angst served cold. Preferably with a cupcake.
It's called having an objective outlook on your own subjectivity. These forums are good for that. -
Oh you really shouldn't kick straight in with the sarcasm, it show's you don't have a grasp of a whole range of issue's. Which will put a lot of people off.
Ah, so sarcasm is out. Will remember that when taking on other topics.
Clearly I have touched a nerve. Sorry for that. You live and learn, with a bit of luck.
As for having a prejudiced view of those of non-belief, that would mean I'm anti myself.
As you were. I'll crawl back into my cave and listen to some Manic Street Preachers. Intravenous Agnostic should do the job. Afterthought: At the end of this he says 'I wish I could crawl into a big concrete bunker like J D Salinger, and never be seen again, so I never let anyone down.' Actually that makes me quite sad. But that's another story altogether...
And since we all need a good laugh, check out this video. It makes a better argument than many, including mine. Creationist Thought