Me neither. Although I have been accused of being anally retentive. Whatever that means...
dj On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 4:39 AM, deripsni<[email protected]> wrote: > > I have never been accused of being organized :-] > > On Jul 21, 2:55 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: >> “…If you don't mind, could you tell me what part of my comment does >> not relate to the topic?” – deri >> >> Deri, apparently my words were misconstrued. I said that I found >> little/no coherence in your point … >> In other words, it didn’t make sense to me nor did it appear to be at >> all well organized. My words “..for this topic” were merely meant to >> say that my comment about coherence was limited to your posts to this >> one topic in case you had posted elsewhere. That was all. >> The question/guess, that you clarified for me (thanks) about the >> timeline you were using may become clearer over time at this group. >> Often we discuss our beliefs about how things were say, 100 years ago… >> 1000 years ago etc. >> Thanks again for your response. >> >> On Jul 20, 4:59 pm, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I can only relate to my life experiences and the history I have read. >> > If there is another source I should refer to I would be happy to >> > research it. I guess I am stating my observations based on this, as I >> > suppose you were when you agreed with archytas' statement that men >> > kill for petty, personal reasons, which I happen to disagree with. >> > Although others may consider someones actions in this regard petty, I >> > am sure those who kill do not feel this way. Similar to the evaluation >> > of truth, the level of pettiness is in the eye of the beholder. >> >> > If you don't mind, could you tell me what part of my comment does not >> > relate to the topic? >> >> > On Jul 20, 7:25 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > “Although violence seems to be intrinsic with many earlier cultures, >> > > it was typically dealt out as a penatly by lawmakers, and not wanton >> > > acts of harm dished out by somebody who got cut off on the way home >> > > from work. I guess there are more reasons to get irate these days as >> > > stress levels rise due to monetary insecurity, over-medication, and >> > > security cameras ;-]” – deri >> >> > > Again I must ask what you base the above belief about there being more >> > > violence today than in the past. I can only guess that your comparison >> > > has to do with things during your lifetime and not before your birth >> > > now. Is this correct? Also, I too appreciate humor and irony but so >> > > far find little/no coherence in your point for this topic. Any >> > > expansion/clarification of your belief structure would be appreciated. >> >> > > On Jul 20, 10:42 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > I'm afraid not. There seems to be many more acts of 'casual' violence >> > > > these days compared to when I was a child. Maybe we just hear about it >> > > > more because of the mulitude of media sources. Although violence seems >> > > > to be intrinsic with many earlier cultures, it was typically dealt out >> > > > as a penatly by lawmakers, and not wanton acts of harm dished out by >> > > > somebody who got cut off on the way home from work. I guess there are >> > > > more reasons to get irate these days as stress levels rise due to >> > > > monetary insecurity, over-medication, and security cameras ;-] >> >> > > > On Jul 20, 12:28 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > “I am sure that early man, before being saturated with media, >> > > > > politics, >> > > > > religious dogma, and over-population, was a much more peaceful >> > > > > animal.” – deri >> >> > > > > Quite an interesting opinion there deripsni. Do you have anything at >> > > > > all to support the idea? >> >> > > > > On Jul 20, 5:10 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > > Maybe knowledge breeds violence? In the unlikely case that a man >> > > > > > has >> > > > > > not been introduced to religion or politics, would he still have >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > same propensity to kill as the modern man? Maybe, but the reasons >> > > > > > would be fewer, say for perceived territorial infringement, or >> > > > > > protection of family and food. >> >> > > > > > I am sure that early man, before being saturated with media, >> > > > > > politics, >> > > > > > religious dogma, and over-population, was a much more peaceful >> > > > > > animal. >> > > > > > A person's conscience seems to dictate activity ranges, and today's >> > > > > > man has had his conscience mezmerized by over-information, over- >> > > > > > breeding, over-indulgence, etc. Unfortuately I cannot forsee a >> > > > > > reversal in this trend short of some global catastrophe that wipes >> > > > > > out >> > > > > > a large number of the human animals that inhabit this rock. >> >> > > > > > Many can speculate as to what breeds violence but, in my opinion, a >> > > > > > healthy conscience precludes any unsolicited violent activity. I >> > > > > > think >> > > > > > a good question to ask is 'what causes the deterioration of a >> > > > > > healthy >> > > > > > conscience?'. Unfortunately, I think there are too many answers to >> > > > > > that question. >> >> > > > > > On Jul 18, 6:42 pm, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > > > A common belief today is that religion breeds violence. Isn't >> > > > > > > this >> > > > > > > like saying politics is violent? I read the below today, and it >> > > > > > > gave >> > > > > > > me food for thought, particularly that last sentence: >> >> > > > > > > "Some kill because their faiths specifically command them to do >> > > > > > > so; >> > > > > > > some kill though their faiths explicitly forbid them to do so; >> > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > some kill because they have no faith and hence believe all >> > > > > > > things are >> > > > > > > permitted to them. Polytheists, monotheists, and atheists kill. >> > > > > > > Men >> > > > > > > kill for their gods, or for their God, or because there is no >> > > > > > > God and >> > > > > > > human destiny must be shaped by gigantic exertions of human >> > > > > > > will. They >> > > > > > > kill out of pursuit of universal truths, and out of fidelity to >> > > > > > > tribal >> > > > > > > allegiances; for faith, blood and soil, empire, national >> > > > > > > greatness, >> > > > > > > "socialist utopia", capitalism, and "democratization". Men >> > > > > > > always seek >> > > > > > > gods in who's name they may perform great deeds or commit >> > > > > > > unspeakable >> > > > > > > atrocity, even if those gods are not gods but "tribal honor", or >> > > > > > > "genetic imperatives" or "social ideals" or "human destiny" or >> > > > > > > "liberal democracy". Then again men also kill on account of >> > > > > > > money, >> > > > > > > land, love, pride, hatred, envy or ambition. ... The truth is >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > religion and irreligion are cultural variables, but killing is a >> > > > > > > human >> > > > > > > constant"(*) >> >> > > > > > > (*) David Bently Hart, _atheist delusion_ pg >> > > > > > > 12http://www.librarything.com/work/book/47946437-Hidequotedtext- >> >> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
