Actually Lee I think I have reasonable good, it seems to be more of a judgment call than anything else, then that will depend on your point of view.. I always come to the question am Ia having to justify my action. Allan
On 1 aug. 2011, at 13:51, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Allen, > > The thing with that is have you tried to live a life doing no harm? > It's impossible mate, it really is. > > On Jul 15, 10:59 pm, allan deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: >> The original guide line to live by is simply "Do no harm" the question >> comes down to is how many ways and laws do we have to create to justify our >> violations of the guideline and guidance? Like thou shall not commit >> murder,. >> Allan >> >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Umm that is an interesting take on it Tony. >> >>> I'm a great beliver in the right of the individual to live life how >>> they wish to. It comes as a by product of my other great belife yep >>> the 'Golden Rule' so I must disagree with you about not allowing >>> individuals to cuase unhappiness. >> >>> If an individual wishes to life a live causeing unhappiness for all >>> then that is their choice and they must then take the consequences of >>> that choice, if that be prison or violence or whatever. I would not >>> curtail this right of the individual but then again, I would personly >>> make the choice to counter this individuals actions if turned against >>> me or mine, and I don't doubt that others would make the same choice >>> that I would. >> >>> I also doubt the power of murder to change thinks for the worst for >>> the majority of people, the rate of murder is overall really not that >>> high, so I must also disagree with you on that score. >> >>> For me the evilness of murder stems not from taking somebody elses >>> life, after all we are all destined to die, so death in and of itself >>> I can't see as an evil thing. Nope for me it is the taking away from >>> somebody all future choices, this I think is a great evil. >> >>> To make a man a slave does the same. Again all attributed to my >>> belife in the golden rule. >> >>> On Jul 14, 1:49 pm, Tony Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Jul 12, 5:02 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >> >>>>> Hey Tony, >> >>>>> Indeed and I would go further and say that good and evil are wholey >>>>> subjective. >> >>>>> Ben declares that murder is normaly counted as evil, but sometimes it >>>>> serves the greater good. I would ask you all to consider why exaclty >>>>> is it that the majority agree with this. >> >>>>> In short why is murder evil? >> >>>> Because we desire stability in society, and murder causes pain and >>>> discord, making societal progress hard for us all. Is the murderer >>>> evil? No, I think the murderer is sick, but society must hold the >>>> individual accountable for their actions in some sense, or it will >>>> collapse into chaos. One cannot allow individuals to cause unhappiness >>>> for everyone else, or no one will be happy. >> >>>> Peace, >> >>>> Tony >> >>>>> On Jul 11, 6:31 pm, Tony Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> Hi Ben - >> >>>>>> A good question, and not one that I haven't spent much time >>>>>> considering. Here are my thoughts. >> >>>>>> One many levels, good and evil are subjective. When a cheetah kills a >>>>>> gazelle, that is good in the cheetah's eye and evil in the gazelle's. >>>>>> Indeed, our sense of what is good or bad rests first in personal >>>>>> pleasure and pain, and as we mature, is extended by association to >>>>>> include that which helps or hurts an object of attachment. For the >>>>>> rich, the current financial situation is good, and for the many poor >>>>>> it is evil. One's personal judgment is generally dependent on their >>>>>> perspective. >> >>>>>> One the other hand, if we assume some greater good, then actions >>> which >>>>>> encourage it are good, and those that set it back or hurt it are bad >>>>>> or even evil. For instance, for those that believe in evolution and >>>>>> would rather be a trillion human cells able to think on our level >>>>>> rather than a pool of algae, evolution may be viewed as a universally >>>>>> good thing. Actions that encourage it are good and those that impede >>>>>> it are bad. Since evolution happens on all levels, from stars to >>>>>> physical organism to minds and memes, one may view this as a >>> universal >>>>>> good. Of course, this depends on whether one personally believes in >>>>>> evolution, so again, even this objective good is subjectively >>>>>> estimated by the individual. >> >>>>>> Hope that was a valuable contribution. Have a nice day >> >>>>>> Tony >> >>>>>> On Jul 8, 11:16 pm, Ben <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>> I do not believe that we can define good and evil without entering >>>>>>> into a philosophical conversation. >> >>>>>>> Good and evil are not absolute rules nor can there be a universal >>> good >>>>>>> or a universal evil. >>>>>>> The concept of what is good and what is evil must be taught to us >>> as a >>>>>>> child, because we are not born inherently good or evil. >> >>>>>>> To murder is bad. However the statement does not speak of a >>> universal >>>>>>> good. Murder in so many cases has been used in good ways. >>>>>>> Euthanization has been used to end a suffering patients life. >>> Abortion >>>>>>> has been used to prevent a child from being born when childbirth >>> could >>>>>>> end a mothers life. To murder is bad in many cases but not all. The >>>>>>> extreme case of the word murder means to kill another human being >>>>>>> under conditions specifically covered in law. We can not define >>> murder >>>>>>> without discussing the implications. There are many instances where >>>>>>> murder must be re-defined as a good not a bad. >> >>>>>>> A child is not born inherently good or evil. Human beings are >>> unique >>>>>>> in the power of our brain. We are able to quickly associate good >>> and >>>>>>> bad. These associations are learned from society, our elders and >>>>>>> peers. A child that is born with no contact from these influences >>> will >>>>>>> associate good and evil with pain and suffering. A child with >>> contact >>>>>>> from these influences will be able to conceptualize good and evil >>> and >>>>>>> apply it to many different aspects of everyday life. >> >>>>>>> Finally, no universal good or evil will ever be agreed upon. There >>> is >>>>>>> no absolute good or bad that we must all follow. One concept can >>>>>>> impede on another and we must accept those societies that have a >>>>>>> rational way of thinking. Each society must continue to evolve >>> these >>>>>>> rules and change the commandments that were made centuries ago to >>> fit >>>>>>> the present day reality of life. To murder is bad, however we live >>> in >>>>>>> a civilized county in which many cases of murder are legal because >>>>>>> they are good. No one is born inherently good or evil and our >>> society >>>>>>> must continue to define every aspect of what could be good or bad >>> in >>>>>>> order to teach our children and they to develop their own, more >>>>>>> complete understanding to be taught to their children. >> >>>>>>> I challenge those of you who have read this to define an absolute >>> good >>>>>>> and evil. >> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Ben Kaylor- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>>> - Show quoted text - >> >> -- >> ( >> ) >> I_D Allan >> >> If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken >> Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text -
