And one's point of view is not fixed. And justification can be just another form of denial.
On Aug 1, 8:49 am, Allan Heretic <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
