Almost thought provoking

[speed]

Aj death - your comment Freedom is inherent in all of us- is quite interesting. I know from my perspective freedom is one of the most imprtant aspects of my life-I yearn for freedom- I detest anything that hampers my freedom- yet I am also left with the thought that if I did succeed and attain total freedom- just what would I have- unbearable solitude- and a lawless chaotic society- in short nothing- its an interesting paradox- man wishes for nothing but freedom- but cant handle freedom when he gets it.

As for America- yes I do think the cracks are in the wall- I really think it starts with the whole Kennedy Assasination( on atrust of gov. level)- but lately with the last pres. election- and the calif election- things are really getting out of hand- to have any say - either in politics or in court- one needs losts of money- and this is starting to go too far.

 

[AjDeath]

@Speed-Kreator has a very useful solution to your problem, it worked for us in the U.S. and as far as I can see it will be tried again over here within my or my childrens lifetime, I whole heartedly support a new American Revolution, hence the sedition remark in my signature, I WILL NOT BE CHAINED! And I will fight for my freedom as it has been fought for since the dawn of time, the problem is some of the ideas that socialists and philosophers have put forth have actually been taken seriously, some day it will be the same as it is today and history will be repeated, but I also believe that one day man will wake up out of its violent stupor and finally shed the animal within us, destruction and chaos is not a useful solution, I think we can all agree on that, but neither is NO solution, so we the people of the world exercise our only other option when confronted by another angry little man who feels inadequate and needs to feel big, by taking our freedom, they threaten my life, and they way I see it, I am allowed by todays relative morality(an idea I absolutely abhor) to use lethal force when someone tries to take what is what is mine and mine only, my way of life, the act of forcing their oppression onto me is in essence them taking away my way of life, an unacceptable violation of me and mine. the slippery slope of what some of you call "the Grey Area" comes into play here though, when you look at what Americans have done to Natives and to the people all over the world is horrifying, there are people in America who want to stop this, only a little while ago I thought they would win, I looked at the things done to us in the name of protecting freedom, the Patriot Act, the Fre Information Act, the fact that George W. released a Presidential elective telling the CIA and the FBI to stay away from Al Queda and the Bin Ladens on penalty of their jobs just before 9-11, Gun control, all these morons putting animal rights before Human Rights, it made me sick, I didn't see anyone in the U.S. caring, I was devastated at the total apathy people have for their own lives, but more and more, I have met people who do care and maybe, just maybe there are more out there who will take action. I man can hope.

 

[speed]

You know if we ever met- Im sure wed be best friends- I couldnt agree with you more on a yearning for a new revolution- Yet, still one must ask what would be put in the place of the gov. we have now? every single revolution has proceeded to put a bigger more murderous gov in power than there was before. Even Bakunin seemed to understand this. SO- as much as I like a revolution- maybe we need an active revolution- one that seriously changes our political structure- but not all at one time.

Maybe tommorrow Ill have the time to come up with some more thoughts on this- but I gotta go.

 

[metu]

I'd like to start by saying that if you guys broke up your posts more it would be easier to read. That would be cool.

I see art as expression. It seems to me that the best part of expressing yourself is that it can inspire others in many ways. I don't see how you can inspire people without expressing something. I see no reason why you can't entertain while you inspire.

However, entertainment for profit, often turns to the bitch of finance. Making people smile and dance is not, necessarily a bad thing. When your motive is greed, however, you're no longer inspiring. You're milking.

I used to think that anyone who went on mtv was selling out. I was furious when I heard Hendrix on a Pontiac commercial. But, what about those African singers who did an album with Paul Simon. Soon after the tour, they did a commercial.

They could see that there was a popularity thing and it made sense for them to try to make a buck. They're from Africa for fuck's sake. They needed the money. Who the hell am I to hold it against them?

Philosophy is in no way pointless... ever. :]

 

[SADUDE]

In reply to all of you who took the time to think about the nature of reality and the nature of man and soicety on a philosophical and sociological level, THANKS OH SO FUCKIN MUCH, trying to get into these subjects with other "metal heads" is very impossible and always gets the same reaction, "What?" It dissapoints me that some people merely exist and do not try to make their life their own.

As I posted in the Iced Earth forum, Freedom is inherent within all of us, it is the nature of life itself, think about it, how can it not be? Only man sets restraints on his life, the MAJOR thing wrong today is that different peoples don't see other people as the same as them, they see themselves as different, when in reality the only difference between them is where they are born, and what YOKE society has placed them under, case in point, The Untouchables of India, degraded, murdered, discriminated against by the Hindu religion, Ghandi failed to free them, millions and millions of Untouchables are eeking out an exsistence because some out dated moral law says they were born unclean, and yet people worldwide say that Hinduism is an enlightened form of "religion." Ignorance is not religion, it is mankinds vision of religion, it is mankinds twisted perversions of power and ability to act through percieved intelligence. Christianity took this same route, and follows that path today, so doesn't the Muslim religion, I truly believe that religion is a true and tangible ideal, corrupted by man it is a dangerous weapon of self aggrandisement and mans darker side of masochism and hate. I truly believe that a God does exist, it may be mans' way to rationalize existense, it is my way, I don't go to church, I don't preach, I don't tell people how to live, I don't force my opinion on others and I always temper my thoughts on reality, existence, ignorance, and morality with logic and reason. This said, I think a lot can be learned through the New Testament, I tend to take it literally, as irrational as that seems, only for the strength those beliefs give me, right and wrong do exist, I thought I explained my feelings on the nature of right and wrong, but looking back at it, it seems I was a little vague, right and wrong do exist, and so doesn't absolute truth, if I killed someone, is this not the truth of the situation, that I killed him? It is reality, now what the problem is is determining the right and wrong of it, why did I kill him?, self defence? hate? accidental? The grey areas do go on forever, but there has to be a point when you have enough information to make a decision, this is called reasoning, all humans have the capacity to do this, but what if the grey is all there is, well, this is where all humanity is now marching towards, a brand new dark age of blamelessness, "IT WAS SOCIETIES FUALT THAT I KILLED HIM!" Oh really now, is it really societies fualt, it is, if you do not want to suffer the consequences of YOUR actions, you did it, not society, YOU killed him, not I freind, and I will not kill you, but you need to be punished and/or reformed, the problem with the U.S. justice system is that there is no reform, yes, telling the difference between people who can be reformed and those who cannot is difficult, but the ends do not justify the means in justice, you can't just lock up every one a la Stalin and throw them into the Gulag to keep your power, oh you may have the means to do it, but then revolution occurs, sheeple will eventually percieve the gross injustice of this situation and kill you, just as it is happeing here, albeit very slowly, in the U.S. Freedom tempered with reality and reason CAN work, but it will ultimately fail. Just like every system breaks down, all ideals and philosophies do too.

You have to let go. The only reason matters of morality are still common sense to you is because they were instilled pointlessy by either Religion, the legal system, or what is accepted by society. Not to be taken the wrong way though. I don't see how anyone can judge or is at least qualified to.

Technically killing someone is referring to an action that has many circumstances and is never the same. The action is agreed as killing by the populace. That is only the word given and not the actual event itself. If you didnt experience it, or at least weren't there to witness it I think it has no merit. Well it the situation can not be fully comprehended at least. Killing I feel is a very abstracted vague word. Murder, self-defence might be more descriptive but are still useless judgemental words. They tell the situation from one point of view only.

My view of life at least now is that suffering needs to be avoided. And if you don't at least don't cause others suffering, or even better aid or prevent the suffering of others, this favorable actions can be viewed as "good". (don't even tell me how bad the grammar was right there).

 

[SADUDE]

AJ:
I don't care for animals. I hate them. Who is anyone to say any animal is less valuable than a himan though. What support can you give this argument. I could understand that it may seem like common sense to you, but I think you could be enlightened by digging deeper. Our self-relfection, language etc is what differentiates us from the beast. These qualities also cause most if not all of our problems though. I see it this way. YOu can sub-divide the heirarchy of life and see things this way. You have life, something that all organisms share. Then further defined we have humans plants and animals. Even further with the human category we have differences like race. IM not sure where i stand on the validity of the concept of race itself. There are a lot more categories and leves to this heirarchy. It isn't common sense to choose one of them. I do hate animals though... but I also hate most people. An animal won't decieve you for the sake of it though. I just love playing devil's advocate though.

 

[AjDeath]

What I was talking about is when I see a news story about some animal rights activist beating a non animal rights activist to death, they people have it backwards, it is not our violence towards animals that makes us barbaric, it is our violence towards eachother, when we can treat all life with the respect it deserves there will be no need of them.

 

[AjDeath]

You have to let go. The only reason matters of morality are still common sense to you is because they were instilled pointlessy by either Religion, the legal system, or what is accepted by society. Not to be taken the wrong way though. I don't see how anyone can judge or is at least qualified to.

Technically killing someone is referring to an action that has many circumstances and is never the same. The action is agreed as killing by the populace. That is only the word given and not the actual event itself. If you didnt experience it, or at least weren't there to witness it I think it has no merit. Well it the situation can not be fully comprehended at least. Killing I feel is a very abstracted vague word. Murder, self-defence might be more descriptive but are still useless judgemental words. They tell the situation from one point of view only.

My view of life at least now is that suffering needs to be avoided. And if you don't at least don't cause others suffering, or even better aid or prevent the suffering of others, this favorable actions can be viewed as "good". (don't even tell me how bad the grammar was right there).

My views are not based on religion, they are based on my respect for all life, and on my ability to reason, all of my beliefs are based on this-There is no greater value in this world than life.

"Compromising with murderers grants them moral equivalence where none can rightfully exist. Moral equivalence says that you are no better than they; therefore, their belief--that they should be able to torture, rape, or murder you--is just as morally valid as your view--that you have the right to live free of their violence. Moral compromise rejects the concept of right and wrong. It says that everyone is equal, all desires are equally valid, all action is equally valid, so eveyone should compromise to get along
"Where could you compromise with those who torture, rape, and murder people? In the number of days a week you will be tortured? In the number of men to be allowed to rape your loved ones? In how many of your family are to be murdered?
"No moral equivalence exists in that situation, nor can it exist, so there can be no compromise, only suicide" --Terry Goodkind

"In so doing, in trying to be kind, to be unselfish, in trying to be nonjudgmental, you allow evil to become far more powerful than it otherwise would. You refuse to see evil, and so you welcome it among you. You allow it to exist. You gave it power over you. You are a people who have welcomed death and refused to denounce it."--Terry Goodkind

Some words to think on. I will have to cut this reply short as I have to rehearse with my band, more thoughts on the nature of reality and mans existence later.

 

[lord667]

AJ:
I don't care for animals. I hate them. Who is anyone to say any animal is less valuable than a himan though. What support can you give this argument. I could understand that it may seem like common sense to you, but I think you could be enlightened by digging deeper. Our self-relfection, language etc is what differentiates us from the beast. These qualities also cause most if not all of our problems though. I see it this way. YOu can sub-divide the heirarchy of life and see things this way. You have life, something that all organisms share. Then further defined we have humans plants and animals. Even further with the human category we have differences like race. IM not sure where i stand on the validity of the concept of race itself. There are a lot more categories and leves to this heirarchy. It isn't common sense to choose one of them. I do hate animals though... but I also hate most people. An animal won't decieve you for the sake of it though. I just love playing devil's advocate though.

The reason that people are more valuable than animals is that it is good for our collective ego to believe so.

The moralist, who believes in absolute moral truths, is a caterpillar. The nihilist, who has figured out that these "truths" are actually not, is a cocoon.

What is the butterfly? It is the man who has realised that just because a belief is false, doesn't make it worthless; and who now has the entire vista of human philosophy before him, which he can now use to reconstruct himself at will, safe from any doubts about the "truth" or "righteousness" of what he believes, and able to focus his energy on activity and creative thought, rather than the destructive tendencies of "reason" and "enlightenment" which led him into the cocoon.

 

[AjDeath]

The reason that people are more valuable than animals is that it is good for our collective ego to believe so.

The moralist, who believes in absolute moral truths, is a caterpillar. The nihilist, who has figured out that these "truths" are actually not, is a cocoon.

What is the butterfly? It is the man who has realised that just because a belief is false, doesn't make it worthless; and who now has the entire vista of human philosophy before him, which he can now use to reconstruct himself at will, safe from any doubts about the "truth" or "righteousness" of what he believes, and able to focus his energy on activity and creative thought, rather than the destructive tendencies of "reason" and "enlightenment" which led him into the cocoon.

man has an infinite capacity to think and rationalize, but what you are saying is that I should kill myself right now, because there is no existence, there are no reality, reality is what you want it to be, bull fucking shit, you tell that to the people who starve every night, you tell that to the persecuted, to the elderly, to the deprived, to anyone who is living the way they are because of someone, or something else tells them and demands that they should shoulder their burdens for them, are you going to tell me that someone who is dying of cancer, if he just tells him or herself that this isn't the truth of the situation, WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THEM, that it won't be, this argument of "nothing is real" falls by the wayside rather quickly when you truly look at life and what it means to exist.

"Take a look at the bloody fingers you or your friends hold. Look at what was done to children by evil men. You should hate such men who would do this. If you don't, or can't, then you have no business being with those of us who embrace life."--Terry Goodkind


"the choice to live demands that the truth be faced. I intend to do that. I intend to live."


What you describe is merely existence, where the realities of passionate thought and rational thinking are overlooked for the percieved freedom of empty thought where the FACTS of reality have no place in your damn life, this makes no sense because our daily existence is ROOTED in how we live our lives and how other people live around us, everything effects us, if someone wanted to kill you, would you let him because it isn't a truth as you see it? This is a ridiculous belief that you can remake reality when reality isn't to your liking, well you will achieve what you embrace, even if you are to blind to see that it is death.

"If you are unwilling to defend your right to your own lives, then you are merely like mice trying to argue with owls. You think their ways are wrong. they think you are dinner."--Terry Goodkind

And that is the truth of reality, just because you think something doesn't or shouldn't exist, does not mean it doesn't, it means you are ignorant, and within mans animalistic behavior structure, people will take advantage of you, they can and will do so often, they will take your life because you do not percieve them or what their actions might be as your reality. And you would deserve it for being so ignorant of reality and your life. And denying the existence of right and wrong is just as much as a fatal flaw as denying your existence, if you think that a man who wants something should steal it because depending on the point of view there really is no right or wrong, who can tell what REAL is, Eh? That is floodgate morality, and if you say you don't believe in the existence of morality (i.e. right and wrong) guess what, you do, you believe in the absence of all morality, i.e. Floodgate morality, you want to tear down millions of years of percieved evolution because it doesn't suit your views of morality and/or you ego, or your desires, well, that doesn't prove that you can remake reality, it only proves that you can dream on, and reality and existence will roll on without you.

"mercy grants value to the life of a killer, while, at the sametime, it strips away the value of the life of the innocent victim. It makes the life of a killer more important than the life of an innocent. It is thus a trade of the good to evil. It is a victory of death over life."==Terry Goodkind

The man who thought up floodgate morality was not happy with his life, he thought if he can change the reality of his existence, then he could remake it, he was not a God, he couldn't do this, and neither can anyone else, it is a denial of reality, and if you cannot except your existence, then by all means follow that road to where it ultimately leads, non existence-DEATH.

 

[lord667]

man has an infinite capacity to think and rationalize, but what you are saying is that I should kill myself right now,

No, I'm not. Where the hell did you get that from?

reality is what you want it to be, bull fucking shit, you tell that to the people who starve every night, you tell that to the persecuted, to the elderly, to deprived, to anyone who is living the way they are because of someone, or something else tells them and demands that they should shoulder their burdens for them, are you going to tell me that someone who is dying of cance, if he just tells him or herself that this isn't the truth of the situation, WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THEM, that it won't be, this argument of "nothing is real" falls by the wayside rather quickly when you truly look at life and what it means to exist.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not claiming that you can change your situation just by wishing it away. I'm saying you can help yourself by choosing the beliefs that are of most help to you psychologically - so you don't feel guilt about stealing food when you're destitute and starving, for instance.

"Take a look at the bloody fingers you or your friends hold. Look at what was done to children by evil men. You should hate such men who would do this. If you don't, or can't, then you have no business being with those of us who embrace life."--Terry Goodkind

I do, so that's all right.

"the choice to live demands that the truth be faced. I intend to do that. I intend to live."

So do I.

What you describe is merely existence, where the realities of passionate thought and rational thinking are overlooked for the percieved freedom of empty thought where the FACTS of reality have no place in your damn life, this makes no sense because our daily existence is ROOTED in how we live our lives and how other people live around us, everything effects us, if someone wanted to kill you, would you let him because it isn't a truth as you see it? This is a ridiculous belief that you can remake reality when reality isn't to your liking, well you will achieve what you embrace, even if you are to blind to see that it is death.

No, I'm saying exactly the reverse of that. I'm saying you choose the beliefs that help you the most in the real world, irrespective of any universal "truth" behind them. For most people, that definitely wouldn't involve letting themselves be killed, now, would it?

"If you are unwilling to defend your right to your own lives, then you are merely like mice trying to argue with owls. You think their ways are wrong. they think you are dinner."--Terry Goodkind

And that fits in perfectly well with what I'm saying.

And that is the truth of reality, just because you think something doesn't or shouldn't exist, does not mean it doesn't,

I didn't say anything about this. I'm talking about remaking yourself, not defining the world.

it means you are ignorant, and within mans animalistic behavior structure, people will take advantage of you, they can and will do so often, they will take your life because you do not percieve them or what their actions might be as your reality.

But who would choose a moral set that allows people to take advantage of them or kill them? Not me.

And you would deserve it for being so ignorant of reality and your life. And denying the existence of right and wrong is just as much as a fatal flaw as denying your existence, if you think that a man who wants something should steal it because depending on the point of view there really is no right or wrong, who can tell what REAL is, Eh?

So, one of your people who is starving every night should die before stealing food, that's what you're saying?

That is floodgate morality, and if you say you don't believe in the existence of morality (i.e. right and wrong) guess what, you do, you believe in the absence of all morality, i.e. Floodgate morality, you want to tear down millions of years of percieved evolution because it doesn't suit your views of morality and/or you ego, or your desires, well, that doesn't prove that you can remake reality, it only proves that you can dream on, and reality and existence will roll on without you.

I don't want to remake reality. I want to remake my belief system so i can get the best out of reality, according to my vision of what "the best" is.

"mercy grants value to the life of a killer, while, at the sametime, it strips away the value of the life of the innocent victim. It makes the life of a killer more important than the life of an innocent. It is thus a trade of the good to evil. It is a victory of death over life."==Terry Goodkind

Allowing someone to live is a victory of death over life? I'm sorry, but that's just bullshit.

The man who thought up floodgate morality was not happy with his life, he thought if he can change the reality of his existence, then he could remake it, he was not a God, he couldn't do this, and neither can anyone else, it is a denial of reality, and if you cannot except your existence, then by all means follow that road to where it ultimately leads, non existence-DEATH.

You must think I'm really fucking stupid. Did you honestly think I'd promote the idea that starvation, age, violence or cancer are not true? I've had family members die of cancer, I've definitely got family members suffering with age, and I've seen enough violence to think that it's true. These are facts - I'm talking about the way people deal with those facts. I do not deny reality and I do not try to remake it, at least not by a process of abstract thought in my bedroom.

 

[AjDeath]

No, I'm not. Where the hell did you get that from?



I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not claiming that you can change your situation just by wishing it away. I'm saying you can help yourself by choosing the beliefs that are of most help to you psychologically - so you don't feel guilt about stealing food when you're destitute and starving, for instance.



I do, so that's all right.



So do I.



No, I'm saying exactly the reverse of that. I'm saying you choose the beliefs that help you the most in the real world, irrespective of any universal "truth" behind them. For most people, that definitely wouldn't involve letting themselves be killed, now, would it?



And that fits in perfectly well with what I'm saying.



I didn't say anything about this. I'm talking about remaking yourself, not defining the world.



But who would choose a moral set that allows people to take advantage of them or kill them? Not me.



So, one of your people who is starving every night should die before stealing food, that's what you're saying?



I don't want to remake reality. I want to remake my belief system so i can get the best out of reality, according to my vision of what "the best" is.



Allowing someone to live is a victory of death over life? I'm sorry, but that's just bullshit.



You must think I'm really fucking stupid. Did you honestly think I'd promote the idea that starvation, age, violence or cancer are not true? I've had family members die of cancer, I've definitely got family members suffering with age, and I've seen enough violence to think that it's true. These are facts - I'm talking about the way people deal with those facts. I do not deny reality and I do not try to remake it, at least not by a process of abstract thought in my bedroom.

If you haven't read all of the posts in this thred, do so, I have already gone through the "grey areas" of what is right or wrong, I am not saying starve yourself, I am saying creating your own reality may sound like a good idea, but picking and choosing your ideals as you see fit makes for an incomplete picture of your world, what the quote about letting a murderer live means that if you forgive everyone everything because you don't feel you can make a judgement of whether murder(or any other crime) is right or wrong, or you feel it is not your business to judge, than that is a victory of death over life, you have let someone kill with no consequences, do you think he will do it again? Well if this is your nondecision you will find out. It sounds intelligent, but by denying some of your reality in favor of something that better suits you is a denial of your life in general, living in the shadow of self inflicted ignorance is not a way of life, I base my ideas on what I observe, what I have felt, what I have endured, i feel my outlook on life is very positive, I choose life over stagnant death, I do for myself and I don't wait for someone to tell me how to live, I look at life every possible way I can, I don't make judgement calls on your personality, I make jugdement calls about life, and reality. I never say you're wrong, I say what you are telling me is a slippery slope into nothing, it's your choice to live that way, I choose to plow through the bullshit instead of avoiding it. And please don't take any of this as a flame, it is discusion, I happen to disagree with you.

 

[lord667]

If you haven't read all of the posts in this thred, do so, I have already gone through the "grey areas" of what is right or wrong, I am not saying starve yourself, I am saying creating your own reality may sound like a good idea, but picking and choosing your ideals as you see fit makes for an incomplete picture of your world, what the quote about letting a murderer live means that if you forgive everyone everything because you don't feel you can make a judgement of whether murder(or any other crime) is right or wrong, or you feel it is not your business to judge, than that is a victory of death over life, you have let someone kill with no consequences, do you think he will do it again? Well if this is your nondecision you will find out.

OK, I have read the other posts. You did indeed say that right and wrong are not grey areas; you then immediately went on to say that there are exceptions to every rule. You also said that humans create their own "mores, folkways and values".

I would like to address what you said about the blameless society. Even if it is not absolutely true that murder, theft etc. is wrong, that does not preclude judgement. I believe, to put it in crude terms, that societies are machines set up by people with shared beliefs, so that through co-operative activity they can reinforce their right to practice those beliefs. I don't believe that, even if murder or theft were accepted as not "absolutely" wrong, either activity would suddenly be allowed to proliferate; society would very likely punish the killer or the thief anyway, not because it is absolutely immoral to kill but because he constitutes a practical danger to the interests of the beliefs that their society is based on.

I also want to throw a little of your own post back to you:

"I tend to take [the New Testament] literally, as irrational as that seems, only for the strength those beliefs give me"

- this is EXACTLY in line with what I am promoting. You CHOSE the New Testament, as a belief framework that would give you strength, even though you were not sure if it was a rational system or not.

It sounds intelligent, but by denying some of your reality in favor of something that better suits you is a denial of your life in general, living in the shadow of self inflicted ignorance is not a way of life, I base my ideas on what I observe, what I have felt, what I have endured, i feel my outlook on life is very positive, I choose life over stagnant death, I do for myself and I don't wait for someone to tell me how to live, I look at life every possible way I can, I don't make judgement calls on your personality, I make jugdement calls about life, and reality.

And that's exactly what I'm suggesting people should do.

I never say you're wrong, I say what you are telling me is a slippery slope into nothing,

From my perspective, it's a ladder *out* of nothing. Of course, in that I'm addressing the nihilists among us, and it's quite obvious that you are not one. For us, I am promoting the value of beliefs, but to you I seem to be degrading them. Such is life in an intellectually free society.

it's your choice to live that way, I choose to plow through the bullshit instead of avoiding it. And please don't take any of this as a flame, it is discusion, I happen to disagree with you.

Oh no, it would be quite ludicrous of me to expect everyone to agree with me. If I'd taken it as a flame, I wouldn't have answered; flame wars are funny the first couple of dozen times, but after that...

 

[speed]

Who is Terry Goodkind?

And whats up with all the put downs- cant one disagree with someone- without it getting personal?

 

[AjDeath]

@ Lord667- I do get what you are saying, breaking down the boundaries perception about what is reality and trying to create a better philosophy for your your own life, this is what I did, I chose the New Testament to base some of my philosophies on life because-A)The ideas are good and seem to be based in the concepts of human decency and B)Man WROTE the New Testament, I do not truly believe that the New Testament came straight from the hands of God. Man wrote this as a way to devolop mores, i think of it as ancient philosophy. And I stated before that I believe in a God, I also believe in Micro-evolution not the prefered macro version taught in schools today. No one is going to tell me that the the eyeball, the most complicated organ in the human body, took millions of years to evolve, an idea which is the corner stone of macro-evolution, how long do you think any animal living on this planet would survive without the ability to see? Of course you have bats, but did it take millions of years to evolve their sonar like qualities?

A view against the concept of "Freedom"

"Freedom can never work. It only gives people license to be self-centered. A thoughtful person, dedicated to the welfare of enlightened mankind, must reject the immoral concept of 'freedom; for what it is-selfish. Such simplistic beliefs can only provoke a cycle of violence. This silly notion of 'freedom' leads to viewing things as black or white. Such uninspired morals are obsolete. Individuals have no right to judge others-epecially in such authoritarian terms. What is needed is compromise among all sides if there is to be peace."--Terry Goodkind

The rebuttal.

"Compromise? A cycle of violence can only exist if you grant all people, including those who are evil, moral equivalence-if you say that everyone, including those who decide tp harm others, has an equal right to exist. That is what you do when you refuse to crush evil-you give moral standing and power to those who murder. Devotion to compromise in such arenas is a sick idea that says you must cut off a finger, and then a leg, and then an arm to feed the monster living among you.
You have two choices before you. Choose to live in cringing fear, on your knees, apologizing endlessly for wishing to be allowed to live as you struggle to appease an ever-expanding evil, or eliminate those who would harm you and free yourselves to live your own lives-which means you must remain vigilant, ever ready to protect yourself."--Terry Goodkind

There is a basis for this situation in history; WW2. But have we as people the world over remained vigilant?


@speed. No insults intended to anyone discussing these issues, I am a hot head and sometimes I let it get out, I sorta appologized buy saying that NONE of this was a flame, let's just say my opinions are the exact opposite of many people responding, and beating a dead horse gets boring after awhile, sometimes.

Terry Goodkind is an author of fantasy, his stories are paralleled to our society, but in fantasy terms, he deals in philosophy a lot, and always and often has something in his books about the nuture of existence, reality, freedom, evil, our perceptions of evil, and basic human nature, if you are interested in these topics, and fantasy as well, by some of his books, I suggest you start with Wizards First Rule, which in actuality is a very long discourse on the nature of why humans believe what they do, The rule? People are stupid, they will believe anything you tell them for two reasons-for fear it might be true, and for wanting it to be true.

 

[speed]

You dont need to apologize- it just the three of you lord 667, and Sadude- were getting a little too personal.

I'm not a fantasy fan- just not my cup of tea. But who knows I may be a bigger geek- all i read is Hesse, heidegger, Bakhtin, Camus, Dostoevsky- etc etc.

 

[AjDeath]

You dont need to apologize- it just the three of you lord 667, and Sadude- were getting a little too personal.

I'm not a fantasy fan- just not my cup of tea. But who knows I may be a bigger geek- all i read is Hesse, heidegger, Bakhtin, Camus, Dostoevsky- etc etc.

I don't read just fantasy, it just helps me forget the world and relax, I do read Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment is the only book of his that I own, but I read more than anything else, so I will be picking up more. I also read H.P Lovecraft and too many others to mention. Also, I am now going to check out the authors you read. Thanx.

 

[speed]

I dont think you have to read the authors I read- just that I jotted down some of the authors I read the most. Yet, I would read The Rebel by Camus- brilliant examination on revolution ,nihilism, philosophy and the modern world. You would love it.

THis lovecraft fellow is always being talked about in these forums- isnt he the one who wrote the book about the necrominicon or something? I tend to stay away from such authors- if I want a book about libertines and satanism Ill read Sade- or Milton, or Rimbaud, Boudelaire etc.

 

[AjDeath]

I dont think you have to read the authors I read- just that I jotted down some of the authors I read the most. Yet, I would read The Rebel by Camus- brilliant examination on revolution ,nihilism, philosophy and the modern world. You would love it.

THis lovecraft fellow is always being talked about in these forums- isnt he the one who wrote the book about the necrominicon or something? I tend to stay away from such authors- if I want a book about libertines and satanism Ill read Sade- or Milton, or Rimbaud, Boudelaire etc.

Lovecraft was a weird horror writer, he also WROTE the Necronomicon, a fact few seem to know about, he wrote it to create his own mythos and write stories based on this mythos, and he was quit good, I don't think he would be too impressed with these people who go around believing a book of fiction.(please, don't go there )
And most people who read him do not know he wrote it. LOL good shit! The song Diary of a Madman is based on it though, bah, Ozzy still blows.


BTW thanx for the geek comment :Smug: I know, I know........

 

[speed]

I wasnt trying to imply you were a geek- just that many people would find my book selections- and your fantasy selections to be a bit odd and eccentric- which is a good thing if you ask me.