Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-01-2007, 03:39 AM
foal foal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,019
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
And let's note something else. You can keep calling it "my principle" like you're some kind of philosophical genius who came up with it, but you're just another overeducated underthinking hack if you won't admit "your" principle is an archetype that has been around for thousands of years in very close form to the way you state it. If you want to assert you made some minor tweakings that are different, then fine, call it "Golden Rule Kaj variation" or something. But enough with all this obtuse refusing to define and name things.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you think he's claiming philosophical credit for inventing a new idea, then you are comprehending poorly.

[ QUOTE ]

And again, if most men agree with "your" principle, whether on a transactional or moral basis, doesn't that indicate such a principle, at some minimal level, is inherent in man? How can it be otherwise?

[/ QUOTE ]
His "principle" is in fact something nearly everyone follows. It's purely a matter of pragmatism. That is, wanting behaviors we don't like to be discouraged or prevented. How strongly we feel about it and how much force we'd accept being used to stop it vary in accordance with how much we dislike the action. When I say dislike the action, I should make a distinction between disliking an action "type" and disliking an action "token". A token being a particular instance of an action and a type being that action in general. One example would be someone check raising you on the river in a poker game. You may dislike it at that particular moment, but you wont necessarily think "I don't want to play in a game where people can check raise". So you dislike it as a token, but not as a type. I believe this principle of Kaj's you are talking about applies mainly to actions we dislike as types rather than as tokens. As for the important question of what action types people will dislike, it will vary from person to person arbitrarily or based on their genes and personal history. Even if you say this principle is somewhat inherent, all we've arrived at is that people tend to act with a degree of pragmatism toward their preferences. Hardly an astonishing conclusion.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-01-2007, 03:54 AM
ElliotR ElliotR is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Traveling too much
Posts: 1,330
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
And let's note something else. You can keep calling it "my principle" like you're some kind of philosophical genius who came up with it, but you're just another overeducated underthinking hack if you won't admit "your" principle is an archetype that has been around for thousands of years in very close form to the way you state it. If you want to assert you made some minor tweakings that are different, then fine, call it "Golden Rule Kaj variation" or something. But enough with all this obtuse refusing to define and name things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely this is the archetype for BluffTHIS! posts. Let's recap:

(1) BluffTHIS! makes a thread calling out Kaj asking hum pestions about "your 'principle'".

(2) Kaj responds with a post that starts "My principle is ..."

(3) BluffTHIS! posts this tripe.

Well done, BluffTHIS!. Well done.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:43 AM
mrick mrick is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 159
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
Cyrus/mrick

[/ QUOTE ]WTF??? [ QUOTE ]
you're just another overeducated underthinking hack if you won't admit...

[/ QUOTE ] WTF???? you are losing the argument dude. How can someone be overeducated?

[ QUOTE ]
"agreement" = the minimal agreement that has always been throughout all periods of history agreed upon, not that which existed at any certain moment.

[/ QUOTE ] OK --- I know that very few things have been "agreed" throughout all periods of history etc and those would be Man's extreme aggressiveness, brutality, etc. And I AGREE that these "principles" are the way you phrased it "INHERENT IN MAN".

So, questions : 1. If God created Man in his own image or whatever did he realy wired us up to be this way or is this some kind of factory glitch? 2. What else is "inherent in Man" and why? Tell me about kindness, love and understanding before or after Son O God came down....
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-01-2007, 06:00 AM
Copernicus Copernicus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,912
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

"And again, if most men agree with "your" principle, whether on a transactional or moral basis, doesn't that indicate such a principle, at some minimal level, is inherent in man? How can it be otherwise? "

Nothing is "inherent in man". Mankind has learned through time how best to manage interrelationships, and those learnings vary from society to society and are passed down/evolve within that society. Man is an animal that happens to have evolved beyond the capabilities of other animals, thats it. Lower animals learn how to best deal with interrelationships and form societies as well.

The "golden rule" is one societal framework for interrelationships. It is of course, a utopian framework that is woefully incomplete unless it is universal. Since it isn't universal there needs to be at least one more rule, such as "but if my neighbor will not treat me in that way, then I sure as hell better mistreat him first".
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:47 PM
pvn pvn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: back despite popular demand
Posts: 10,955
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My principle is that I try to act in a way that I'd like society as a whole to act.

[/ QUOTE ] That's as good as it gets, dear sir.

(Lock the pilot's cabin! Here come the AC hijackers to argue that no such thing as a society exists...)

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that there is subjectivity here is acknowledged.

[/ QUOTE ]

There can be nothing else actually.

(Watch your back! A Catholic preacher is sneaking up on you to "explain" about everything being ruled by the higher objectivity of the Christian Allah...)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think BT may be on to something. I'm 95% sure Cyrus or Mickey or both made this EXACT SAME POST at some point.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:48 PM
pvn pvn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: back despite popular demand
Posts: 10,955
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cyrus/mrick

[/ QUOTE ]WTF??? [ QUOTE ]
you're just another overeducated underthinking hack if you won't admit...

[/ QUOTE ] WTF???? you are losing the argument dude. How can someone be overeducated?

[ QUOTE ]
"agreement" = the minimal agreement that has always been throughout all periods of history agreed upon, not that which existed at any certain moment.

[/ QUOTE ] OK --- I know that very few things have been "agreed" throughout all periods of history etc and those would be Man's extreme aggressiveness, brutality, etc. And I AGREE that these "principles" are the way you phrased it "INHERENT IN MAN".

So, questions : 1. If God created Man in his own image or whatever did he realy wired us up to be this way or is this some kind of factory glitch? 2. What else is "inherent in Man" and why? Tell me about kindness, love and understanding before or after Son O God came down....

[/ QUOTE ]

OTOH, this definitely does not look like a Cyrus post.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-01-2007, 05:43 PM
John Kilduff John Kilduff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,903
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

[ QUOTE ]
So, questions : 1. If God created Man in his own image or whatever did he realy wired us up to be this way or is this some kind of factory glitch?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, mrick, I will try to answer your two questions in summary fashion.

God created man in his own image and this included free will. Man used free will wrongly and selfishly and desired to become like God (akin to a very out-of-control ego. Satan is the most extreme example of this out-of-control ego, as Satan is actually trying to take God's place).

Man was tempted to disobey God and fell prey to the temptation. This was the original sin: disobedience of God's specific instruction.

All of mankind has ego problems from the time they are babies; each person is inherently tremendously selfish and due to the sinful nature of man (resulting from the original sin), all are sinners and fall short of the glory of God.

So, God created man in his own image but the original man and woman fell from grace due to misusing free will and disobeying God. This is why all of mankind is now partly evil as well as good, because we have inherited the willfull and rebellious nature which Adam and Eve freely chose.

[ QUOTE ]
2. What else is "inherent in Man" and why? Tell me about kindness, love and understanding before or after Son O God came down....

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus Christ gave his own perfect life so that we could see unlimited love in action, thus making it possible for us to believe that God can forgive even the very worst of deeds.

All are in need of forgiveness and all have sinned and done bad things, so becoming aware that you might truly be able to be forgiven and to start entirely anew is a powerful realization.

By accepting the love and forgiveness offered by Jesus Christ, you too can be redeemed in the eyes of God and be forgiven for the sinful, evil side of your existence. The sinful nature of mankind ensures that you have done bad things: so this applies to you, to me, and to everyone else in the world.

If you do not accept the ultimate gift of love and forgiveness from God, then when you die you will not be forgiven for your evil side and deeds, since you willfully rejected the offer of love and forgiveness from God; so instead of uniting with God forever in heaven, you will instead be cast into outer darkness, separated from the love of God forever.

If you accept the love of God you must also try to put it into practice in your daily life, by extending love and forgiveness to others as well. This is what is meant by Christian love.

I hope this brief summary helps to answer your questions. If you have further questions, or wish for additional Christian reading material, please feel free to PM me.

Thanks for reading, and I hope that this was helpful in response to the questions that you specified.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-01-2007, 09:22 PM
kidpokeher kidpokeher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: value shoving
Posts: 2,115
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

Kilduff, you crack me up. Even your one-liners take three pages.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-01-2007, 10:07 PM
VarlosZ VarlosZ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 1,694
Default Re: Thread for Kaj on topic of human values

BluffTHIS! brings up a good point about a very common error of which I wasn't even aware until now.

Just so it's clear, in the past, whenever I used the phrase "my computer," I didn't mean to hold myself out as some kind of engineering genius who invented the microcircuitry and wrote all the software. It's actually a Gateway. In the future, I'll be careful to refer to it as "Gateway VarlosZ version."

I apologize to the forum for all the confusion I've caused.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.