Random Thoughts, strictly Text

Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
AppLeo said:
Again, a universe that contradicted itself couldn't exist.

It may be a natural question in our minds, but it's a question that sneaks in the wrong answer. It implies that the universe was created by something. The universe wasn't created by anything.
Click to expand...

Scientifical data points to the universe having both a beginning and end. So there has to have been some occurance in nature that lead to the creation and expansion of the universe.

AppLeo said:
It is a punishment. If they were virtuous they would've been rewarded. When you are virtuous, and being virtuous means being honest, just, independent, rational, productive, having integrity and pride you live a much better life than choosing to not live with those virtues. It's not anecdotal.

People who don't live with these virtues are miserable and unhappy people. I think this is self-evident. If you don't believe me, be my guest and live without these virtues and see how far you can get.
Click to expand...

You are providing anecdotal evidence again. There is no proof that politicians or corrupted individuals have suffered consequences for certain actions. You are speculating on your perceived notion that people who work hard begett happiness derived from their hard work. But it does not disprove that some lazy people can and will enjoy the fruits of corruptions.

AppLeo said:
Abortion isn't exactly a straight-forward topic.

But I would say that woman has a right to her life, and an unborn child is a threat to the right of her life, therefore she shouldn't have to deal with it.
Click to expand...

You are calling him a child, thus recognising it is a human life with a right of his or her own. And while a woman may have a certain priority in life and death situations where you have to choose one over the other (most anti abortionist agree), there is no logical reason to terminate the life of a living person because you find them unconvinient. This is the reason why in your country they don't, for example, execute illegal immigrants when they are captured. Sure, they are inconvinient for your nation and you guys have a right to deport them, but every action you take is always respecting their right to life

AppLeo said:
Well if someone broke into my house and threatened my life and family, then I don't see why I shouldn't kill that person.
Click to expand...

In that situation you are protecting yours and your family's right to live, from an immediate threat. It is a different situation if you killed a person just because you may believe that in the future, that individual could create an unconvinience for you.

AppLeo said:
But to kill people who have harmed no one? That only wastes your time and energy, destroys any possibility of that person serving your self-interest by taking part in the free market, and killing people makes people not want to trust you and will probably try to kill you.
Subservience to the state or God are both evil regardless.
Click to expand...

If a guy is banging the girl you like, he is not harming you. He is not doing anything to you. But if there is no moral reason, and no meaning to life, and you like that girl and you believe that removing the guy from the picture could lead you to being able to have her, and you find the opportunity to remove the guy without anyone finding out, and even if that possibility existed the odds would still be in your favour: according to your atheistic views, why not kill him?

Humans are subservient either to God or the State. The state is simply a representation of the absolute human condition of ultimate power. Just like when you give yourself the authority to call an unborn child a cancerous growth, its a deminished form of the goverment saying a fetus is not a baby. You grant yourself godlike authority to decide on the life of others.
 
AppLeo

AppLeo

Well-known member
Dirius said:
Scientifical data points to the universe having both a beginning and end. So there has to have been some occurance in nature that lead to the creation and expansion of the universe.
Click to expand...

Whatever created the universe, already was the universe. It already existed. It didn't come from nothing. Something can't come from nothing. That's impossible.

Dirius said:
You are providing anecdotal evidence again. There is no proof that politicians or corrupted individuals have suffered consequences for certain actions. You are speculating on your perceived notion that people who work hard begett happiness derived from their hard work. But it does not disprove that some lazy people can and will enjoy the fruits of corruptions.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that if someone lies more than telling the truth they'll be better off?

Do you really think that if someone steals more instead of building their own wealth they'll come out on top?

Do you really think that if someone is irrational more than rational they'll come out on top?

Cuz I absolutely say no to those questions.



Dirius said:
In that situation you are protecting yours and your family's right to live, from an immediate threat. It is a different situation if you killed a person just because you may believe that in the future, that individual could create an unconvinience for you.
Click to expand...

Why would I kill someone just because they are inconvenient? Inconvenient in what way?


Dirius said:
If a guy is banging the girl you like, he is not harming you. He is not doing anything to you. But if there is no moral reason, and no meaning to life, and you like that girl and you believe that removing the guy from the picture could lead you to being able to have her, and you find the opportunity to remove the guy without anyone finding out, and even if that possibility existed the odds would still be in your favour: according to your atheistic views, why not kill him?
Click to expand...

So your premise is basically if there isn't a threat of burning in hell, people can't be moral or good.

I know many atheists who are good people for their own atheistic reasons. They don't need the threat of hell to keep them from murdering people.

As an atheist myself, I don't want to kill anyone. I have my own reasons for why I wouldn't want to kill someone.


Dirius said:
Humans are subservient either to God or the State. The state is simply a representation of the absolute human condition of ultimate power. Just like when you give yourself the authority to call an unborn child a cancerous growth, its a deminished form of the goverment saying a fetus is not a baby. You grant yourself godlike authority to decide on the life of others.
Click to expand...

It's because I value the woman's life she doesn't have to keep the baby.
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
AppLeo said:
Whatever created the universe, already was the universe. It already existed. It didn't come from nothing. Something can't come from nothing. That's impossible.
Click to expand...

You are against all manner and form of scientific data, and mainstream belief. Are you a big bang denialist? or even worse, a creationist all of the sudden?

AppLeo said:
Do you really think that if someone lies more than telling the truth they'll be better off?

Do you really think that if someone steals more instead of building their own wealth they'll come out on top?

Do you really think that if someone is irrational more than rational they'll come out on top?

Cuz I absolutely say no to those questions.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people that lie are better off than telling the truth. I know people who have happily spent their lives living off other person's wealth. I think famous irrational feminists would be a good example of them faring of better than many of us.

Again, anecdotal, you are talking abou your personal experience which are subject to your personality. Not everyone has the same scruples as you do. Your line of argument is the equivalent of saying "God exists because I saw his face on a cloud".

In any case you are trying to quantify "happines". There is not a unit of measurement that can do that. Maybe some individuals will find a mix of feelings regarding a wrong action.

AppLeo said:
Why would I kill someone just because they are inconvenient? Inconvenient in what way?
So your premise is basically if there isn't a threat of burning in hell, people can't be moral or good.

I know many atheists who are good people for their own atheistic reasons. They don't need the threat of hell to keep them from murdering people.

As an atheist myself, I don't want to kill anyone. I have my own reasons for why I wouldn't want to kill someone.
Click to expand...

Well you advocate the killing of unborn children- while you may not personally be the one executing them, you clearly have no problem with that happening, have you not?

And while most athiest might not have intentions of killing someone, the idea of a universe that is random and with no meaning eventually leads you into situations where you will inevitably disregard human life, because you do not believe in its sacrosanctity, but rather in that life is of use to you, and a certain degree of empathy might benefit you in the long run.
AppLeo said:
It's because I value the woman's life she doesn't have to keep the baby.
Click to expand...
So you choose to kill an unborn child, so the woman's life can be more comfortable.
 
AppLeo

AppLeo

Well-known member
Dirius said:
You are against all manner and form of scientific data, and mainstream belief. Are you a big bang denialist? or even worse, a creationist all of the sudden?
Click to expand...

Nope


Dirius said:
I think a lot of people that lie are better off than telling the truth. I know people who have happily spent their lives living off other person's wealth. I think famous irrational feminists would be a good example of them faring of better than many of us.
Click to expand...

I don't think feminists are happy at all. But I guess there's no way to know.

So do you choose to lie, be irrational, and live off other people then since you think it would make you better off?

Dirius said:
In any case you are trying to quantify "happines". There is not a unit of measurement that can do that. Maybe some individuals will find a mix of feelings regarding a wrong action.
Click to expand...

Well, I see happiness as fulfillment. Eudaimonia. It's a feeling that your life has added up to something and you can feel proud of your life. That's how I would describe and measure happiness.

Dirius said:
Well you advocate the killing of unborn children- while you may not personally be the one executing them, you clearly have no problem with that happening, have you not?
Click to expand...

Because the unborn child is a threat to the mother's life. It's the same as a robber threatening my life and property by breaking into my house.

Dirius said:
And while most athiest might not have intentions of killing someone, the idea of a universe that is random and with no meaning eventually leads you into situations where you will inevitably disregard human life, because you do not believe in its sacrosanctity, but rather in that life is of use to you, and a certain degree of empathy might benefit you in the long run.
Click to expand...

I still don't understand how Atheism, belief in no God, suddenly means you want to kill people.

That seems pretty anecdotal if you ask me.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
We're trapped in the tropical Age of Capricorn, and the Age-lord is limiting both our cognitive and magical abilities. No equitable solution to life's many problems is possible under these circumstances. But, most of us are doing the best we can. If religion can help with that, fine. If secular humanism can help, that's fine too.
 
P

petosiris

Banned
david starling said:
We're trapped in the tropical Age of Capricorn, and the Age-lord is limiting both our cognitive and magical abilities. No equitable solution to life's many problems is possible under these circumstances. But, most of us are doing the best we can. If religion can help with that, fine. If secular humanism can help, that's fine too.
Click to expand...

Trapped in the age of drugs. :retrograde:
 
conspiracy theorist

conspiracy theorist

Well-known member
passiflora said:
For one, those who copped to having one on the current Mercury rx thread aren’t in the thick of this conversation.
Click to expand...

Do you think there is anything that could be said about the way Merc Rx manifest that would be related? Or maybe its just a coincidence.

Appleo has something at early Leo iirc, the recent Mars/Merc conjunction aspected my Sun/Merc/Pluto and I don't know the degrees of Dirius' Leo ascendant or Sun but they may have taken a hit from the recent transits.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
Well, we've got Sun conj NN opposite Domicled, retro Saturn which is conj retro Pluto. Try to Jupiter is square retro Neptune. Retro Mercury is conjunct Mars in Leo, square :uranus: in Taurus. Everything is peachy keen! :sideways:
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
conspiracy theorist said:
Do you think there is anything that could be said about the way Merc Rx manifest that would be related? Or maybe its just a coincidence.

Appleo has something at early Leo iirc, the recent Mars/Merc conjunction aspected my Sun/Merc/Pluto and I don't know the degrees of Dirius' Leo ascendant or Sun but they may have taken a hit from the recent transits.
Click to expand...

Merc is still close orb conj Mars. In a chart, it would definitely be considered conj.
 
Top