what topics do you think everyone, or at least everyone here in the ethics forum, can agree on?
things we agree on
- Thread starter SwedishFish
- Start date
R
Redoubtable
Guest
The "all" implies that an indeterminate number of individuals can, indeed, agree to disagree, SpyMoose.
Now what exactly is this "lieing" you mentioned?
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
SwedishFish
Ethics, Morality, & Justice
are all based on philisophical base constructs
hence i ask
are you speaking purely ethicly or more on a topic based idea
like a thread topic
groove on
Ethics, Morality, & Justice
are all based on philisophical base constructs
hence i ask
are you speaking purely ethicly or more on a topic based idea
like a thread topic
groove on
i guess what i mean is....topics? i think. we all agree that forcing employees to wear diapers to avoid bathroom breaks is a bad thing. what else can we agree on? i suppose it's universal that raping kids is bad.
I'm guessing some pedofiles would probably disagree.
Munchmausen
Registered Senior Member
would all pedophiles on the board please come forward so we can give them a good shaming
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
lets not twist the tread into a hate box of ranting
thnks SwedishFish
i find the violence issue one of the most perplexing as you refer to children the smacking debate comes to the surface
on the issue of those doing the smacking think it is NOT OK
if THEY THEMSELFS are SMAKED for the same or other offences.
so on a base of violence it would be fair to say that most of the population think violence is ok and being a hypocrite and bully is also ok
they only object if it is them that is being hit or bullyed
so let us not hang too long on the violence issue
rape is a crime of violence regardless of what the age of the victim
one could easily debate that because of the hypocracy of those who believe smaking thier kids is ok and then think they as adults should not be smaked says that by their definition they think child rape is less of a crime than rape of an adult
as above in conclusion to violence
it is learned behaviour lets hope the parents and educators can teach better as they learn more
another issue would be?
equal rights is the same as above
so whats left
umm any thoughts anyone
groove on
thnks SwedishFish
i find the violence issue one of the most perplexing as you refer to children the smacking debate comes to the surface
on the issue of those doing the smacking think it is NOT OK
if THEY THEMSELFS are SMAKED for the same or other offences.
so on a base of violence it would be fair to say that most of the population think violence is ok and being a hypocrite and bully is also ok
they only object if it is them that is being hit or bullyed
so let us not hang too long on the violence issue
rape is a crime of violence regardless of what the age of the victim
one could easily debate that because of the hypocracy of those who believe smaking thier kids is ok and then think they as adults should not be smaked says that by their definition they think child rape is less of a crime than rape of an adult
as above in conclusion to violence
it is learned behaviour lets hope the parents and educators can teach better as they learn more
another issue would be?
equal rights is the same as above
so whats left
umm any thoughts anyone
groove on
Last edited:
i can't get into a pedophile's head but i would imagine that even they do not think what they are doing is right. perhaps they have remorse but can't stop themselves. like that guy who begged the court to have him castrated because once he was released, he'd keep doing it.
I think we can all agree on the ten commandments, maybe at least the last seven of them for the Atheists among us.
1- I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
2- Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
3- Remember thou keep the Sabbath Day.
4- Honor thy Father and thy Mother
5- Thou shalt not kill.
6- Thou shalt not commit adultery.
7- Thou shalt not steal.
8- Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
9- Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife.
10 - Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods.
Re: Re: things we agree on
I can tell you right now that I don't agree with any of them at all. And thats the truth.
I honour thy father and thy mother. But what i am refferring to with that would be the sun and the earth, which I worship like gods, so with that I am disobeying the first commandment right?
I hate the ten commandments, they conflict with my lifestyle and beliefs to such a degree that its almost like they are out to get me personally.
Thats rather presumptuous.
I can tell you right now that I don't agree with any of them at all. And thats the truth.
I honour thy father and thy mother. But what i am refferring to with that would be the sun and the earth, which I worship like gods, so with that I am disobeying the first commandment right?
I hate the ten commandments, they conflict with my lifestyle and beliefs to such a degree that its almost like they are out to get me personally.
Re: Re: Re: things we agree on
Why Dr. Lou, Is your lifestyle full of
1- Killing
2- Stealing
3- Commiting Adultery
4- Bearing false witness
5- Covetting your neighbors goods.
6- Sleeping with your neighbor wife.
7- Dishonoring your father and mother.
I see that you must agree with at least those seven, or I will worry about you. And how do you know that it's not nature that it's talking and saying I'm god worship me.
Why Dr. Lou, Is your lifestyle full of
1- Killing
2- Stealing
3- Commiting Adultery
4- Bearing false witness
5- Covetting your neighbors goods.
6- Sleeping with your neighbor wife.
7- Dishonoring your father and mother.
I see that you must agree with at least those seven, or I will worry about you. And how do you know that it's not nature that it's talking and saying I'm god worship me.
Re: Re: things we agree on
Well just to be contrary. . .
Well if he wants me to think that, then he can come down and tell me himself and then give me some good reason for why I should bother worshiping his ass. Until then I'd much rather hold no God at all, it makes a lot more sence.
I'll take the first amendment over this any day. We aren't allowed to criticize our leaders now? What kind of shoddy operation is God running down here, anyway?
This one has always seemed a bit odd to me. Those hebrews must have really liked their weekends.
Unfortunately being a parent isn't sufficient grounds for respect. I've seen a lot of people who would have been better off if they'd stop forgiving deadbeat family members every time they screw 'em over. Just because you were born to them doesn't mean you have to be blind to their wrong doings if they happen to be horrible people.
No complaints on the last 6, though.
Well just to be contrary. . .
Well if he wants me to think that, then he can come down and tell me himself and then give me some good reason for why I should bother worshiping his ass. Until then I'd much rather hold no God at all, it makes a lot more sence.
I'll take the first amendment over this any day. We aren't allowed to criticize our leaders now? What kind of shoddy operation is God running down here, anyway?
This one has always seemed a bit odd to me. Those hebrews must have really liked their weekends.
Unfortunately being a parent isn't sufficient grounds for respect. I've seen a lot of people who would have been better off if they'd stop forgiving deadbeat family members every time they screw 'em over. Just because you were born to them doesn't mean you have to be blind to their wrong doings if they happen to be horrible people.
No complaints on the last 6, though.
Well "though shall not kill" is kid of impractical if you take it too literally. I always guess I sort of took it to mean that you shouldn't kill fellow human beings, which seems pretty reasonable to me.
It is, however, a cold fact of our particular troposphere (energy comes from the sun, it is collected and stored as glucose by photosynthetic plants, herbivores eat those plants, carnivores eat the herbivores, and a higher level of carnivore eats those other carnivores. At each level more and more of that original energy from the sun is used up, and there is less and less of it at each level. Humans, being omnivores span the troposphere, but still are completely unable to collect energy directly from the sun) that we must kill to survive, killing is the only thing that can keep us alive and there isn't a hell of a lot that we can do about that.
and in that sense "though shall not kill" is kind of impractical.
It is, however, a cold fact of our particular troposphere (energy comes from the sun, it is collected and stored as glucose by photosynthetic plants, herbivores eat those plants, carnivores eat the herbivores, and a higher level of carnivore eats those other carnivores. At each level more and more of that original energy from the sun is used up, and there is less and less of it at each level. Humans, being omnivores span the troposphere, but still are completely unable to collect energy directly from the sun) that we must kill to survive, killing is the only thing that can keep us alive and there isn't a hell of a lot that we can do about that.
and in that sense "though shall not kill" is kind of impractical.
I haven't killed anyone... yet.
But I don't think it is naturally bad. I learn whats right by looking at the animals and you'll find that apex predators have to kill members of their own species due to competition, if nothing preys on them they have to kill eachother to keep their population in check. It doesn't get much more apex than humans and competition doesn't get much more tight than it is for us now.
For example, Japan is taking so many fish and other wierd animals out of the ocean that if it continues at this rate their won't be any fish for anyone(or any thing) very soon.
I would not be against a war over such a thing, it would be a natural activity for a globe dominating species to partake in. Good healthy competition. A lion will kill a lion from somewhere else if it comes into its territory and eats buffaloe. Chimpanzee's will do the same if a stranger chimpanzee is in their territory. Most animals will.
I refuse to believe lions and chimps and hyenas etc etc are "wrong". If theres a right it would be common and consistent in nature, this is, so what humans are doing when they allow other humans to diminish food stocks is actually wrong. Not killing in that scenario is wrong IMOTIBOTRW(In my opinion that I based on the real world)
I guess at this stage it is impractical to kill people just because you don't know them, but the original human families that joined forces with stranger human families to form primitive societies were "sinful" in a way, by not killing. Dolphins "sin" every now and then by joining forces with strangers to avoid killer whale attack but thats as far as they got. They learned a long time ago that hanging around in large non-family specific groups, though safer from predators, is a breeding ground for disease so they never stay together for long.
Humans just took the diseases on the chin for thousands of years untill they eventually figured out how to fight against them.
Call me crazy, but I think diseases are quite obviously nature telling us we're doing something wrong. Joining forces and getting an unfair advantage is "wrong", so nature rights it with disease.
There's alot of "neighbour" talk in the ten commandments.
I don't think they are made up arbitrary crap like most atheists, I think they're distinctively evil. They directly contradict nature, who I hold in a pretty high regard. And for that reason flores, I find it impossible to think the god in the quaran/bible etc is nature. If I had to believe in that god I would say he was natures opponent, and he skewed natures most potentially destructive creation with his evil commandments to start a war against the earth. A war we are all taking part in.
Its not one sided, nature's fighting back with diseases and natural "disasters", she made the skin of the most dangerous light so her boyfriend could burn us etc but the evil commandment maker's soldiers do have the upper hand at the moment
What if you were tricked like this flores? Maybe the quaran is real, a real complex trick. It feeds our ego's and promises us eternal life to make us do its dirty bidding. If gods so smart, who says he couldn't trick measly humans into thinking he was good when in reality he was bad?
I had to write all this to describe my anti-10commandments stance. It's not that it conflicts with my lifestyle, that was a joke, its that if you look at it from earths point of view they are actually subtle evil instructions telling her children to attack her viciously. Its a cosmic conspiracy that I'm not going to fall for.
No I'm not on drugs.... at the mo...
But I don't think it is naturally bad. I learn whats right by looking at the animals and you'll find that apex predators have to kill members of their own species due to competition, if nothing preys on them they have to kill eachother to keep their population in check. It doesn't get much more apex than humans and competition doesn't get much more tight than it is for us now.
For example, Japan is taking so many fish and other wierd animals out of the ocean that if it continues at this rate their won't be any fish for anyone(or any thing) very soon.
I would not be against a war over such a thing, it would be a natural activity for a globe dominating species to partake in. Good healthy competition. A lion will kill a lion from somewhere else if it comes into its territory and eats buffaloe. Chimpanzee's will do the same if a stranger chimpanzee is in their territory. Most animals will.
I refuse to believe lions and chimps and hyenas etc etc are "wrong". If theres a right it would be common and consistent in nature, this is, so what humans are doing when they allow other humans to diminish food stocks is actually wrong. Not killing in that scenario is wrong IMOTIBOTRW(In my opinion that I based on the real world)
I guess at this stage it is impractical to kill people just because you don't know them, but the original human families that joined forces with stranger human families to form primitive societies were "sinful" in a way, by not killing. Dolphins "sin" every now and then by joining forces with strangers to avoid killer whale attack but thats as far as they got. They learned a long time ago that hanging around in large non-family specific groups, though safer from predators, is a breeding ground for disease so they never stay together for long.
Humans just took the diseases on the chin for thousands of years untill they eventually figured out how to fight against them.
Call me crazy, but I think diseases are quite obviously nature telling us we're doing something wrong. Joining forces and getting an unfair advantage is "wrong", so nature rights it with disease.
There's alot of "neighbour" talk in the ten commandments.
I don't think they are made up arbitrary crap like most atheists, I think they're distinctively evil. They directly contradict nature, who I hold in a pretty high regard. And for that reason flores, I find it impossible to think the god in the quaran/bible etc is nature. If I had to believe in that god I would say he was natures opponent, and he skewed natures most potentially destructive creation with his evil commandments to start a war against the earth. A war we are all taking part in.
Its not one sided, nature's fighting back with diseases and natural "disasters", she made the skin of the most dangerous light so her boyfriend could burn us etc
but the evil commandment maker's soldiers do have the upper hand at the moment What if you were tricked like this flores? Maybe the quaran is real, a real complex trick. It feeds our ego's and promises us eternal life to make us do its dirty bidding. If gods so smart, who says he couldn't trick measly humans into thinking he was good when in reality he was bad?
I had to write all this to describe my anti-10commandments stance. It's not that it conflicts with my lifestyle, that was a joke, its that if you look at it from earths point of view they are actually subtle evil instructions telling her children to attack her viciously. Its a cosmic conspiracy that I'm not going to fall for.
No I'm not on drugs.... at the mo...
So quit bothering us here on the internet. Go tare your clothes off, live in the wilderness, and eat your young.
At what point did Dr Lou turn into an eco terrorist? Is this just a recent development or had I just been missing it up until now?
Oh I've always been one.
I back off every few weeks to let the dust settle.
Ask around, I go on about this stuff quite often, I've just been on a break so as to not send human-fans into violent cyber-rages.
And we all have our subjects that we feel strongly about mystech.
I'd be a pretty petty individual if the next time you were voicing your opinions on gay rights I said "So quit bothering us on the internet and go fuck a dude" wouldn't I?
I back off every few weeks to let the dust settle.
Ask around, I go on about this stuff quite often, I've just been on a break so as to not send human-fans into violent cyber-rages.
And we all have our subjects that we feel strongly about mystech.
I'd be a pretty petty individual if the next time you were voicing your opinions on gay rights I said "So quit bothering us on the internet and go fuck a dude" wouldn't I?
Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
I'd be a pretty petty individual if the next time you were voicing your opinions on gay rights I said "So quit bothering us on the internet and go fuck a dude" wouldn't I?
Yes, but the difference is that I'm not completely insane.