Displaying 481 To 510 Of 981 Comments The universe only seems perfectly calibrated because that calibration led to your being. If the universe was not calibrated in such a fashion as to allow you to come into being, then you wouldn’t be around to notice it. Okay, that sounded stupid, but it makes sense… When you think about it. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 5:21 pm I don’t see how it applies either, but I think this is what bito was getting at. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 5:09 pm I know. I’m just having a little fun. 😉 » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:56 pm KillgoreTrout “You lost me bito.” ______________________________________________________________ I think that I’ve found what he means, courtesy of wikipedia: “…mu is considered by Discordians to be the correct answer to the classic logical fallacy of the loaded question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”[9] Assuming that you have no wife or you have never beaten your wife, the answer “yes” is wrong because it implies that you used to beat your wife and then stopped, but “no” is worse because it suggests that you have one and are still beating her. As a result, some Discordians proposed “mu” as the correct answer, which to them means, “Your question cannot be answered because it depends on incorrect assumptions.”” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29 » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:53 pm To bito, No, a blind man does not see the moon. Unless, of course, you are using a non-physical definition of “see”, wherein the blind man could have the moon described to him and “see” it in his mind. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:41 pm KT, mu is either an ancient Greek or Japanese letter/word. I’m not familiar with the Greek meaning, but in Japanese it means “no thing”. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:32 pm So, we’re mostly in agreement. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:20 pm Bito, it is not dishonest to accept that one does not know, but that’s not what I suggested that it was dishonest to do. I suggested that it may be dishonest to ignore *any* question that may upset your peace of mind. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:11 pm Thanks for replying, Kalima. I sometimes forget that people are generally more experienced than me. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:02 pm Of course not, bito. I had considered that beforehand and phrased my comment to be self-specific. But, it is interesting to me because ignoring a question because it may upset your peace of mind seems a little dishonest – for lack of a better word – to me. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 4:01 pm Is there such a thing as a practising Deist? » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 3:57 pm Kalima, just because KT quoted someone doesn’t mean that he takes his word as gospel. Most people quote someone because that person was able to better express an idea than they were. Also, not questioning something because you have or think you have peace of mind? I mean, really? It wouldn’t be possible for me to have peace of mind if there was a question about it that I hadn’t considered. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 3:48 pm I know what Campbell means and while it can be artistically or metaphorically valid to engage in anthropomorphisation, people tend to get carried away with it. » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 3:21 pm That’s quite similar to the Hindu idea that I mentioned. You say that this spirit can be experienced, so does it come to you or do you find it? » Posted By Caru On April 30, 2011 @ 3:18 pm Isn’t that an aspect of Hindu thinking? » Posted By Caru On April 29, 2011 @ 3:43 pm Perhaps I was a bit strong in my defining of Anti-Theism. Of course, within Anti-Theism there is a spectrum like all the other forms of atheism that I’ve listed bar apatheism, which is too uninterested to have a spectrum. 😉 » Posted By Caru On April 29, 2011 @ 10:00 am Don’t get me started on Kitchener either. » Posted By Caru On April 27, 2011 @ 12:23 pm Gallipoli is one of the many reasons why I’m not Churchill’s biggest fan. » Posted By Caru On April 26, 2011 @ 9:34 am “It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.” ~ Voltaire, War » Posted By Caru On May 5, 2011 @ 12:47 pm It just jumped out at me. 🙂 Anyway, good post. You series is coming along quite nicely. » Posted By Caru On May 5, 2011 @ 12:41 pm Quote: Well, yes, since thievery, with the exception of stealing necessities explicitly to survive, is simply another expression of materialism. » Posted By Caru On May 5, 2011 @ 12:34 pm The View From the Left Hemisphere of the Universe Whenever I turn my mind to the universe as a whole, my higher functions seem to be enraptured by the awe-inspiring majesty of it all. But, my lizard brain starts whispering about lovecraftian terrors that lurk between the stars. Kinda spoils the fun. » Posted By Caru On April 24, 2011 @ 4:11 am I do not consider science to be one of mankind’s greatest achievements. Many specific scientific things could be regarded as some of mankind’s greatest achievements, but not the entirety of the field. Much in the same way as all books are not considered to be literary masterpieces. That said, I do consider the scientific method to be one of mankind’s greatest achievements, along with such things as writing and space travel. » Posted By Caru On April 24, 2011 @ 3:51 am Quote: Within seconds, she was joined by the rest of her party at their table, until the lot of them were politely ushered from the room by attending plain-clothes security officers. The President thanked them for their offering and carried on with his speech.” O_O » Posted By Caru On April 22, 2011 @ 10:09 am Exactly, it’s a terribly weighty thing. » Posted By Caru On April 29, 2011 @ 3:40 pm Perhaps I am splitting hairs, though I’ll try to defend my view. If I accept the definition of morally justified as what you should do, then you’d be completely correct. However, I’d say that the definition of morally justified – at least for me – would be more along the lines of what you should ideally do. After all, sometimes there are no “good” options. I can defend this somewhat lofty notion on the grounds that “good” morality is idealised and should be idealised, though not to the point of parody. I am unread in both consequentialism and this virtue based approach that you speak of. As I’ve said, I am not very well-read in the area at all. » Posted By Caru On April 26, 2011 @ 9:27 am “if you kill a guy who killed your wife, I got no problem with you.” For me, I’d have a problem with it and I’d understand greatly. Condemnation would not come easily to me in such a situation. » Posted By Caru On April 26, 2011 @ 6:57 am Thanks for reading, pl, and thanks for the critique. It gave me some food for thought. “1+) Stopping someone from being murdered in an attack” Yes, this would indeed be an equally valid example of 1. However if (1+) could only be achieved by killing the attacker, then we would, as you said, find ourselves in a pickle. The solution to this would either be: a) My ideas are wrong, which is entirely possible. I just haven’t been convinced otherwise yet. b) That helping the person by preventing them from being killed and necessarily killing the attacker are two separate, yet interlinked events with separate moral flavours. You can’t have one without the other. You’ve basically said this yourself. I agree with you that this leads to an ends justify the means type situation, but that’s only if you believe that a good ending justifies bad action. I don’t, I believe that a good ending renders the bad action necessary not justified – determining when a bad action completely overturn the scales on a good ending is another matter entirely. Ultimately, I don’t ever believe that a bad action can be justified because I believe that doing so is taking the easy way out of a complicated situation by moving the goalposts. However, a bad action can be necessary and often is. Lastly, I do agree that a morally justified act doesn’t equate to feeling swell. Take the example of calling a ambulance for a murderer for example. You may prefer for him to simply die and calling the ambulance may pain you greatly, but it’s the morally justified thing to do. » Posted By Caru On April 26, 2011 @ 6:55 am I agree completely. I just choose the examples and areas I did because they were easy to describe. Of course, there is a certain degree of blurring between each. For example, helping a murderer escape from prison isn’t good. However, I do think that most specific situations arising from the two terms that I laid out would fit in one of the four areas I listed. » Posted By Caru On April 24, 2011 @ 4:05 am Wow, you’ve led a pretty interesting life so far, PW. » Posted By Caru On April 24, 2011 @ 3:59 amComments Posted By Caru
“Can a society lost in a sea of empty materialism provided by some of the most corrupt people in existence, really berate anyone who chooses to interfere with that system?”
“A young woman stood up in the middle of the President’s speech peeled off her top to reveal a teeshirt bearing the smiling image of cri de coeur martyr of the moment, Bradley Manning, and began to sing an ode to Private Manning.
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats