User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Original Sin

  1. #11
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into It View Post
    It is the perversion of reason that offends. A system of values that takes what is and calls it "backward" is not moral, and that is the point. What is is, as determined by our senses, and that should be our standard.
    I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here, other than that you're opposed to a moral framework that challenges whatever may be the status quo. If you're in favour of a morality founded on empirical description, what rationale would you use for deriving "ought" from "is"?
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

  2. #12
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into It View Post
    2. Please think about this some more. The physical world is all that is. Values and Identities are ideas that we try to add to it, but we don't actually add to it, because we can't. The person standing to my left hates me. The person to my right loves me. A third person tells me "I'm going to name you Brian." What changes? Nothing. We are just four people standing in a room. Everything else is false. I am an imaginative person as well, which is why it is so important for people like you and I to be able to tell the difference between what is real and not real, and to make reasonable conclusions based on the information we are able to collect from the world.
    People have been judged unfairly so many times by people that believe what they can see and what seems to make sense on the surface is all that matters. That's such a shallow perspective.


    3. Think about this some more too. I don't mean to sound condescending by telling you to rethink these issues, but you're stumbling upon some very important ideas, that's all. You said "some of us actually experience more joy from forgiving and helping others than from a meaningless existence of perpetual selfishness." If you are one of those people, then for you, helping people is selfish. I never said that one shouldn't help people. Lots of people like to help, like you said, and they should. Other people derive joy from designing buildings or working on nanotechnology. They should. Something to consider is that if you are one of these people who loves to help, then not helping people would be a sacrifice for you. Sacrifice means self-mutilation. I stand against sacrifice. If you came over to my house, I would consider it a special occasion. So should I get out my best and most expensive bottle of wine? Is it virtuous for YOU to drink MY best bottle of wine instead of me? Why is it virtuous for ME to drink YOUR bottle of wine? I am right in drinking any wine but my own? What if I only had enough for one glass left, which I was thinking about enjoying alone some night? The Christians would say, "give him your last glass, and you drink the cheap wine." Why should there be any sort of sacrifice involved? Why is this right? I would serve us both the cheaper wine, because we are equals. I won't get on my knees because I am not below you, nor would I expect or appreciate you bowing down to me.
    The thing is, Christians never sacrifice anything themselves except the bare minimum necessary, and they always blow it out of proportion... they mostly just want OTHER people to sacrifice who they are, for THEM. Have you not noticed this? This is why they promote sacrifice.

    I would agree that sacrifice is bad. Exchanges should be mutual. I believe in equality.
    4. I am using the word "nature" in its truest sense. I am not talking about squirrels and creepy-crawly things. I am talking about that which is made up of atoms.
    Oh, THAT nature? I can understand that. Of course I value the structure of reality. Just not reality itself.
    5. Skewed by what standards? It's reasonable. That's the only standard.
    [/QUOTE]

    It doesn't seem reasonable to me. Not at all. It sounds like something you just made up.

  3. #13
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into It View Post
    And if man, with his innate curiousity, had not yet fallen, then can he be blamed for the decision he made to eat from it?
    He had already fallen.

    In what kind of Christian household were you raised?

  4. #14
    Senior Member Into It's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here, other than that you're opposed to a moral framework that challenges whatever may be the status quo. If you're in favour of a morality founded on empirical description, what rationale would you use for deriving "ought" from "is"?
    When I say "what is, is," I am not referring to the status quo. I am speaking about humans, nature, existence - anything above argument.
    On this level, what is ought to be. It's all there is. Ideas attempting to label natural occurences "evil" are immoral. 'Sacrifice' becomes immoral if you look at it closely, because we are beings set up to survive and thrive. Sacrifice and other forms of self-destruction are not in line with this. What is moral is living and enjoying life. What is immoral is saying "No" to your self, to the senses, or to reason.
    An inscription above the gate to Hell:
    "Eternal Love also created me"

  5. #15
    Senior Member Into It's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    He had already fallen.

    In what kind of Christian household were you raised?
    I guess I have the story wrong. Will you explain it to me? I thought that Adam was punished for eating the apple, and this was called the Fall of Man.
    An inscription above the gate to Hell:
    "Eternal Love also created me"

  6. #16
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into It View Post
    I guess I have the story wrong. Will you explain it to me? I thought that Adam was punished for eating the apple, and this was called the Fall of Man.
    "You shall not surely die, for you shall be like God, knowing good and evil."

    This is an argument. The premise asserts that they shall be like God, knowing good and evil, and, therefore, they shall not die.

    This argument is valid, but not sound.

    They believed the conclusion, because they believed the premise, and the premise is clearly false. God knows good and evil because he is the eternal creator: he determines good and evil in the act of creation. Man knows good and evil through discovery of the natures of things created. The only way they could have fallen for this trap is if they failed to pay attention to basic distinctions--in this case they were tested concerning their knowledge concerning the distinction between the infinite (God) and the finite (man). Their eating of the tree, the fruit sin, was the result of their prior failure to seek to know God as he is--the root sin. And sin first is not seeking, which results in not understanding, which results in not doing what is right.

  7. #17
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into It View Post
    When I say "what is, is," I am not referring to the status quo. I am speaking about humans, nature, existence - anything above argument.

    On this level, what is ought to be. It's all there is. Ideas attempting to label natural occurences "evil" are immoral. 'Sacrifice' becomes immoral if you look at it closely, because we are beings set up to survive and thrive. Sacrifice and other forms of self-destruction are not in line with this. What is moral is living and enjoying life. What is immoral is saying "No" to your self, to the senses, or to reason.
    Suppose that you wish to kill a person who you feel has wronged you in some way. This has made you extremely angry, your natural instinct is to kill this person, it would bring you great satisfaction and a release from your feelings of pent up rage and frustration, and an analysis of the situation suggests a way to kill them without a serious fear of failure, harm to yourself in the process, or retalliation. Would failure to slay them in these circumstances be actually immoral according to your system as seems to be implied by your statement? If on the other hand, killing them is immoral, how do you derive the conclusion from the naturalistic phillosophy you're advocating?
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

  8. #18
    Senior Member Into It's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    Suppose that you wish to kill a person who you feel has wronged you in some way. This has made you extremely angry, your natural instinct is to kill this person, it would bring you great satisfaction and a release from your feelings of pent up rage and frustration, and an analysis of the situation suggests a way to kill them without a serious fear of failure, harm to yourself in the process, or retalliation. Would failure to slay them in these circumstances be actually immoral according to your system as seems to be implied by your statement? If on the other hand, killing them is immoral, how do you derive the conclusion from the naturalistic phillosophy you're advocating?
    We are rational beings who want to live in harmony. Physical violence should never be initiated. This is where the line is drawn, and there are no two ways about it. To initiate force is to cripple another's capability to live. Everyone is free to think whatever they would like to think. Inconsistencies between minds cannot be resolved with violence, so violence is obselete. One had better learn to get control of his feelings quickly if he feels like committing murder. What he is dealing with is a disagreement, a mental inconsistency. If he wishes convert his feelings into physical aggression, he either does not understand or agree with freedom of thought. If he were to kill in self defense, it would be another matter entirely. If violence is committed against him, he may retaliate violently. He is not immoral then, because he is only extirpating an evil, participating in battle on the grounds his enemy has chosen.
    An inscription above the gate to Hell:
    "Eternal Love also created me"

  9. #19
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    You're attacking Christianity from a subjective viewpoint and not an objective one. If you were truly looking at it metaphorically among other things, should you not weigh the good with the bad?

    The whole adage about giving away a good glass of wine? Seriously? It's basic socialization. Quid pro quo. If I'm nice to you, you'll be nice to me and we can both be happier. You don't need to bow down to do it. Hell, you don't have to do it at all, but giving a friend a nice glass of wine could help you further down the road than hoarding it for yourself. You can even make the argument that it's more selfish offering the person the wine and expecting a favor in return in the future. Most of what Christianity was built on is a tool for socialization.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  10. #20
    Senior Member Into It's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blank View Post
    1. You're attacking Christianity from a subjective viewpoint and not an objective one. If you were truly looking at it metaphorically among other things, should you not weigh the good with the bad?

    2. The whole adage about giving away a good glass of wine? Seriously? It's basic socialization. Quid pro quo. If I'm nice to you, you'll be nice to me and we can both be happier. You don't need to bow down to do it. Hell, you don't have to do it at all, but giving a friend a nice glass of wine could help you further down the road than hoarding it for yourself. You can even make the argument that it's more selfish offering the person the wine and expecting a favor in return in the future. Most of what Christianity was built on is a tool for socialization.
    1. I'm not concerned with the rush of happiness the arsonist feels when he throws the coctail. I'm not concerned with the ease of life a kidnapper acquires through ransom. I'm not concerned with the glints of good that are visible within mountains of corruption. And Christianity is corruption because it is a denial of our ability to discern right and wrong on a physical earth based on unseen and invisible forces, and unseen effects caused by the invisble forces supposed.

    2. I'm serious. Generosity is a merit only when one thinks or feels that he should be generous. For instance, if I see a man starving to death, I will give him the food I've got and go hungry for the day. I would rather fast for a day than see a man die preventably. It is in my best interest to do so, because ignoring him would be a sacrifice of my values - a sacrifice of myself. Debt is implied in the action of a favor. You may "insist" that someone "forget about it" when you buy them a new car, but they won't. Your actions are imprinted onto anothers' perception of you; they build up. All you would earn from such an action, if the person you bought the car from was morally sound, would be resentment. You would earn resentment through your generosity because you, the debtor, attempt to bend reality, which is debt, to suit the one you find pitiful.

    Conerning the wine specifically, you are right to say it would be a selfish action giving away wine and expecting a good relationship in return. If you understand this, then you are correct, it is a selfish action, and it is right. In a short-sighted universe, where future relationships are not regarded, then it would not be moral to give away your best to another, unless they deserved it. This is justice.
    An inscription above the gate to Hell:
    "Eternal Love also created me"

Similar Threads

  1. Original sin?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 02-21-2017, 03:20 PM
  2. original sin
    By greenfairy in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 04-23-2013, 12:01 AM
  3. Seven Deadly Sin Quiz
    By Kiddo in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-05-2010, 02:53 PM
  4. Problems with Original Sin (Genesis)
    By Didums in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-18-2008, 04:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO