Total servers: 3
baSE ReALiTy
Modern Warfare1.0 – 20lt
IP: 84.230.193.74
Game Mode: Death Match
Lives: 0
Max Kills: 15
Version: OpenLieroX 0.58 rc5
Players:
M0rtsHeaven
Modern Warfare1.0 – 20lt
IP: 84.251.82.159
Game Mode: Death Match
Lives: 0
Max Kills: 12
Version: OpenLieroX 0.58 rc5
Players:
Backup server NL
Modern Warfare1.0 – 20lt
IP: 95.46.198.26
Game Mode: Death Match
Lives: 0
Max Kills: 15
Version: OpenLieroX 0.58 rc5
Players:
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Philosophies  (Read 31187 times)

Oxygen

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #100 on: December 09, 2008, 12:58:43 am »
I hate religion in all forms. Just thought I would say that. I am close minded about it and I strongly believe that if those 'great minds' had not believed in God or any form of religion they would have been even greater. It is because I have brought up to see religion as a form of oppression because of reasons in my own family and those around us. If someone mentions that Charles Darwin was infact Christian you are wrong. To be admitted to university in those days it was required for you to say you were Christian.
Logged

Rakkula

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #101 on: December 09, 2008, 09:01:11 am »
How can you agree to either one of Sakmongkol's or Oxygen's definition of god, which are both differenent, and then reply by saying that you think god is everything, nothing, and anything. If you think god is everything, anything, and nothing (which LOGICALLY makes no sense) then you would not have agreed with either Sak or Oxygen because they did not say that. For this topic, you managed to agree to two different opinions, as well as formulate your own opinion on the matter, adding it all up, you agreed to three different definitions of god. Congratulations!
What the ****? I said god can be anything, everything or nothing (or all of them). That was my opinion of what a God can be depending on the definition. I tried to make a definition which would apply to most cases. I agree to their opinion because they are correct to some extent. However, this doesn't mean their definition would be right always. According to my own definition, why couldn't I agree to theirs?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2008, 11:47:39 am by Rakkula »
Logged
Opinions are like assholes: everyone has one, and they usually stink.
I started playing LX while you were on your mother's stomach

Jeff

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #102 on: December 10, 2008, 03:02:10 am »
Next Question: Did Jesus Christ really do all of the "miracles" that the bible describes?
Logged

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #103 on: December 10, 2008, 01:11:29 pm »
Next Question: Did Jesus Christ really do all of the "miracles" that the bible describes?

Obviously he didn't, even his existence is highly disputable. I personally believe he did exist, and he must have been a nice and clever guy, but his actions and teachings have been hugely misinterpreted and exaggerated. I don't even believe he ever wanted to be seen as the son of God or the Messiah, this is probably just something the people around him (and even more so after his death) attributed to him.

But how is this question related to philosophy? This is purely a question of personal beliefs, and there is rather little evidence to support either view on the subject.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Rakkula

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #104 on: December 10, 2008, 04:17:39 pm »
I agree with Sakmongkol. I believe Jesus existed (there are thousands of Jesuses living in South-America atm  :P), but I know miracles don't happen. What I mean by miracles is magic and stuff. Maybe he just did a lot card tricks or changed water into "wine" without letting anyone taste it (colouring it). Or his teachings just made people exaggerate his stories. You all know how it goes; a kid saw a cow on the road, he told his grandpa who later said to his neighbours that a herd of cows crossed a street, et cetera. Jesus might have been a philosopher or simply a manic narsist who saw a lot effort making people follow him. The point being: who knows? Not philosophies really imo.

My question: Do you think that it's morally right to clone humans or other species? Or simply clone body parts or organs which would contribute to easier living for those who, for instance, have lost their leg or their liver has been destroyed due to a disease (or one just destroyed it by drinking). Do you also think that it's right to grow fetuses simply for genetic research? I didn't want this to be an exact question so people can expand this if they want. The point of view should be in philosophical ethics though.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 04:19:10 pm by Rakkula »
Logged
Opinions are like assholes: everyone has one, and they usually stink.
I started playing LX while you were on your mother's stomach

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #105 on: December 10, 2008, 04:56:03 pm »
About cloning humans or other species (animals mainly), I think it would be okay for research purposes. I can't imagine why else anyone would want to clone them anyway. Don't have much of an opinion on this one.

Cloning body parts and organs though, I think that's just stupid. If someone has lost a vital organ, it should be accepted and he should not be kept 'artificially' alive, especially if the organ was destroyed because of one's own actions. On this subject I also believe in karma of some kind, so that fatal accidents are not just 'accidents', but they happen for a reason. When people want to keep the victims alive and waste huge amounts of resources on them, I think they are in a way acting against Nature's 'will'. The world is too crowded already and the resources should be left for the healthy ones who need them. This is of course cruel and maybe I should try to think from the view of the less-fortunate also, but of course I can't imagine what their situation really is like. I can imagine though, that if I was in a fatal accident and I would need organ transplants just to stay alive, I would rather die than live the rest of my life in bed or a wheelchair or tied to a ventilator. Similarly when I get old I don't want to live the last 10-20 years only thanks to heavy medication.

Now I can't come up with any good arguments for this, so this is really only my (rather selfish and cruel) opinion.

Oh and growing fetuses for genetic research might be useful for something (I'm not sure what exactly) so I think it could be acceptable. If, however, it got to the point where people can use genetic manipulation and other stuff to get a baby that looks exactly the way they want and is perfectly healthy, I don't think it would be good for anyone anymore.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Jeff

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #106 on: December 10, 2008, 10:43:33 pm »
Next Question: Did Jesus Christ really do all of the "miracles" that the bible describes?

Obviously he didn't, even his existence is highly disputable.

there is proof that a man was once named jesus christ
Logged

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #107 on: December 10, 2008, 10:55:37 pm »
Next Question: Did Jesus Christ really do all of the "miracles" that the bible describes?

Obviously he didn't, even his existence is highly disputable.

there is proof that a man was once named jesus christ

Proof for his existence does exist, yes, but a lot of the historical depictions are in conflict either with each other or the gospels. There are no undisputed records of Jesus' appearance.

Besides, so most likely a man named Jesus Christ did exist, but so what? Just the name Jesus Christ is no proof that everything that is said about him in the Bible is real. I was merely pointing out his historical disputability to show that even if he did do all the miracles, we can not know if the depictions are factual or not. But as I have yet to see anyone else do anything like what Jesus supposedly did, I believe it is more probable that he didn't do those things either.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Gaston

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #108 on: December 11, 2008, 12:22:35 am »
I hate religion in all forms. Just thought I would say that. I am close minded about it and I strongly believe that if those 'great minds' had not believed in God or any form of religion they would have been even greater. It is because I have brought up to see religion as a form of oppression because of reasons in my own family and those around us. If someone mentions that Charles Darwin was infact Christian you are wrong. To be admitted to university in those days it was required for you to say you were Christian.

How would those minds be greater? Would they have done more great things if they hadn't believed in God? Or would the be greater by definition?

I've also seen atheism being used as a form of oppression. In Norway, where I am from, about 50% of the population do not believe in God, and I would say that Atheism and Agnostism has an amazingly high position here compared to most other countries in the world. For example when I went to school, the norm was to not believe in any of the religions that were presented, because then you were a sheep. So a few people would go around asking other people if they believed in God. If the question was answered with a "Yes", they would then be ridiculed by this group for being dumb with no further explanation nor argument behind them than it was stupid. It was basically opression in the schoolyard. Should I hate all forms of non-belief in God because of me having seen it being used as oppression? As far as I can tell from your logic, I would have to, unless of course you're leaving out a factor that makes belief in God special. Because as far as I can tell, both belief in God and non-belief can be utilized as a tool of opression of whomever wishes to do so.
Logged
26 Mars 2007
Belle: woah, is that a neatly snuck in sexproposition? Could I ask you to take of your pants?

Oxygen

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #109 on: December 11, 2008, 08:22:36 am »
Hah, don't get all titchy with me (Because of my beliefs or lack thereof). We both know you cannot change my mind on this subject. And people who are religious are stupider for believing in a being who cannot logically exist. Even Christians must admit that God's existence is pure speculation. As far as I'm concerned I'm yet to see one shred of hard evidence supporting the existence of God. I call people who believe in UFOs visiting Earth or ghosts stupid as well. And it seems to me there is a LOT more evidence for those two things there is of God. Even Big Foot has more evidence, instead we only have a book called the bible which itself is rather illogical not to mention incredibly violent. And don't give me any of this "Old Testament, It's irrelevant" crap. Did God rewrite the Bible to make it more PC? As far as I'm concerned the Old Testament being the original is the proper Bible. I'm yet to see anyone stoned to death or any pregnant women torn apart and I'm glad that people don't seem to be following the bible in that respect. Instead all they do is try and convert us, tell us we're going to hell, restrict us and generally make everyone's lives unpleasent.

Yes, you struck a nerve.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 08:25:24 am by Oxygen »
Logged

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #110 on: December 11, 2008, 08:52:34 am »
I hate religion in all forms. Just thought I would say that. I am close minded about it and I strongly believe that if those 'great minds' had not believed in God or any form of religion they would have been even greater. It is because I have brought up to see religion as a form of oppression because of reasons in my own family and those around us. If someone mentions that Charles Darwin was infact Christian you are wrong. To be admitted to university in those days it was required for you to say you were Christian.

How would those minds be greater? Would they have done more great things if they hadn't believed in God? Or would the be greater by definition?

I've also seen atheism being used as a form of oppression. In Norway, where I am from, about 50% of the population do not believe in God, and I would say that Atheism and Agnostism has an amazingly high position here compared to most other countries in the world. For example when I went to school, the norm was to not believe in any of the religions that were presented, because then you were a sheep. So a few people would go around asking other people if they believed in God. If the question was answered with a "Yes", they would then be ridiculed by this group for being dumb with no further explanation nor argument behind them than it was stupid. It was basically opression in the schoolyard. Should I hate all forms of non-belief in God because of me having seen it being used as oppression? As far as I can tell from your logic, I would have to, unless of course you're leaving out a factor that makes belief in God special. Because as far as I can tell, both belief in God and non-belief can be utilized as a tool of opression of whomever wishes to do so.

Yeah, it is kinda ironic that atheism has become/is becoming like a religion of it's own in certain places, and it is just as dogmatic as the traditional religions and doesn't really require you to think on your own any more than the religions do. Some atheists just take God's non-existence for granted in the same way as religious people do the opposite, without any more proof or logic to support their views. I don't think there's anything wrong in believing or not believing in God, as long as you try to think and explain to yourself why your view suits you better, and above all you shouldn't tell anyone who disagrees with you that their view is wrong. Unfortunately I have more personal experience of atheists accusing religious people of being stupid, but I won't deny that the opposite happens a lot too.

And people who are religious are stupider for believing in a being who cannot logically exist.

I would rather say you are stupid for calling anyone else stupid based on that. God can logically exist, it is just a matter of how you define God. If you're interested, I have defined God following Baruch Spinoza's logic and proved it's existence in this very thread, but I am not really a religious person in a certain sense, so maybe my definition doesn't please you.

Instead all they do is try and convert us, tell us we're going to hell, restrict us and generally make everyone's lives unpleasent.

That is indeed stupid, but can you say it's any more clever to make the religious people's lives unpleasant by telling them God doesn't exist and believing in Him is stupid? You have an exactly equal amount of proof to say that your view is correct as they do: none. It is a matter of personal beliefs and there is no right or wrong on this subject.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Oxygen

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #111 on: December 11, 2008, 09:51:04 am »
You can't prove that something doesn't exist. That's kinda the point.

 And I've said enough, I know my views grate against others. I've stated my point of view and I know that anything else I will say will just lead to a Creationism Vs. Evolution debate. Most of the religious people I have met have been the "You're going to hell/Science is stupid, worship God instead" types. So of course I'm going to have problems with people explaing religion to me. I don't believe in any religion and I hate everything relating to it. And excuse me for not understanding how anyone intelligent could believe in something with so little evidence supporting it. It doesn't seem right to me, then again I am a 'Man of Science' who needs evidence for everything, or at the very least a theory that fills all the gaps.

K, done.

Edit: I Lied, guess I'm going to hell. Sak and Gaston you have both been prime examples in this thread for why I hate religion. My original post I didn't think was offending in any such way. Simply posting my views and a fact. However Gaston's post did seem rather agressive towards me and Sak's even more so. Which in turn made my post of an agressive manner.

K, Now I'm done.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 09:56:01 am by Oxygen »
Logged

Gaston

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #112 on: December 11, 2008, 10:10:30 am »
Hah, don't get all titchy with me (Because of my beliefs or lack thereof). We both know you cannot change my mind on this subject. And people who are religious are stupider for believing in a being who cannot logically exist. Even Christians must admit that God's existence is pure speculation. As far as I'm concerned I'm yet to see one shred of hard evidence supporting the existence of God. I call people who believe in UFOs visiting Earth or ghosts stupid as well. And it seems to me there is a LOT more evidence for those two things there is of God. Even Big Foot has more evidence, instead we only have a book called the bible which itself is rather illogical not to mention incredibly violent. And don't give me any of this "Old Testament, It's irrelevant" crap. Did God rewrite the Bible to make it more PC? As far as I'm concerned the Old Testament being the original is the proper Bible. I'm yet to see anyone stoned to death or any pregnant women torn apart and I'm glad that people don't seem to be following the bible in that respect. Instead all they do is try and convert us, tell us we're going to hell, restrict us and generally make everyone's lives unpleasent.

Yes, you struck a nerve.

I just gave you a case of the opposite, and asked if I was justified to think all atheism and agnostism is stupid based on that. God can logically exist.  Some specific Gods defy logic, and can't logically exist, but that does not go for all Gods. Belief in God does not equate christianity. (I say this because most of your post when talking about religion,  refers to christianity, while I refer to religiousity in general.)
Logged
26 Mars 2007
Belle: woah, is that a neatly snuck in sexproposition? Could I ask you to take of your pants?

Raziel

  • Guest
Re: Philosophies
« Reply #113 on: December 11, 2008, 10:15:25 am »
Whenever there is some pointless dispute about relligion, I always feel like posting this:

Desiderata

Go placidly amid the noise and haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible without surrender
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons,
they are vexations to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain and bitter;
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.

Keep interested in your own career, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
Exercise caution in your business affairs;
for the world is full of trickery.
But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
many persons strive for high ideals;
and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself.
Especially, do not feign affection.
Neither be cynical about love;
for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment
it is as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the counsel of the years,
gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune.
But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings.
Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.
Beyond a wholesome discipline,
be gentle with yourself.

You are a child of the universe,
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God,
whatever you conceive Him to be,
and whatever your labors and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world.
Be cheerful.
Strive to be happy.

Max Ehrmann, Desiderata, Copyright 1952.
Logged

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #114 on: December 11, 2008, 10:18:28 am »
Edit: I Lied, guess I'm going to hell. Sak and Gaston you have both been prime examples in this thread for why I hate religion. My original post I didn't think was offending in any such way. Simply posting my views and a fact. However Gaston's post did seem rather agressive towards me and Sak's even more so. Which in turn made my post of an agressive manner.

Those I don't understand. I tried to say that I am not a religious person at all and I don't support any particular religion or religions in general, nor do I support the certain kind of dogmatic atheism. All I was trying to do was to say that everyone has a right to their own opinion and everyone's opinion should be respected. I respect your opinion and I didn't mean to offend you in any way, and I don't believe I offended you anymore than you offended religious people in general. It seems to me that you are the one posting aggressive posts here and not respecting other people's opinions. If you think that as a 'Man of Science' you have the right to bash every opinion that doesn't have scientic evidence and thus doesn't please you, I feel rather sad for you. I have nothing against scientific people, but I think you are now being just as close-minded as the average fundamentalist Christian or Muslim or whatsoever. To you science seems to be a dogma in the same way as the Bible or Qur'an to the aforementioned fundamentalists.

Again I don't mean to offend you, I'm just suggesting you could try to be slightly more open-minded towards other people's opinions also.

@Raz: I don't really feel I'm disputing about religion here, but more about tolerance towards views that don't match your own.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Valk

  • Valkonian King
  • LXA Part Time Adapt
  • *****
  • Schwartz: +1/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 744
  • 330 credits
  • View Inventory
  • Send Money To Valk
  • The Harlequin shall come, come for revenge.
Re: Philosophies
« Reply #115 on: December 11, 2008, 01:35:41 pm »
There is one thing i really dont understand about religion.
What year are Muslims in?

Think about it, because we are in the year 2008 other wise known as AD2008 which is after christ, and when be speak further in the past before christ was born we say 0000BC, and christ being part of the christianity, muslims dont worship him. Its hard to explain but i hope you understand what im saying. So do muslims live in a different year, such to speak?


EDIT: Ignore this post i've just found out its; The current Islamic Year is 1429 AH, from approximately January 9 (evening) to December 28, 2008 (evening).
« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 01:40:49 pm by Valk »
Logged
-=GOOOOD MORNING VIETNAM=-

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #116 on: December 11, 2008, 01:53:45 pm »
There is one thing i really dont understand about religion.
What year are Muslims in?

Think about it, because we are in the year 2008 other wise known as AD2008 which is after christ, and when be speak further in the past before christ was born we say 0000BC, and christ being part of the christianity, muslims dont worship him. Its hard to explain but i hope you understand what im saying. So do muslims live in a different year, such to speak?


EDIT: Ignore this post i've just found out its; The current Islamic Year is 1429 AH, from approximately January 9 (evening) to December 28, 2008 (evening).

Just a side note: Muslims also believe in Jesus, not as the son of God but a prophet. And yeah, the Muslims have their own calendar, but I think they have mostly adapted to the Gregorian calendar, just like the rest of the world, and their own calendar is only used to date the religious celebrations.
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis

Oxygen

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #117 on: December 11, 2008, 10:37:35 pm »
Fine, I appologise to everyone I managed to offend. I was feeling rather threatened. Anyways, I focused on christanity because that's the religion I have the greatest beef with. Sak, from my point of view you seemed quite strictly religious and I didn't bother reading your earlier posts in much detail.

Anyways, let's get off this subject (I admit defeat).

Scientology! Before we begin, does anyway believe that millions of humans were brought to Earth by a space faring race to be killed off to make souls?
Logged

Jeff

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #118 on: December 12, 2008, 03:53:11 am »
Logged

Sakmongkol

Re: Philosophies
« Reply #119 on: February 05, 2009, 01:14:29 am »
I wonder what happened to this wonderful thread. There was a lot of nice discussion here in my opinion, and now that I am 'preparing' for a very important exam that takes place in about 7 hours (I should definitely be asleep already), I came to think of one problem that could be called philosophical. It falls in the area of social philosophy and it goes as follows:

Why do people have to work so ridiculously much these days? With the economic recession that's taking place now, along with a lot of other bad stuff, a lot of people are probably working harder than ever before. We are working like animals to get money and fancy possessions, but still I don't think we are any happier than before. You could lose your job anytime and be up to your ears in debt. And all of this, I think, is because people try to reach for something that doesn't exist, they try to achieve growth and development and make 'happiness' out of nothing. But the amount of prosperity on this planet is a constant, and at best people can only try to get their hands on others' share of it, and I don't think prosperity achieved like this can last very long.

I think everything was better in ancient Greece (and maybe Rome too) where people got slaves to do the hardest work. This way the free people could focus on all of the more interesting stuff like philosophy, culture, arts, science and so on. And this basically created the basis for all modern western culture.

Applied to the modern world though, I doubt it would be possible to create a country where you use slave labor. Still, I would be interested to see someone at least try to apply the ancient Greek way of life to the modern world. How exactly that would be done, I don't know, but I can say for sure that the way we work like idiots for nothing today is far from what the heritage of the ancient culture would encourage us to do.

How do you others feel about this? Can you honestly say you are happy living your lives the way you are right now? Am I just especially lazy and discontent with my life? I hope there'll be at least some kind of discussion about this. :-\
Logged
"If you understood everything I say, you'd be me!"

~ Miles Davis
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up