Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-08-2014, 01:44 PM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2014 01:56 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 01:27 PM)morondog Wrote:  Sleepy

God you're boring.

So you didn't sign the social contract Smile This I can agree with. I didn't sign it either. But I don't see the point of not following social convention. As you've said, not following convention which you didn't sign up for may get you killed even... To me... it's the world you live in though. We *do* have the power to change it to a degree, but it requires a great effort. I can't see why you'd put in the effort.

What's so desperately wrong with society now that you feel the rules are too onerous? Is it just taxes and spanking?
Thanks for asking. I could tell you about 200+ million dead by governments, or all the global problems, but basically it's this pesky thing called evil. Lots of people are evil, but they pretend to be good. I really really really want to be good, which is the opposite of evil. I want to be rational, but that is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being good. I want to be good so much, that even in RPGs I always played as good characters and I never read post-modernist novels.

So if I want to be good, I need to know damn well what good is, because the first trick of evil is to take over the definitions of good and make good people do evil. The second trick of evil is to convince everyone that there is no good or evil and things are just laws that you write on paper, maybe vote for them with majority, maybe with 2/3 majority if you want to be sure.

The purpose of philosophy is to fight for good and against evil, because only philosophy can define them. Goodness is the only way to the state of virtue and virtue is the source of happiness. I think it's starting to work for me, it's like slowly getting healthier. If I'm good, I can't be happy if there's so much evil in the world and I'm not doing anything about it. I want to be happy, but more than that I want to be good. People who do evil can't be happy, but they can damage and torture other people and it makes them feel better for a moment. People who deny the existence of good and evil tend to be both unhappy and powerless and also very cynical, defensive and inevitably abusive.

I say abusive, because these people have children and they need somehow to get the children to do what they need them to do. And they use false argument from morality, because you are bad if you disobey and need to be punished, by superior force and threat of denial of love. Of course children die if denied attention, for a child every threat is a death threat, that's how evolution programmed us. This is all very difficult and complicated and almost pointless to explain to grownups, it is much easier to raise children in a healthy way, without battling the false morality of the culture. I am the strange anomaly of a person who had changed his thinking and worldview significantly about half a dozen times, on the grounds of seeing a greater potential for rationality, practicality and goodness. Which local atheists did about once in life, during their de-conversion from Christianity, most people never. So that's the sort of objective measure of what I do. People think I am dogmatic and never change my mind, but how many times did they change their mind to admit painful realizations that threaten relationships? Me, about half a dozen times, maybe more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 02:04 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
You're on crack my bro. I commend your desire to be good but... I don't think that what you propose is good.

I also think this is one hell of a weak reason to embark on a total overthrow of society.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like morondog's post
02-08-2014, 02:11 PM
Re: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Okay now. After reading this whole, so convicted on good diatribe... I'm going to step away. There's no doubt some lingering issues keep him from any expansive thoughts. I couldn't say certainly, maybe living in a undeservedly unified state dramatically altered his positions. But in seeing no examples of a willing open minded person reachable.

Good luck to you in your crusade for good Lumi.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
02-08-2014, 02:38 PM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2014 02:54 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 02:04 PM)morondog Wrote:  You're on crack my bro. I commend your desire to be good but... I don't think that what you propose is good.

I also think this is one hell of a weak reason to embark on a total overthrow of society.
I see it a bit differently, not total overthrow of society. Society is doing a damn good job of overthrowing itself.
You trust in science, but science is merely a creation of philosophy.
I think what is good about society is also logical, rational, well-defined and even scientific. So if we stick with philosophy and science and never mix in any compromise with evil or aggression - the good parts of society will stay in place.
The bad parts of society are unscientific and have bad definitions, they are unreal. And unreal things have no method, so they rely on violence. Violence or aggression is evil, see how it nicely adds up? Philosophy is not so much about giving us new stuff to play with, but about removing badly defined emotional buzzwords that cover up the violence. You already know that from debunking Christianity, but exactly the same method applies to the state, and unfortunately to abusive families as well.

The good and real parts of society are for example pure capitalism without state interventions (Austrian school of economy) and then science and engineering, psychology, and of course philosophy, though not the academical one for the most part. Also, civil law with horizontal contracts between people is pretty much our daily life which I have no problem with. It's called freedom.

You may be worried, because every time someone talks about morality, it is someone telling people what to do, using morality as a blunt instrument to bash their heads with. Morality is about deciding who will get shot. Moral philosophy is literally the most dangerous discipline in the world, because it's the only way how to kill people in mass numbers, how to get good people under mind control or disable them. I OTOH look for good people who want to get a grip on the good and pursue it on their own.
In that case I really don't understand what do you mean by boring in your earlier post. This is the scariest adventure for which all the action movies of Hollywood are a metaphor. It only isn't scary right now, because internet talks aren't considered dangerous by the law. Did you really think that Matrix is about robots, Fight Club is about fist fights and World War Z is about zombies?

(02-08-2014 02:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Okay now. After reading this whole, so convicted on good diatribe... I'm going to step away. There's no doubt some lingering issues keep him from any expansive thoughts. I couldn't say certainly, maybe living in a undeservedly unified state dramatically altered his positions. But in seeing no examples of a willing open minded person reachable.

Good luck to you in your crusade for good Lumi.
Expansive thoughts? I've had all the thoughts you call expansive and I expanded from them. I can no longer return to them, if that's what you mean.

Undeserved unified state? I like that! I like the unified state idea, but I'd say the question of deserving it is personal discipline, it's between me and reality, nobody else.

Willing open minded? I listened to the government for 4 years when it taught me about the legal system and I passed the exams. The legal system had.... 2,500 years or so since the ancient Rome to solve social problems and it seems to be at best a mere failsafe for the society, not a solution in scientific sense.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 02:50 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 02:38 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 02:04 PM)morondog Wrote:  You're on crack my bro. I commend your desire to be good but... I don't think that what you propose is good.

I also think this is one hell of a weak reason to embark on a total overthrow of society.
I see it a bit differently, not total overthrow of society. Society is doing a damn good job of overthrowing itself. I think what is good about society is also logical, rational, well-defined and even scientific. So if we stick with philosophy and science and never mix in any compromise with evil or aggression - the good parts of society will stay in place.
The bad parts of society are unscientific and have bad definitions, they are unreal. And unreal things have no method, so they rely on violence. Violence or aggression is evil, see how it nicely adds up? Philosophy is not so much about giving us new stuff to play with, but about removing badly defined emotional buzzwords that cover up the violence. You already know that from debunking Christianity, but exactly the same method applies to the state, and unfortunately to abusive families as well.

The good and real parts of society are for example pure capitalism without state interventions (Austrian school of economy) and then science and engineering, psychology, and of course philosophy, though not the academical one for the most part. Also, civil law with horizontal contracts between people is pretty much our daily life which I have no problem with. It's called freedom.

You may be worried, because every time someone talks about morality, it is someone telling people what to do, using morality as a blunt instrument to bash their heads with. Morality is about deciding who will get shot. Moral philosophy is literally the most dangerous discipline in the world, because it's the only way how to kill people in mass numbers, how to get good people under mind control or disable them. I OTOH look for good people who want to get a grip on the good and pursue it on their own.
In that case I really don't understand what do you mean by boring in your earlier post. This is the scariest adventure for which all the action movies of Hollywood are a metaphor. It only isn't scary right now, because internet talks aren't considered dangerous by the law. Did you really think that Matrix is about robots, Fight Club is about fist fights and World War Z is about zombies?

(02-08-2014 02:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Okay now. After reading this whole, so convicted on good diatribe... I'm going to step away. There's no doubt some lingering issues keep him from any expansive thoughts. I couldn't say certainly, maybe living in a undeservedly unified state dramatically altered his positions. But in seeing no examples of a willing open minded person reachable.

Good luck to you in your crusade for good Lumi.
Expansive thoughts? I've had all the thoughts you call expansive and I expanded from them. I can no longer return to them, if that's what you mean.

Undeserved unified state? I like that! I like the unified state idea, but I'd say the question of deserving it is personal discipline, it's between me and reality, nobody else.

Willing open minded? I listened to the government for 4 years when it taught me about the legal system and I passed the exams. The legal system had.... 2,500 years or so since the ancient Rome to solve social problems and it seems to be at best a mere failsafe for the society, not a solution in scientific sense.

Presuppositionalism: it's not just for theists anymore!

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
02-08-2014, 03:05 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 02:38 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Did you really think that Matrix is about robots, Fight Club is about fist fights and World War Z is about zombies?

... You're telling me they're not? They're just stories man. Kids' stories. Sure, you can mix in a bit of moralizing... I can tell, you're gonna tell me they're part of a government plot... please don't. I'll cry. I was just an innocent lad until you started with this stuff.

Boring because... I get bored dude. Chasing your stuff round in circles isn't exactly my favourite thing in the world. Undecided

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 03:06 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 02:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Presuppositionalism: it's not just for theists anymore!
Would you please provide a clear, unanimous and objective definition of presuppositionalism that fits both on me and theists? Or is it another vague negative buzzword?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 03:13 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 03:06 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 02:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Presuppositionalism: it's not just for theists anymore!
Would you please provide a clear, unanimous and objective definition of presuppositionalism that fits both on me and theists? Or is it another vague negative buzzword?

You declare yourself right because you feel that you are right. You justify your premises by calling them "self-evident" despite manifestly obvious disagreement on them. You refuse to admit of any possibility of error, because you judge your own feels infallible.

Presuppositionalism fail.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like cjlr's post
02-08-2014, 03:14 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Okay, I've been squatting on this thread for quite some time, popping in here and there for a little comment.

This whole thing is very INFP-ish if you ask me. Luminon has said that he identified as INFP before. Now, I agree with what Revs has said to me in the past - that that (MBTI) is only a generalization to go by - as no one is going to fit every little thing in those descriptions but I do quite like them myself (for whatever reason - I think I know what that reason is, but I digress) and anyway, Lumi just seems to, at the heart of all this, really really REALLY want people to just be nice and not have to have all these external things in place in order to keep, well... order.

Which, I mean... okay. I myself would love for people to just really be nice too. And to not war against one another, etc. But this is by and large a pipedream. He cannot seem to realize this, though, or... perhaps having realized it has rejected it because the idea is too painful for him.

Sometimes I think that maybe.... *maybe* far enough down the road we humans could be more peaceful with one another, but we are nowhere near that point, I don't think.

My brain is a scramble on this, actually.‏ But it just seems like maybe it is something like that that is at the core of all this for him.‏ I could be way off base.‏ I do think it is mostly or perhaps entirely feels-based.

Anyway, zat is my two cents, for however little or much it might be worth. Sleepy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Escape Artist's post
02-08-2014, 03:16 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 03:14 PM)Escape Artist Wrote:  Okay, I've been squatting on this thread for quite some time, popping in here and there for a little comment.

This whole thing is very INFP-ish if you ask me. Luminon has said that he identified as INFP before. Now, I agree with what Revs has said to me in the past: that that (MBTI) is only a generalization to go by - as no one is going to fit every little thing in those descriptions, but I do quite like them myself (for whatever reason - I think I know what that reason is, but I digress) and anyway, Lumi just seems to, at the heart of all this, really really REALLY want people to just be nice and not have to have all these external things in place in order to keep, well... order.

Which, I mean... okay. I myself would love for people to just really be nice too. And to not war against one another, etc. But this is by and large a pipedream. He cannot seem to realize this, though, or... perhaps having realized it has rejected it because the idea is too painful for him.

Sometimes I think that maybe.... *maybe* far enough down the road we humans could be more peaceful with one another, but we are nowhere near that point, I don't think.

My brain is a scramble on this, actually.‏ But it just seems like maybe it is something like that that is at the core of all this for him.‏ I could be way off base.‏ I do think it is mostly or perhaps entirely feels-based.

Anyway, zat is my two cents, for however little or much it might be worth. Sleepy

Needs more batshit insane psychobabble:
(23-06-2014 04:27 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Man, I'm sorry. I must be some kind of monster for pushing your buttons like that. I heard abusers do that. Maybe it's some kind of trolling, teasing or bullying. Maybe I'm addicted to yanking your leg and you're a bit too ready to react. I've been bullied a lot, but never actually bullied anyone. But I think they do it for the sense of control. I can control you, I can detonate you quite easily. I mean, it's still your responsibility, you come with steam blowing out of your ears, it's not my idea. But once you react, you always react, like a robot. As a prime neurotic here, I say that's not healthy at all. I was like that in my early teens, before I understood that bullies actually want that. Abusers get a kick from driving their victims out of control. But even abused people get a kick from managing abusive people (that would be you). They like it as an adrenaline sport.

And I don't think it's really me you've got a problem with. I am just some anonymous young guy on the net. If someone made you very angry in the past, but he was more powerful, so powerful that you could not even show your anger, you save it for later and forget it is there. And then it erupts at anyone who resembles the original situation. But it will repeat indefinitely, because I am not the one who caused that. You are recreating the old scenario with new person (me) but it will not calm you down permanently, because I am not the one who caused your anger and repressed it. You're on a wrong address. If you can remember who was it and when, and re-live the situation, which is rather unpleasant, you will get a hold of this reaction. There's no other way but this therapy. But first you've got to recognize that flying off the handle like that isn't healthy or righteous.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: