Real World Philospohy

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I said they all rest on an assumption somewhere - I didn't say where. Tell me - why should God's word be authoritative on the question of ethics? Don't get me wrong, it is - but why is it? For that matter, it is an assumption that good is inherently better than bad, or that better is something that should be sought, or ... - there are a zillion of them.

first question - answer's from God are athorative. can't explain it any better than that. second. good doesn't want you to die wailing in dispair. third. better is better. explains itself.

and now i must sleep.

[ November 06, 2003, 05:43: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
first question - answer's from God are athorative. can't explain it any better than that.

A variation on "it just is" - one of the ways of identifing an underlying assumption. Don't get me wrong, the assumption is correct - but that can't be proven this side of Doomsday, so it remains an assumption for the duration.

Assumptions aren't inherently a bad thing. They are ultimately all any string of reasoning or logic has to rest on.

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
second. good doesn't want you to die wailing in dispair.

That just leaves another why: Why should dying while wailing in dispair be something to be avoided? Don't get me wrong, it is something to be avoided; but sooner or later (if the chain is not infinite) there that chain can be followed back to a "feelings" argument, a circular argument, a variation on "it just is", or an an out and out assumption. All of the four classifications of possible eventuals are assumptions, of one guise or another.

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
third. better is better. explains itself.

Another variation on "it just is". Don't get me wrong - you are correct that better is better; but why better should be sought? That's a different question. There are some philosophies out there - of the fate variety, usually - that don't advocate seeking better as there is exactly nothing you can actually do to influence events. Mind you, they are wrong, and you are right, but that can't be proven.

I'm in an odd mood today....

[Atrocities]

People spend their lives wondering why and what if. They hide, they duck, they go on wishing for good luck. But in time the dime is dropped and all that was twas no more. The joke is on us, and no matter how much we ignor the truth of our lives, in the end all that will matter is that nothing mattered at all.

[Atrocities]

The average life span of 75 years is not enough time to live an average life.

[deccan]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
science has a lot of guesswork, scientists are priests. you speculate on the the nature of the microwave background, when as far as i know, we still havn't >taken a sample from another planet in our own solar system.<

I've done this many times, and I'm way too tired and busy to do this right now, but what the heck, once more into the fray in defense of science and against the enemies of organized religion!

Science is more than a collection of facts and theories (though it is also that). It is above all a methodology to discover facts and formulate theories. Though it is true that most of the general public regard scientists as high priests, that is only because most people have allowed that to happen, i.e. let themselves fall behind the research curve so much that the arguments, speculations etc. of scientists have become wholly unfathomable to them.

The most wonderful thing about science in my opinion is that in principle, anyone, limited only by their own time and interest, can follow in the footsteps of the work of scientists and verify scientific results on their own.

Narf seems to argue that science doesn't offer the same kind of certainty from which stems spiritual satisfaction that most forms of organized religion. I agree that this is probably true for the vast majority of people. But then science isn't "meant" to satisfy any spiritual urges. It doesn't have to be a bromide, to use a word beloved by Ayn Rand, it only has to be "true".

One of my conceptions of paradise is the world described by Greg Egan in his novelette "Border Guards". In it, humans are immortal, all but indestructible, with all but infinite powers at their disposal (though none have the power to truly hurt another being without his/her/its consent), and above all with constant access to the huge database of human knowledge. In this world, a talented few actually push back the frontiers of knowledge, but the vast majority only follow far, far behind, living lives not unlike that of many university students, studying for the raw pleasure of study, intersped by moments of play, conversation and love.

[Atrocities]

Who the hell really knows?

[Loser]

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
Ever read Mark 2:27?

Of course. But I was responding to your claim that you follow the Ten Commandments, not the apparently implied claim that you follow the Ten Commandments as modified by certain later scholars and holy men. That would be different.