Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
That is, of course, an over-generalization.
However, we are very flawed. Extremely so. Each person is capable of far more than what they ever actually do, and is inclined to make lots of mistakes that hurt others. Our greatest flaw, is our failure to help others. If a person were to go out on a limb and make a desperate effort to help people, they could surely save thousands of lives over the course of their own life.
Mother Teresa was able to aid a great deal of people, for example. Most of us, instead of being inspired, place her upon a sort of "hero" pedestal as if to say "gee, that's pretty great, good thing I don't have the same responsibility...".
A code of behaviour is necessarily a set of rules... standards. Narrow and systematic responses to an unknowable array of possible situations in accordance with certain particular criteria. Generalisation and simplification mandatory.
Undesirable, I'd call it.
One cannot possibly accomodate all that life will throw at you in advance. It is to do a disservice to everything around you.
But yeah, you make a good point, Anonym, I think.
@ Soti: A set of rules need not be narrow or systematic.
Or actually, "code" might have been a bad choice. Suppose I were to say "always do that which will, as far as you can see, further the most happiness and cause the least suffering". Is that overly restricting?
No. Not overly restricting.... but I'd call that a goal, or an objective maybe... aim, perhaps.
To stick the word "morality" on that would be redundant, as previously noted.
But yeah, so, we are indeed using the words differently, therefore there is no point in us debating the concept when I am not advocating the concept you are opposing. Isn't it nice to be on the same page?
And I reckon I'm better off this way... or that way.... the ideal I'm aiming for, sans personal shortcomings.
I reckon everyone would be better off that way. All this talk about things being "right" or "wrong" is just oppressive.
I don't think it's oppressive. Used to, but then I realised I still had principles, and that they didn't always relate directly to immediate desires.
But generally, not to spoil it for you deliberately or anything.... what is most liberating about it is the sense of personal mastery you have afterwards.... It is the realisation that while you keep your principles intact, you are compelled to adhere to them. Once you have willfully violated them once however, it is entirely your choice whether you wish to partake of them or not... and you can know that your actions and decisions are your own.
For a more specific example.... anyone can say they would never kill and stick by it.... but doesn't it mean so much more for someone who has killed of their own free will to simply never choose to do so again? It is a whole new level of freedom.
I've done all sorts of things I hate... to prove to myself that it is my freedom to choose whether I do them or not, rather than fear or some other compulsion.
But what about all the delicious prison buttsex?Yeah, I'd be fucked. Literally and figuratively.
And then you get to be the one doing the penetrating!
Then you make them. Many MANY shivs, piled high to the sky.
It bothers me a lot.
Wouldn't be so bad in a country with a death-sentence for stuff.
I'm cool with having no objective worth, but I'd rather not regard myself as scum.
That was easy.
That which is ... is inferior to that which is not.
i.e.
Things << Nothing.
No further differentiation needed.