[Arm-netbook] Totally derailed topic
petercarlson79 at gmail.com
Wed May 10 01:52:25 BST 2017
That was fun
On Tue, May 9, 2017, 6:14 PM John Luke Gibson <eaterjolly at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/9/17, Lyberta <lyberta at lyberta.net> wrote:
> > doark at mail.com:
> >> I think you're caught in the same trap, unable to realize your own
> >> potential for lack of a moral standard (it also suffers as a result of
> >> an Atheistic philosophy), and unable to accept a pointless existence.
> > When I was 19, I was in a very bad situation. Everything I've ever
> > believed in was false. So I've spent the next 6 months looking for
> > truth. Thankfully, I have dropped out of college by this time so I had
> > time to investigate.
> > And in one moment it dawned upon me. There is no truth. Everything is
> > relative. People invent their own truth and start believing in it. So if
> > I want to stay unshackled I must not believe in anything.
> > The next thing was supposed to be suicide but I couldn't do it. I don't
> > know the future and I don't know what will happen when I die. In fact,
> > I'm trapped inside my own consciousness and by definition can't escape
> > it and see the truth. Remember Plato's allegory of the cave?
> > Another thing that bugs me is, since I don't believe in anything, I also
> > don't believe in science. I can't predict what's gonna happen in the
> > next moment. Every once in a while I get in this state of mind where I
> > understand that I understand nothing.
> >> In any and all cases I think you might enjoy a book that is eyeopening,
> >> insightful and uplifting, with respect to the world around you, as
> >> opposed to your more dreary, despairing, world view.
> > I was forced to read books at school and this gave a huge hatred for
> > them. I remember I've tried to read a fiction book at psychiatric
> > hospital and after the 1st paragraph I was so enraged that I quickly put
> > it away. Though this mostly applies to fiction.
> The mountains of religious thought pumped into this thread has it
> visibly oozing (I mean no offense). Firstly, the speaker in that video
> linked @zap I'm familiar with and is very unreliable when their claims
> are checked or researched. Secondly, Nietzsche explores that so-called
> "trap". The thing is that religion presents the concept of morality
> which fills the space created by ennui and lack of obstacles to
> self-preservation. Noam Chomsky popularized abit the thought that the
> consistent trend in nature is more intelligent species tend to go
> extinct after a shorter period than obviously less intelligent ones
> (i.e. beetles), this is due to genetic drift and inbred weaknesses due
> to a lack of obstacles to their survival. Ethics is an artificial
> obstacle we present ourselves in order to keep us strong (Nietzsche
> referred to the model used by Christianity as Slave Morality,
> suggesting that the ethics therein enslave the subscriber to the whims
> and desires of the less fortunate, and thusly purporting the existence
> of less fortunate as ENDEMICALLY NECESSARY because without less
> fortunate people then there would be point to the ethics of
> christianity and therefore there would be no obstacle to occupy
> ourselves with and therefore genetic drift would set in and we would
> die as a species. In other words, Nietzsche considered christianity so
> obsessed with compassion, that in a world without suffering it would
> utterly and completely fall apart.).
> Nietzsche's life's work was dedicated to attempting to create a
> well-developed replacement to both religion and "Slave Morality".
> I don't know if I support Nietzsche's alternative of "Master Morality"
> (where the obstacle is to become the best human possible, the
> so-called "ubermensch"), but I do say that "trap" is hardly a "trap"
> rather it's just a human need for an obstacle or conflict, and by
> rejecting religion all one is doing is rejecting the type of conflict
> which that religion endorses.
> .................| -> vvvvvvvv
> On the subject of Relativity:
> .................| -> ^^^^^^^^^
> "The only rule is everything changes, even this rule." is the best
> misquoting of Heraclitus I've heard and has rather impacted my view of
> "Relativity". Ultimately building off of the concept that the meaning
> of life is just any arbitrary form of conflict, then sometimes
> constant values contribute to having an increased selection of types
> of conflict. Technology of modern day allows us to have simulated
> battles over the net, and, without a whole slew of discovered
> constants (such as ways of making the voltage across a wire consistent
> with what is intended to deliver a message), then that would not be
> possible. I believe the universe only stays as consistent as it needs
> to be for every life to have a potentially unique purpose given work
> to discover new constant attributes to apply to a new purpose to
> assume. I believe it is quite possible high-fantasy magic might have
> existed at one point and that it was merely purged by the work devoted
> to the infinitely more rigorous "science". That's just my perspective,
> and it is also my perspective that science could be replaced with
> high-enough degree of arbitrary work dedicated to discovering
> attributes of the universe incompatible with modern science. This
> would require a large influx of unfulfilled persons highly motivated
> to transform the status quo and contradict conventional wisdom.
> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the arm-netbook