Jump to content

insane

Members
  • Posts

    3510
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by insane

  1. Nihilism could have roots in science. From a scientific standpoint, there is nothing to suggest that things other than matter exist. Since a universal, encompassing purpose to life cannot come from merely matter, then nihilism must be true. Thus one could argue the validity of nihilism from science.

     

     

     

    There is nothing in science that suggests that anything other than matter exists, yet there's nothing in science that dosen't. Science has a focus on a way of explaining things, it dosen't make a claim that things are always as science explains. It's not metaphysically naturalistic, it dosen't carry ideological baggages and doesn't suggest that there is no overarching meaning to existence, if you believe that there is.

     

     

     

    Your argument would be against a metaphysical naturalist who asserts that there is nothing beyond nature and your argument assumes that nihilism is the position that there is no objective meaning or purpose for the universe.

     

     

     

    Let me try and make this really clear -

     

     

     

    Science - no claim of the existence or non-existence of supernatural notions or overarching purpose to existence.

     

     

     

    Nihilism - claims that there is no overarching purpose to existence.

     

     

     

    Therefore, science is not nihilistic. Am I wrong? My discriptions off?

     

     

     

    I didn't say that nihilism is science, I was just thinking out loud that it is possible that it can be inferred from science.

  2. Nihilism could have roots in science. From a scientific standpoint, there is nothing to suggest that things other than matter exist. Since a universal, encompassing purpose to life cannot come from merely matter, then nihilism must be true. Thus one could argue the validity of nihilism from science.

  3. Yea, it really wasn't my best work, but it served the purpose of pointing out how ridiculous it is to atrribute one single thing to causing his sisters to drop out and such.

     

     

     

    I'm pretty sure he would know his sister's situation and what would have had the greatest effect in them dropping out.

  4. Yep, all I'm saying is that it might be damaging knowing that there's absolutely nothing "official" to keep your parent walking out. There's no security there.

     

     

     

    My parents were married, and 'walked out' (divorced) when I was 7. They got their separate apartments as well.

     

     

     

    It's not like marriage actually makes a relationship more binding; If it did, so many people wouldn't divorce in the first place. The two people involved make it more binding, not a ceremony or a religion.

     

     

     

    For the sake of this discussion we have to assume that marriage is permanent. If we assume (for this discussion), that marriages can end then there's no difference between a marriage and any other relationship, rendering this entire thread pointless. I think we have to look at each side from a purely theoretical standpoint.

  5. And it's not like marriage affects a child biologically

     

     

     

    I conjecture that growing up in a loving and committed household would have a positive effect on a child psychologically.

     

     

     

    A child can quite easily grow up in a loving and committed household positively with no marriage, psychologically speaking.

     

     

     

    Yep, all I'm saying is that it might be damaging knowing that there's absolutely nothing "official" to keep your parent walking out. There's no security there.

  6. I'm from Canada.

     

     

     

    We have people coming here to get free/extremely cheap medcare/pharmaceuticals, and we also have people from here going to the States for speedy care. Frankly, our care sucks. I guess you get what you pay for. Unfortunatly, we are also heavily taxed for this crappy care. I heard it usually takes several weeks-months to get a MRI. Most people here blindly think we have the best med care in the world, sadly this is not the case, places such as France are also free and are much faster/better.

     

    I think it depends on where you get your treatment. It took me 3 days to get a MRI, and CAT scan done, and with the test where they measure your brainwaves, ECG or something? And there was no rush on these. I live in the southern Ontario area, and everything is fast down here?

     

     

     

    I also live in Southern Ontario and it took me over a month to get into a dermatologist. But yes, all the appointments with the dermatologist were free once I got in.

  7. Haven't seen the movie, but I can tell you the healthcare in continental US (which excludes military bases or overseas facilities operated by US that get preferential treatment) sucks if you're poor.

     

     

     

    Healthcare should be available to any person regardless of their wealth, just like in most European countries.

     

     

     

    It's mind-blowingly bizarre and idiotic that some people in the US (which is the largest economy in the world) die because they are unable to get medical treatment, mainly because their healthcare provider found a loophole which denies care, or the person/family could not afford paying several hundred dollars a month on top of their other expenses for health insurance.

     

     

     

    What kind of a doctor can sleep with a clean conscience, knowing some patients which he turned away due to a lack of money will die while they did nothing wrong and wanted what is a basic right of a human in a developed country?

     

     

     

    Americans that live on the US-Canada border often have Canadian friends that let them use their health cards and get free care in Canada. What do you think about that?

  8. ~So, a thread back from 2004, when the Sith was a mod, and Lionheart wrote leik a nubz.~

     

     

     

    The only exception i'd say in abortion is in rape. the baby is born because of a malicious crime, not an act of love.

     

    Let's say I'm in a wild party, OK? Both me and this girl that has a crush on me get too drunk, and have sex. The girl gets pregnant and drops out of school because the insults of her classmates and the economic burden a child is. Of course, the mother will unconsciously hate the child because of what he caused to her, etc. The child will have no responsible parent figures to look up to, he won't be loved as he ought to.

     

     

     

    That baby wouldn't be the affect of an act of love, would it? According to your argument, why shouldn't the girl get the chance to undergo abortion?

     

     

     

    Fortunately for your scenario, this isn't a "become a parent or abort" situation; there are other alternatives. Don't present false dilemmas as good arguments.

  9. You missed some names. Gregg Zaun was also on the list.
    Zaun too? Damn.

     

     

     

    Some of those were already pretty much known...Didn't Glaus get some evidence against him some months ago? Same w/ McGwire and Sosa?

     

     

     

    And some you just had to know. There's a big poster of Giambi in the weight room at my old high school, and you can just sorta tell.

     

     

     

    I'm not sure whether this is a good day for baseball or a bad day. I was watching the video conference with Bud Selig and he said they are trying to get screenings for HGH cause a lot of guys are switching over to that.

     

     

     

    Blood tests can detect HGH, can't they?

     

     

     

    Also, the list can be found here

  10. Who said anything about "safe"? If you're having pre-marital sex and your woman gets pregnant...What're you gonna' do? Most guys bail, some take care of them, but either way, you're hindering your OWN life because you have to care for another life. AKA, pre-marital sex is teh badz.

     

    What about a wedding ring makes a couple more ready?

     

     

     

    Yes, it does signify a couple's commitment to each other (and nine times out of ten I would definitely bet on the married couple raising their child better), but talking in absolutes like that is generally not a good idea when making a point.

     

     

     

    Making a point requires you talk in generalities. What kind of a point is a point that only applies to a specific person in a specific situation? The entire point of a point is that it applies in general. So, in general, premarital sex happens between people that are less committed to each other than marital sex.

     

     

     

    Oh no, did I just make a blanket statement?

  11. If someone wants to not exist so much, why are we stopping them? Why are we forcing them to suffer? Only because of our own selfish desire to not fee guilty and have them around.

     

     

     

    I think alot of suicide happens during a time of extreme, temporal suffering. Judgment can be clouded by emotion.

  12. And we're just saying regardless of the existence of universal meaning or the existence of a God, individual meaning can exist. No contradictions of opinion here.

     

     

     

    Yeah, I understand that. I'm just saying that I think universal meaning is better :P.

     

     

     

    (because it isn't subject to change at will).

     

     

     

    Edit: presuming your argument refers to something you previously posted about not being able to assign meaning to something more universal/authoritative than you, how would I be more universal or authoritative than myself?

     

     

     

    Lol, nice one. I guess my response would be that a creator of all life on earth would be even more authoritative on your life than you, given the God I believe in.

     

     

     

    Likewise in assigning my own meaning and purpose to my life (neglecting that I can't possibly see how I'm more universal or authorative than myself), I'm in no way expecting you to swollow that it's 'universally true', yet merely that I can and do impose my own meaning and purpose in my life. Whether in your opinion this isn't ideal is irrelevant. I've already said I revel in the fact I can form my own purpose and meaning in my life and in my opinion I like it this way.

     

     

     

    But why do you revel in that fact, other than the freedom of it? Your ideals and standards for your life and wont to change at your every beck and call! You can devote your life to feeding the hungry, but as soon as that first fat paycheck comes in, you can just change the purpose of your life to accumulating as many material goods as possible. Don't you think that's kind of lame? :P

     

     

     

    Oh and thanks for the good response. And sorry about overreacting in my prev. post, it was 1:30am and I had a lot of adrenaline pumping yet from a hockey game I just played :P.

  13. (1) And you don't choose your faith? You choose to believe in a universal meaning. Your belief is not objective no matter how much you'd like to think it is or sidestep the fact that it is in actuality a belief you have and a way of making your life have meaning in your own personal way. On the uncompelling point, we're at a difference of opinion. My purpose may very well be changable, but I can choose it for myself and I don't see this as pointless like you do. I'm not going to repeat that I see your view as uncompelling because we'll just end at the same difference of opinion.

     

     

     

     

    I'm just saying, if God exists, then universal meaning and purpose exists. I didn't say that I would be 100% sure that I know what it is.

     

     

     

     

     

    (2) Good thing I don't assign meaning to the universe then.

     

     

     

    What kind of a response is this? Fine; you, in assigning meaning to your life, are just like the art critics who are trying to assign meaning to something they did not create. You knew exactly what I was getting at (I hope).

  14. Ok, my turn to ask a question: Why is it that you only see life as meaningful if there is an afterlife and/or a supernatural being who dictates what that meaning is? You don't see the possibility of seeing meaning in living a life of charity, empathy, compassion, friendship, family, art and love? You don't see that we can form meaning ourselves independent of belief in something higher?

     

     

     

    Because God is a source of absolute truth and meaning. Nothing in your atheistic viewpoint can give an absolute purpose to things.

     

     

     

    Of course. That you can envisage and have faith in something as a source of absolute truth and meaning is uncompelling to me, but IÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢m happy for you nonetheless. Furthermore, I donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t need absolutes to see meaning or purpose in my life. As Satenza has said, meaning comes to each of us individually. Whether you think itÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s absolute is irrelevant to the fact that itÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s you who garners faith in this concept for your own personal meaning, including the notion of it being absolute making it more meaningful in your eyes.

     

     

     

    Meaning "comes" to you? How does meaning "come" to you? No, you "come" to your meaning. You choose it. Making it completely pointless because your "purpose" and "meaning" in life are as fleeting as your hunger or emotion. As soon as something is subjective, it becomes temporary, because opinions and feelings are fickle things. I find an encompassing purpose that is wont to change at any time "uncompelling".

     

     

     

    If a bunch of art critics (or indeed anyone and everyone) badmouth a 2 year old girl's picture drawn for her father, does that make it unmeaningful or purposeless? Of course not. ItÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s incredibly meaningful for the father irrespective of any 'absolute' meaning perceived and dictated by others. In the same way, I can form my own meaning and purpose that is incredibly profound to me irrespective of yours or any other theist's views on what constitutes meaning or purpose.

     

     

     

    Exactly! The two year old's picture is meaningful because the creator of the picture gives it the meaning. Just like the creator of the universe would give it meaning, if there's no creator, there's no one to give it meaning! That is EXACTLY my point. In you assigning meaning to the universe, you are taking the position of the art critics trying to assign meaning to something they did not create.

  15. I totally agree with insane on this issue. There isn't really a "reason" to give your life a meaning. In 200 or so years, unless you were extremely significant, nothing you've done will have any impact. You and me basically just wasted the resources on Earth, experienced some emotions and events, then died.

     

    This isn't true, and it's a very cynical view on life.

     

     

     

    You don't need to be a significant historical figure to affect others. Chances are you will affect a lot of people in your lifetime. Even if it's something as minor as donating to charity, loving your friends and family, or working hard at a job, you can still affect others.

     

     

     

    But what's the point of affecting others? It still sounds to me like it's all circular. You want to affect others for the sake of affecting others... have meaning and purpose for the sake of having meaning and purpose, etc.

  16. Ok, my turn to ask a question: Why is it that you only see life as meaningful if there is an afterlife and/or a supernatural being who dictates what that meaning is? You don't see the posibility of seeing meaning in living a life of charity, empathy, compassion, friendship, family, art and love? You don't see that we can form meaning ourselves independant of belief in something higher?

     

     

     

    Because God is a source of absolute truth and meaning. Nothing in your atheistic viewpoint can give an absolute purpose to things.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.