Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [existlist] Re: flowcharting an action

Expand Messages
  • William Harris
    Jim, It is if we I.E. mankind, keep reinventing the wheel. Playing with gods and angels, when it is all just tripe. It is always some charlitan bastard , in
    Message 1 of 35 , Sep 24 2:44 PM
      Jim, It is if we I.E. mankind, keep reinventing the wheel. Playing with gods
      and angels, when it is all just tripe. It is always some charlitan bastard ,
      in there for the easy buck, who spreads and respreads the bullshit. We dont
      need that garbage to build better systems. We are light years better in
      concept and wonderful new knowledge.Hubble has shown us more in its brief
      life than its nominative could have drempt of. More and more I elect to
      ignore the ignorant. Bill

      Jim Aiden wrote:

      > Since you are being coy, I will elaborate.
      >
      > Consider morality like art. Without all the bad art (mommy, G~d,
      > emotions) we could not have the supposed good art (law). If we
      > eliminated the all the various moral questions that make people sick,
      > we would eventually end all legal ones as well.
      >
      > J.Aiden.
      >
      > -----------------------------
      >
      > --- In existlist@y..., William Harris <bhvwd@n...> wrote:
      > > Not from jesus. Bill
      > >
      > > Jim Aiden wrote:
      > >
      > > > <<Jim, From elected legislative bodies, while morality comes from
      > > > somebodys preacher or sombodys mommy.>>
      > > >
      > > > And where do those bodies come from? (Still leading the witness)
      > > >
      > > > J.Aiden
      > > >
      > > > --- In existlist@y..., William Harris <bhvwd@n...> wrote:
      > > > > Jim, From elected legislative bodies, while morality comes from
      > > > somebodys
      > > > > preacher or sombodys mommy. Bill
      > > > >
      > > > > Jim Aiden wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > > << Morality is like the garbage, it comes fromeverywhere and
      > is
      > > > > > usually worthless. Law is like the stuff you put in the
      > recycle
      > > > bin,
      > > > > > there is slightly less of it and it can be retooled.>>
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Where is that law comes from? (Forgive me for leading the
      > > > witness)
      > > > > >
      > > > > > J.Aiden
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In existlist@y..., William Harris <bhvwd@n...> wrote:
      > > > > > > You bet, Jim. I remember how heartned I was when I heard of
      > the
      > > > > > concept of
      > > > > > > "sundown laws" Actually emptying the trash bin, how
      > refreshing
      > > > it
      > > > > > would be.
      > > > > > > Remember Alices Restaurant, the constable always makes you
      > bring
      > > > the
      > > > > > garbage
      > > > > > > back. Quite anal of him, what? Morality is like the
      > garbage, it
      > > > > > comes from
      > > > > > > everywhere and is usually worthless. Law is like the stuff
      > you
      > > > put
      > > > > > in the
      > > > > > > recycle bin, there is slightly less of it and it can be
      > > > retooled.
      > > > > > I just
      > > > > > > fuckin hate morality, It is anacronistic, it is racist, it
      > is
      > > > > > classist, it
      > > > > > > is narrowminded, it is antiprogressive, it is antiprivate,
      > and
      > > > it is
      > > > > > > provencial. There, now I feel better!! Bill
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Jim Aiden wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > << Morality is like using the last wars army to
      > fight
      > > > the
      > > > > > > > new war. Eventually, probably sooner than later , the
      > > > emotional,
      > > > > > > > moral response fails. >>
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Yes lovely. Can you run with this further. I have
      > some
      > > > ideas
      > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > my own on this but I want to see if we independently come
      > to
      > > > the
      > > > > > same
      > > > > > > > conclusions.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > J.Aiden
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > -----------------------
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > --- In existlist@y..., William Harris <bhvwd@n...> wrote:
      > > > > > > > > Jim, Your posting hits on very many things I have been
      > > > trying to
      > > > > > > > sort out.I
      > > > > > > > > tried to post you yesterday but my server was having a
      > viral
      > > > > > attack.
      > > > > > > > Im
      > > > > > > > > trying to put cognition in an evolutionary framework.
      > Our
      > > > > > ability to
      > > > > > > > think
      > > > > > > > > has given our species a survival advantage. It is part
      > of
      > > > our
      > > > > > > > evolutionary
      > > > > > > > > process. All genetic changes are not beneficial to the
      > > > species,
      > > > > > in
      > > > > > > > fact most
      > > > > > > > > mutation is detremental. All thoughts are not beneficial
      > to
      > > > the
      > > > > > > > species, I
      > > > > > > > > have no idea of the ratio of beneficial to detremental
      > > > > > thoughts.
      > > > > > > > We emote
      > > > > > > > > in response to stimulus, it is neither random nor
      > proactive.
      > > > I
      > > > > > agree
      > > > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > > morality shares many of those emotional traits.
      > Morality
      > > > > > becomes a
      > > > > > > > built in
      > > > > > > > > set of responses after an emotionally charged ,
      > > > triggering
      > > > > > event.
      > > > > > > > Since it
      > > > > > > > > is not thought out . a moral response will never
      > exactly
      > > > fit a
      > > > > > new
      > > > > > > > > situational stimulus. Morality is like using the last
      > wars
      > > > army
      > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > fight the
      > > > > > > > > new war. Eventually, probably sooner than later , the
      > > > emotional,
      > > > > > > > moral
      > > > > > > > > response fails. Bill
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Jim Aiden wrote:
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > No probs Bill,
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > I'll lay off bookdoc because you suggest it makes
      > him
      > > > > > unhappy
      > > > > > > > > > despite his assurances it does not. Perhaps I've taken
      > the
      > > > > > > > > > experimenting too far. If so, I apologize to any or
      > all
      > > > that
      > > > > > > > are/were
      > > > > > > > > > offended. Bookdoc if you think I'm being condescending
      > in
      > > > my
      > > > > > > > writing
      > > > > > > > > > or I make a bad point, I don't mind when you point in
      > out.
      > > > I
      > > > > > > > > > always try my best to consider it.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > You make a very diplomatic statement Bill, I take
      > it to
      > > > > > mean
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > subject matter has lost its fun for somebody. If it's
      > ok,
      > > > I'd
      > > > > > like
      > > > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > > > continue on the subject of emotion and morality for a
      > wee
      > > > bit
      > > > > > > > more.
      > > > > > > > > > This is not aimed at encapsulating your existence
      > bookdoc.
      > > > I'm
      > > > > > > > saying
      > > > > > > > > > that because I'm worried you will interprete as thus
      > > > because
      > > > > > we've
      > > > > > > > > > been taking about these things for a while in my
      > > > roundabout
      > > > > > way.
      > > > > > > > No
      > > > > > > > > > offense was EVER intended. I have the highest regards
      > in
      > > > your
      > > > > > > > > > reasoning ability.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > .....
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > A great deal of Existential thought revolves around
      > > > > > morality.
      > > > > > > > One
      > > > > > > > > > might even argue that the whole purpose of Existential
      > > > thought
      > > > > > is
      > > > > > > > > > morality. So assume for a moment that the study Wyatt
      > > > posted
      > > > > > is an
      > > > > > > > > > absolute truth and morals exist because of emotion.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Now then...
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > If we say a joke, even a bad one, the only time we
      > can
      > > > say
      > > > > > > > someone
      > > > > > > > > > GETS it, is when they laugh. If they do not, then they
      > do
      > > > not
      > > > > > GET
      > > > > > > > it.
      > > > > > > > > > The joke teller must invoke emotion for the words to
      > > > become
      > > > > > > > > > meaningful. I suggest this does not only apply to
      > humour
      > > > but
      > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > anger,
      > > > > > > > > > to sadness, to... all the range of existing human
      > emotions
      > > > for
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > priority of a information to be communicated
      > effectively,
      > > > for
      > > > > > > > reason
      > > > > > > > > > to take shape, and finally for action to occur. That
      > is to
      > > > > > say,
      > > > > > > > > > emotion exists before reason..... before construct.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > For those that have been watching CNN over that
      > last
      > > > few
      > > > > > days,
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > terrible events unfold at WTC and Pentagon. I've seen
      > > > > > countless
      > > > > > > > buzz
      > > > > > > > > > words, montages of suffering , beautiful voices
      > singing
      > > > > > Amazing
      > > > > > > > grace.
      > > > > > > > > > Not to belittle all the people that died or America
      > > > itself, I
      > > > > > > > think
      > > > > > > > > > its a great country, but where was the editorializing
      > > > during
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > Iraqi
      > > > > > > > > > war? Amnesty international estimates 250000 people
      > died
      > > > then.
      > > > > > All
      > > > > > > > I
      > > > > > > > > > saw was a big video game. Where are all the crying
      > mothers
      > > > of
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > 5900
      > > > > > > > > > plus children that die each DAY in Africa? America's
      > > > tragedy
      > > > > > is
      > > > > > > > sad
      > > > > > > > > > yes, but no more so than the ones that happen all over
      > the
      > > > > > world
      > > > > > > > each
      > > > > > > > > > day. Is it just me, or is the American public involved
      > in
      > > > an
      > > > > > > > emotional
      > > > > > > > > > moral frenzy to justify acts of war? Sort of like the
      > > > > > techniques
      > > > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > > > Islamic Extremists use isn't it? Sort of like
      > McCarthyism?
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > I'm not judging anyone for these decisions. They
      > are
      > > > very
      > > > > > > > natural.
      > > > > > > > > > I suppose the U.S. Government did not want to risk
      > another
      > > > > > public
      > > > > > > > > > relations disaster like Vietnam in Iraq and no one
      > wants
      > > > to
      > > > > > seem
      > > > > > > > > > unpatriotic at such times. I also believe every other
      > > > country
      > > > > > in
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > world acts like this. In fact I think, America is one
      > of
      > > > > > lessor
      > > > > > > > > > offenders. I find it quite remarkable that I can even
      > > > discuss
      > > > > > such
      > > > > > > > > > matters freely even though I laugh at the video games,
      > > > movies
      > > > > > and
      > > > > > > > > > television shows that are being pulled.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > I am trying to demonstrate that emotion generates
      > > > morality
      > > > > > and
      > > > > > > > in
      > > > > > > > > > the end action. I'm not saying its bad that it does (I
      > am
      > > > > > > > frightened
      > > > > > > > > > of those that lack it and equally so of those that
      > have
      > > > too
      > > > > > much
      > > > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > > > it) only that reason plays second fiddle no matter
      > what
      > > > anyone
      > > > > > > > says.
      > > > > > > > > > Even if not caught in a moral 'trauma', our reason is
      > on
      > > > > > cruise
      > > > > > > > > > control from other emotional highlights of our life.
      > No
      > > > moral
      > > > > > > > judgment
      > > > > > > > > > in that statement just an observation. I'm trying to
      > > > bridge
      > > > > > > > psychology
      > > > > > > > > > and philosophy.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > In times of hunger, I can almost understand war
      > but I
      > > > > > believe
      > > > > > > > > > Christians, Muslims, Jews, Communists, Capitalists,
      > > > > > > > Philosopheretc...
      > > > > > > > > > are perhaps not at war with each others beliefs as it
      > > > might
      > > > > > > > appear.
      > > > > > > > > > They are at war with themselves. The wars of today are
      > > > defined
      > > > > > > > because
      > > > > > > > > > the INDIVIDUALS on each side seem to find a lack of
      > > > humanity
      > > > > > in
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > other. They actively promote that the other's
      > philosophy
      > > > is
      > > > > > devoid
      > > > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > > > some intellect, truth and soul with moral rantings.
      > Each
      > > > side,
      > > > > > > > says
      > > > > > > > > > they 'love', yet oddly do not match actions and words.
      > > > There
      > > > > > is no
      > > > > > > > > > patience to grasp anothers point of view. We push down
      > on
      > > > > > another,
      > > > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > > > buoy ourselves from feeling inferior (a verrrry loose
      > > > word)
      > > > > > > > because
      > > > > > > > > > it makes us feel good. We emotionally pounce on
      > individual
      > > > > > words,
      > > > > > > > > > phrases, bad choices as evidence of absolute fallacy.
      > We
      > > > > > ignore we
      > > > > > > > all
      > > > > > > > > > eat, we all sleep,,.... what was it that Shakespeare
      > said
      > > > in
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > Merchant of Venice?
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > A few minute differences are attached great
      > importance.
      > > > As
      > > > > > > > > > far as I can see, people barely understand their own
      > > > motives
      > > > > > > > (since
      > > > > > > > > > rationally it requires a great deal of focus on 'self'
      > to
      > > > do
      > > > > > that)
      > > > > > > > yet
      > > > > > > > > > they busy themselves defining others. This need is
      > > > something
      > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > is
      > > > > > > > > > defined somewhere in their emotional state, not just
      > in
      > > > reason
      > > > > > as
      > > > > > > > most
      > > > > > > > > > would verbally authenticate to avoid the stain of so
      > > > called
      > > > > > > > > > intellectual weakness.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Our emotions are absolutely necessary to create
      > moral
      > > > > > structure
      > > > > > > > > > (tempered with reason of course). When you sprinkle
      > > > > > adjectives,
      > > > > > > > > > personification, morality on your words, you are using
      > > > your
      > > > > > sense
      > > > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > > > emotion to give credibility to your arguments. This is
      > in
      > > > the
      > > > > > hope
      > > > > > > > > > the reader feels the same, so that they might
      > understand
      > > > and
      > > > > > > > > > sympathize with them..... to get the
      > joke.....together.
      > > > >From a
      > > > > > > > > > purely Darwin view, there is strength in numbers. One
      > that
      > > > is
      > > > > > > > isolated
      > > > > > > > > > would have difficulty procreating. (I still think
      > > > diversity is
      > > > > > > > better
      > > > > > > > > > by the way.)
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > I suggest.......
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > That most conflict and disagreements are just one
      > big
      > > > > > > > > > misunderstanding. Only the impatience of people to
      > > > negotiate,
      > > > > > > > share
      > > > > > > > > > ideas and bend to the possibility of validity of
      > pieces of
      > > > > > others
      > > > > > > > > > truths, as opposed to rejecting their totality.
      > Emotion is
      > > > > > what
      > > > > > > > > > determines how open or closed that door will be. Open
      > it
      > > > too
      > > > > > far,
      > > > > > > > and
      > > > > > > > > > we have blind fanaticism. Close it, and we distance
      > > > ourselves
      > > > > > from
      > > > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > > > rest of humanity. I guess the trick is using reason
      > > > somewhat
      > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > figure
      > > > > > > > > > out when you've gone too far.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Millions upon millions that have died for holy
      > war,
      > > > racial
      > > > > > > > purity,
      > > > > > > > > > and freedom. I think the real reason is
      > misunderstanding
      > > > and
      > > > > > > > > > impatience, the stupidity of our leaders united in
      > being
      > > > > > UN-united
      > > > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > > > letting it happen, and ourselves letting us lose
      > ourselves
      > > > in
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > mob.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Another perspective.
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > J.Aiden
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > start
      > > > > > > > > > genetics
      > > > > > > > > > experience
      > > > > > > > > > event
      > > > > > > > > > emotion
      > > > > > > > > > reason
      > > > > > > > > > action
      > > > > > > > > > end
      > > > > > > > > > -----------------
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > > Et all, I have been talking to a psychologist friend
      > > > about
      > > > > > > > > > absurdism. He
      > > > > > > > > > > suggested that Bookdoc, If he wishes, speek about
      > the
      > > > > > > > differences
      > > > > > > > > > between
      > > > > > > > > > > his philosophy and Nihilsism and Anarchism. He
      > ventured
      > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > > > Bookdoc would
      > > > > > > > > > > not be happy being labeled either of the latter. I
      > > > told
      > > > > > him
      > > > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > > > Bookdoc
      > > > > > > > > > > has not seemed to damned happy about anything
      > lately.
      > > > > > Perhaps
      > > > > > > > this
      > > > > > > > > > change of
      > > > > > > > > > > venue would lighten and enlighten. What you say ,
      > guy?
      > > > bill
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > > > > > > > > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > > > > > > > > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
      > > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > > > > > > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > > > > > > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > > > > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > > > > >
      > > > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > > > > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > > >
      > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
      > > >
      > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      >
      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • William Harris
      Bookdoc, I was confused until your last paragraph, but that cleared it up .Ill give him your answer next week and see what he says. I have been canoeing the
      Message 35 of 35 , Oct 1, 2001
        Bookdoc, I was confused until your last paragraph, but that cleared it up
        .Ill give him your answer next week and see what he says. I have been
        canoeing the root river for the last three days, no lap top allowed. We had
        a running philosophical discussion between a mensa, atheist genius; a
        agnostic, christian physician; and myself. I tried to explain your
        philosophy, but was a dismal failure. I attempted to apprpach through
        existentialism, which both have some knowledge of. Empiricism impressed the
        athiest and he liked the individualism of exist thought but when I suggested
        he could not trust sense knowledge he wanted no part of that. The physician,
        who is also an author, was less dogmatic. He could accept an absurd world as
        a concept, especially as something to write about. In fact he mixed it in
        with his god as a unifying principle theory, as if god understands while we
        lesser beings just cant grasp it all. I would have expected the athiest to
        entertain the concept more than the agnostic, the agnostic however liked and
        felt comfortable with the unknown. He did not mind being ungrounded. In fact
        he will try to incorporate an absurdist character in his novel. He made an
        interesting comment, he was not an athiest because he would not undergo the
        angnst associated with a rejection of god, absurdism would not subject him
        to that rigor. See all the trouble you cause Bookdoc. Thanks, Bill

        nothing@... wrote:

        > <<He wished me to ask of you if the emotional component of
        > your concept of interest is fuled by a sense of social
        > obligation.>>
        >
        > Bill? I am still not completely clear on this. I'd say no. Interest is
        > inherently self-centered, but I would suggest that the degree of
        > uncertainty plays a critical role. One cannot tell how real real is.
        > One must make an assumption that even though they cannot
        > define real, what he/she assumes as real has got to be
        > considered a 'best bet.' If one is interested in continuing the
        > current illusion, one does not step in its way (by performing cute
        > tricks such as stepping in front of a train). Inherently, there is no
        > social obligation. However, there is also no interest in
        > terminating interests of others by willful action. Murder is not
        > appropriate, but is not so much a social obligation as a result of
        > ignorance. I can't know what is right or wrong, but I can know that
        > willful disturbance of reality -- even if it is an illusion OR fiction --
        > will terminate interests.
        >
        > To make this somewhat clearer, I believe I mentioned Einstein's
        > secret wish to become a clown. Again, that is a real thought,
        > though it might be able to be claimed as illusion or fiction. In
        > other words, I cannot deny that this is a possibility and potentially
        > true even if Einstein himself were to tell me so, as he might be
        > lying about it due to embarassment. In the same way I cannot
        > deny that there might be others who exist -- even if I can't prove it
        > -- but i can logically conclude that if I were to do something to
        > terminate their interests, that would be, potentially, disinteresting
        > -- so to speak.
        >
        > I don't believe that adds up to 'fueled by social obligation.' At any
        > rate, it would be inconsistent if so, as that would suggest one
        > was positive there was a society. If there is no proof as to 'I', one
        > can hardly find motivation in society unless they decide to retain
        > the illusion of involvement within it. It would depend on your
        > illusions...
        >
        > Idon'tknowifIansweredathing
        > ---------------------------------------
        >
        >
        > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
        >
        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
        > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.