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

Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the necessity of God...

Expand Messages
  • Jared Frailey
    You should live your life the way that you want others to live. If your opinions are right, people should be drawn to them on their merits, and not because
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 17, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      You should live your life the way that you want others
      to live. If your opinions are right, people should be
      drawn to them on their merits, and not because they
      "should" or "ought" to do or think something. To me
      morality and ethics are a way for society to say you
      "should" do this, but you "shouldn't" do that.

      The ideas of morality and ethics need to be
      demystified. A group of individuals came up with our
      current morality, therefore it has no more meaning
      than an opinion.

      One point you mentioned was that religion may be
      needed to teach good and evil, or right and wrong, to
      the uneducated. In other words, the ignorant masses
      should be subjected to a group of individuals ideas on
      right and wrong? If left to their own devices, the
      uneducated would most likely develop a sense of right
      and wrong. Remove the brainwashing of man by society,
      government, and religion, and you will have a new
      species of man able to decide what is "right" for
      himself, and what is "wrong."

      You may laugh at the notion of brainwashing, but as a
      child I never questioned the ideas of patriotism,
      marriage, government, capitalism, war, prisons, etc...
      Once I realized that the sources of my information
      were biased, I developed my open opinions. I see a
      society without gods, religions, and governments as a
      society with man thinking for himself.

      I'm done rambling,
      Jared



      -----Original Message-----
      From: The Sierants <sierant@...>
      To: existlist@egroups.com <existlist@egroups.com>
      Date: Monday, July 17, 2000 6:41 PM
      Subject: Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the
      necessity of God...


      Another thought about religion...
      If not religion, then what basis is there for ethics
      and morality of any
      kind? Who would teach this morality? What would it
      be based on? Many
      believe now in total hedonism, in satisfying the
      individual needs without
      conscience. This will only lead to chaos and extreme
      selfishness in my
      opinion, where everyone is right and everyone would be
      wrong at the same
      time. So there is a foundation for religion to help
      teach the less
      cereberal or unstructured or uneducated about the
      value of good and evil,
      right and wrong.
    • Yana Youhana
      ... Question: What do you mean by the above statement? This is a world of acheivments, (dogy dog world), if one wants to live his/her life the way she/he
      Message 2 of 13 , Jul 18, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        >From: Jared Frailey <lostmaia@...>
        >Reply-To: existlist@egroups.com
        >To: existlist@egroups.com
        >Subject: Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the necessity of God...
        >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
        >
        >You should live your life the way that you want others
        >to live.
        Question: What do you mean by the above statement?
        This is a world of acheivments, (dogy dog world), if
        one wants to live his/her life the way she/he wanted to
        live, they would be loosers!!!!




        If your opinions are right, people should be
        >drawn to them on their merits, and not because they
        >"should" or "ought" to do or think something.
        I don't think you live anywhere near Silicon Valley
        , SF or NY?

        >
        >One point you mentioned was that religion may be
        >needed to teach good and evil, or right and wrong, to
        >the uneducated. In other words, the ignorant masses
        >should be subjected to a group of individuals ideas on
        >right and wrong? If left to their own devices, the
        >uneducated would most likely develop a sense of right
        >and wrong. Remove the brainwashing of man by society,
        >government, and religion, and you will have a new
        >species of man able to decide what is "right" for
        >himself, and what is "wrong."
        That sounds better.




        >
        >You may laugh at the notion of brainwashing, but as a
        >child I never questioned the ideas of patriotism,
        >marriage, government, capitalism, war, prisons, etc...
        > Once I realized that the sources of my information
        >were biased, I developed my open opinions. I see a
        >society without gods, religions, and governments as a
        >society with man thinking for himself.
        >
        >I'm done rambling,
        >Jared
        >
        >
        >
        >-----Original Message-----
        >From: The Sierants <sierant@...>
        >To: existlist@egroups.com <existlist@egroups.com>
        >Date: Monday, July 17, 2000 6:41 PM
        >Subject: Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the
        >necessity of God...
        >
        >
        >Another thought about religion...
        >If not religion, then what basis is there for ethics
        >and morality of any
        >kind? Who would teach this morality? What would it
        >be based on? Many
        >believe now in total hedonism, in satisfying the
        >individual needs without
        >conscience. This will only lead to chaos and extreme
        >selfishness in my
        >opinion, where everyone is right and everyone would be
        >wrong at the same
        >time. So there is a foundation for religion to help
        >teach the less
        >cereberal or unstructured or uneducated about the
        >value of good and evil,
        >right and wrong.
        >

        ________________________________________________________________________
        Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
      • Jared Frailey
        I m not sure I could handle others thinking I am a looser. :-) That is part of the problem: people should not worry about what other people are doing, or
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 18, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          I'm not sure I could handle others thinking I am a
          "looser." :-) That is part of the problem: people
          should not worry about what other people are doing, or
          what other people will think. Success and failure,
          like good and evil, are terms for the individual to
          define. What I consider good may not be your idea of
          good, and what I consider to be an achievment may not
          be your idea of an achievment.

          I can't help it, I have to quote Thoreau: "Why should
          we be in such desperate haste to succeed, and in such
          desperate enterprises? If a man does not keep pace
          with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a
          different drummer. Let him step to the music which he
          hears, however measured or far away."

          >I don't think you live anywhere near Silicon Valley
          >, SF or NY?
          Actually, I live in the Bible Belt: Oklahoma to be
          exact.

          Regard,
          Jared







          ----Original Message-----
          From: Yana Youhana <yana_youhana@...>
          To: existlist@egroups.com <existlist@egroups.com>
          Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 2:20 AM
          Subject: Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the
          necessity of God...


          >From: Jared Frailey <lostmaia@...>
          >Reply-To: existlist@egroups.com
          >To: existlist@egroups.com
          >Subject: Re: [existlist] Existentialism and the
          necessity of God...
          >Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
          >
          >You should live your life the way that you want
          others
          >to live.
          Question: What do you mean by the above statement?
          This is a world of acheivments, (dogy dog world), if
          one wants to live his/her life the way she/he wanted
          to
          live, they would be loosers!!!!
          If your opinions are right, people should be
          >drawn to them on their merits, and not because they
          >"should" or "ought" to do or think something.
          I don't think you live anywhere near Silicon Valley
          , SF or NY?

          >
          >One point you mentioned was that religion may be
          >needed to teach good and evil, or right and wrong, to
          >the uneducated. In other words, the ignorant masses
          >should be subjected to a group of individuals ideas
          on
          >right and wrong? If left to their own devices, the
          >uneducated would most likely develop a sense of right
          >and wrong. Remove the brainwashing of man by
          society,
          >government, and religion, and you will have a new
          >species of man able to decide what is "right" for
          >himself, and what is "wrong."
          That sounds better.




          >
          >You may laugh at the notion of brainwashing, but as a
          >child I never questioned the ideas of patriotism,
          >marriage, government, capitalism, war, prisons,
          etc...
          > Once I realized that the sources of my information
          >were biased, I developed my open opinions. I see a
          >society without gods, religions, and governments as a
          >society with man thinking for himself.
          >
          >I'm done rambling,
          >Jared
          >



          =====
          Best wishes,
          Frailey


          ----------------------
          Revering the universe, caring for nature, celebrating life -
          The World Pantheist Movement: http://www.pantheism.net/index.htm
        • Amber Leigh Griffioen
          ... But isn t that really the POINT of morality and ethics? We speak often of a moral or ethical duty , but what is that except an idea of what we feel we
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 18, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Jared Frailey <lostmaia@...> writes:

            > You should live your life the way that you want others
            > to live. If your opinions are right, people should be
            > drawn to them on their merits, and not because they
            > "should" or "ought" to do or think something. To me
            > morality and ethics are a way for society to say you
            > "should" do this, but you "shouldn't" do that.

            But isn't that really the POINT of morality and ethics? We speak often of a moral
            or ethical "duty", but what is that except an idea of what we feel we "should" or
            "must" do. By living your life "the way that you want others to live", you are
            saying that were anyone in your exact situation, you would want them to (i.e.
            you believe they "should") do exactly what you decide to do.

            > The ideas of morality and ethics need to be
            > demystified. A group of individuals came up with our
            > current morality, therefore it has no more meaning
            > than an opinion.

            One cannot forget the history behind our moral and ethical "system", however. (Do
            we really even have a system? Laws, religion, I guess. Anything else?) These
            "opinions" may be flawed, but they are not completely devoid of merit. One could
            say "you've come a long way, baby" since the days of slavery. I would also arge
            that we have a long way to go. (Down with capital punishment!) I'm not saying,
            we give in and "go with the flow". I mean, just look at what the "Mitmachen" did
            to Germany in the 30s & 40s. I AM saying that we need to give morality a little
            more credit than "an opinion".

            > If left to their own devices, the
            > uneducated would most likely develop a sense of right
            > and wrong.

            But who's to say it's the "right" sense of right and wrong? It would just be
            another group of people, coming up with a morality for you to question.

            > Remove the brainwashing of man by society,
            > government, and religion, and you will have a new
            > species of man able to decide what is "right" for
            > himself, and what is "wrong."

            Even the Aborigines have a sort of society, government, and religion. And my big
            question is: does society, religion, etc. determine morality, or does morality
            determine society, religion, etc. This has always made for interesting
            discussion. Kind of a "Did Adam have a navel?" or "Which cam first, the chicken
            or the egg?" question.

            > You may laugh at the notion of brainwashing, but as a
            > child I never questioned the ideas of patriotism,
            > marriage, government, capitalism, war, prisons, etc...
            > Once I realized that the sources of my information
            > were biased, I developed my open opinions. I see a
            > society without gods, religions, and governments as a
            > society with man thinking for himself.

            Go anarchy! *gg*

            Anyways, that was my first post to the list, so nice to meet you all. Can't wait
            for more good discussions!

            Bis dann,

            Amber

            * * * * * * * * * * * * *
            "I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being with an
            independent will, which I now exert to leave you." -Jane Eyre
            * * * * * * * * * * * * *
            Amber Griffioen
            griffioe@...
            amber_griffs@...
            http://www.geocities.com/amber_griffs
          • Tom J
            Doesn t morality almost entirely begin and end with other people? What good is a personal morality . What is often termed as brainwashing is inevitable,
            Message 5 of 13 , Jul 18, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Doesn't morality almost entirely begin and end with other people? What good
              is a "personal morality".

              What is often termed as "brainwashing" is inevitable, you can't remove it.
              Even if you think that you have formed your own opinions, they were surely
              not based on totally original thoughts? We will still always, to an extent,
              be cogs in a machine.

              The uneducated are already developing a sense of what is right and wrong and
              the fact that it has no moral basis derived from respect for a superior
              being makes it all the more catastrophic. Directionless futility.

              Tom
            • Jared Frailey
              ... I believe everyone has the prejudice that they are right, and everyone else is wrong. :-) What I was trying to say is that if your opinion is that
              Message 6 of 13 , Jul 19, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                > By living your life "the way that you
                > want others to live", you are
                > saying that were anyone in your exact situation, you
                > would want them to (i.e.
                > you believe they "should") do exactly what you
                > decide to do.

                I believe everyone has the prejudice that they are
                right, and everyone else is wrong. :-) What I was
                trying to say is that if your opinion is that
                important to you, you shouldn't try to convert someone
                to your ideas but set an example. For example, I
                consider myself to be a pacifist. I don't believe in
                the use of violence for any purpose, but I arrived at
                this opinion on my own. By practicing pacifism, I set
                an example for humanity. The difference between my
                opinion and morality is that my opinions will not be
                maintained by the use of coercive measures by society,
                government, and religion. After all, coercion is
                violence. :-) And another difference between my
                opinions and morality is that I don't view my opinions
                as something "sacred." I can always change my
                opinions, but changing morality is almost impossible
                (I'm exaggerating). In other words, I am against
                morality, but I am for personal ideals and opinions.

                >I AM saying that we
                > need to give morality a little
                > more credit than "an opinion".

                I will give you that point: Morals are opinions with a
                history. :-)

                > But who's to say it's the "right" sense of right and
                > wrong? It would just be
                > another group of people, coming up with a morality
                > for you to question.

                Is there a right one? No. And why would it be a
                group effort? I have my own personal values, and they
                should have their own. As long as the individual
                isn't harming another person's freedom, the individual
                should not be restrained by morality or laws.

                > Even the Aborigines have a sort of society,
                > government, and religion. And my big
                > question is: does society, religion, etc. determine
                > morality, or does morality
                > determine society, religion, etc.

                My guess is that morality came first. :-)


                > Go anarchy! *gg*
                >
                > Anyways, that was my first post to the list, so nice
                > to meet you all. Can't wait
                > for more good discussions!

                Actually, I do consider myself to be an anarchist. I
                fit somewhere between an Individualist Anarchist and a
                Communist Anarchist. :-)

                Best Regards,
                Jared
              • Jared Frailey
                ... What good is a personal morality? Whatever good the individual can get out of it. I tend to enjoy producing my own morals (opinions, ideals, etc.) ... I
                Message 7 of 13 , Jul 19, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Doesn't morality almost entirely begin and end with
                  > other people? What good
                  > is a "personal morality".
                  What good is a personal morality? Whatever good the
                  individual can get out of it. I tend to enjoy
                  producing my own morals (opinions, ideals, etc.)

                  > What is often termed as "brainwashing" is
                  > inevitable, you can't remove it.
                  > Even if you think that you have formed your own
                  > opinions, they were surely
                  > not based on totally original thoughts? We will
                  > still always, to an extent,
                  > be cogs in a machine.

                  I concede that "brainwashing" is inevitable if you are
                  in contact with other individuals, society, religion,
                  or government. My opinions are not based enitirely on
                  my own original thoughts, but the formation of my
                  opinions was an active venture: I sought and analyzed
                  the opinions of others. Morality is an inactive
                  process: the individual absorbs the opinions of
                  others.

                  > The uneducated are already developing a sense of
                  > what is right and wrong and
                  > the fact that it has no moral basis derived from
                  > respect for a superior
                  > being makes it all the more catastrophic.
                  > Directionless futility.


                  Catastrophic in what way? Is it because they are not
                  developing in a direction that you would have them go?


                  The uneducated people, that I know personally, derive
                  all of their values and morals from their church, the
                  members of their church, and other community members.
                  This to me does seem directionless. My ideal would be
                  where every individual decided what would be "good"
                  and "evil" to them personally. There seems more
                  personal direction in my ideal, but societal,
                  governmental, and religious direction would fade.

                  Best Regards,
                  Jared
                • Amber Leigh Griffioen
                  ... So if I go through an exhaustive mental process and decide that, to me personally, it would be OK to hit another person in the head with a baseball bat,
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jul 20, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Jared Frailey <lostmaia@...> writes:

                    > The uneducated people, that I know personally, derive
                    > all of their values and morals from their church, the
                    > members of their church, and other community members.
                    > This to me does seem directionless. My ideal would be
                    > where every individual decided what would be "good"
                    > and "evil" to them personally. There seems more
                    > personal direction in my ideal, but societal,
                    > governmental, and religious direction would fade.

                    So if I go through an exhaustive mental process and decide that, to me personally,
                    it would be OK to hit another person in the head with a baseball bat, you'd
                    support that because it was my own personal idea of "good"? Because as soon as
                    you step in and say it's not OK, you are imposing some sort of moral law over me.

                    Sorry if I'm nitpicking,

                    *Devil's Advocate*

                    * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                    "I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being with an
                    independent will, which I now exert to leave you." -Jane Eyre
                    * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                    Amber Griffioen
                    griffioe@...
                    amber_griffs@...
                    http://www.geocities.com/amber_griffs
                  • Jared Frailey
                    As long as you are not harming another person s freedom, you should be free to act on or think what you wish. I wouldn t be allowed to lock someone in a cage
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jul 20, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      As long as you are not harming another person's
                      freedom, you should be free to act on or think what
                      you wish. I wouldn't be allowed to lock someone in a
                      cage or kill them, but I would be free to do anything
                      that does not harm another person's freedom. :-)


                      --- Amber Leigh Griffioen <griffioe@...> wrote:
                      > Jared Frailey <lostmaia@...> writes:
                      >
                      > > The uneducated people, that I know personally,
                      > derive
                      > > all of their values and morals from their church,
                      > the
                      > > members of their church, and other community
                      > members.
                      > > This to me does seem directionless. My ideal
                      > would be
                      > > where every individual decided what would be
                      > "good"
                      > > and "evil" to them personally. There seems more
                      > > personal direction in my ideal, but societal,
                      > > governmental, and religious direction would fade.
                      >
                      > So if I go through an exhaustive mental process and
                      > decide that, to me personally,
                      > it would be OK to hit another person in the head
                      > with a baseball bat, you'd
                      > support that because it was my own personal idea of
                      > "good"? Because as soon as
                      > you step in and say it's not OK, you are imposing
                      > some sort of moral law over me.
                      >
                      > Sorry if I'm nitpicking,
                      >
                      > *Devil's Advocate*
                      >
                      > * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                      > "I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free
                      > human being with an
                      > independent will, which I now exert to leave you."
                      > -Jane Eyre
                      > * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                      > Amber Griffioen
                      > griffioe@...
                      > amber_griffs@...
                      > http://www.geocities.com/amber_griffs
                      >


                      =====
                      Best wishes,
                      Frailey


                      ----------------------
                      Revering the universe, caring for nature, celebrating life -
                      The World Pantheist Movement: http://www.pantheism.net/index.htm
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.