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

9845Re: [ishmael_discussion] Materialism and Beyond (was: DQ controversy)

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Figgins
    Apr 8, 2010
      On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Janos Biro <janosbirozero@...> wrote:

      > Let me play philosopher here. Why should we value life? Because all those
      > who survive do? Why should we survive? Why can't we just kill everything
      > and
      > then die? Is there something wrong about me wanting to do that? And if I
      > do,
      > why should stop just because most people don't want it? Why should we do
      > something just because every living being does it? How do you know that
      > life
      > is not, in itself, the big mistake, and we, destroyers of life, are the
      > correction? Can you really answer that without a moral judgment?
      >

      I can't explain why we should or should not, not without a moral judgment, I
      can only explain why we do or do not. Does that make sense? Should
      implies a moral judgment. I can't go shoulding on you without making an
      ethical or moral evaluation of some kind.

      And I don't know about a big mistake. If life is a big mistake, then who
      made that mistake? That sort of assumes someone had a take to mistake. I
      have no reason to believe that life is either a mistake or mistake.


      > If we felt joy, happiness and contentment serving death, than it would be
      > alright? Who made happiness the judge of what we should do? If we are
      > programmed to do so, who programmed, why, and why should we follow it? Why
      > is survival a criterion?
      >

      I don't know that it would be alright or not alright. I don't expect we
      would have survived as a species if this were so. As to who programmed, I
      would guess nature did, or circumstance did. Maybe it was a coincidence.
      Maybe plenty of early single celled creatures lacked it and so starved and
      didn't survive and for some reason this other one did and so did survive.
      Does it seem too far fetched to believe that a desire to survive is a
      criterion of survival?

      In cases where people feel joy, happiness and contentment harming others, I
      believe if you look deeply enough they think they are in some way serving
      life by doing so. I don't completely rule out that someone could be born
      without the need to serve life, it just seems unlikely, and less likely that
      lacking any will to survive that they would manage to do so.

      For something more far fetched though, try this. I believe that any time we
      choose, we always choose the thing that we believe, at the time, will make
      life most wonderful. If we truly have option A and B, and we think A
      will be a more wonderful choice than B, we will always choose A. I believe
      this holds true for all living things.

      I'm not sure how to falsify this though, so it doesn't really count as a
      theory. Just a belief.

      --
      Stephen


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic