Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (74744)	2/20/2000 6:04:00 PM
From: James R. Barrett	Respond to of 108807

Very well put Steven. I always thought that Hitler invaded Poland because he was positive he could kick their ass and get away with it. He should have left the "Sleeping Bear" alone though.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (74744)	2/20/2000 6:06:00 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

I thank you. Of course I didn't think of it as a rant. I enjoyed reading it. Although we don't always think exactly the same - in this case we do. Or at least based on what you write, and how I interpret it, I could say at this moment that we do. It is always hard to have conversations with people one does not know well- about subjects where the definition of terms is so very important. When I talk to my close friends I know how they thing- for the most part- and I know them well enough that I really know what the mean most of the time. When arguing with people one does not know well, it is very easy to be misunderstood, or to misinterpret. Hence my complete misreading of Michael's post. I really had no clue he meant himself. So when I say relativism- I mean the very general concept that everything is relative morally. And - to a certain extent- even our impressions of the world are relative, as each of our eyes, each of our ears, each of our brains, are different. But we were mainly talking about moral relativism today- or so I thought. Now as I understand it relativism is the belief that belief is relative to the groups or individuals holding them- and that value judgments external to the group are meaningless. SO this basically means that no belief is "better" than another because you can't judge outside of the group context- BUT the observer, the relativist holding this knowledge in his or her head KNOWS that no belief is better or worse than any other, extrinsically, group to group - but to say that all things are therefore permitted makes as much sense as saying all things are therefor not permitted. Although inaction seems to be the most likely result of the paralyzing knowledge that nothing is certain, that everything is ambiguous, that everything could be other than it is. However, after one works through the state of catatonia induced by the relativistic merry go round, one can come to the conclusion that true relativists who really BELIEVE in relativism (and are not using it merely as an excuse to promulgate some awful action) are the least dangerous of creatures. Or so I postulate. Until I can imagine it to be otherwise.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (74744)	2/20/2000 7:00:00 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Steven, it's unfortunate you had to add that last sentence to an otherwise interesting post. I would have enjoyed continuing our conversation in a climate of open dialogue. However, it appears the ones aligning themselves against "natural laws" cannot escape the personal attack mindset and allow the issue to be explored to a greater level. It's also unfortunate, that your "ladders of inference" lead you so quickly from natural law into the fear of religios dogma and forcing ones ideas on another. So I'll leave and let you guys have a good time (probably at my expense) with these thoughts... Our minds cannot function optimally unless we are emotionally balanced. Emotion rather than intellect plays the primary role in decision making. As Gandhi put it. "Untimately one is guided not by the intellect, but by the heart." The heart accepts a conclusion for which the intellect subsequently finds reasoning. "Man often finds reason, Gandhi said, in support of whatever he does or wants to do". Even more important than knowledge is the life of emotion. Natural laws link are emotions to our intellect by guiding us with an inner voice. If we have keen ears we can hear the timeless vibrations of truth in our minds. There is a reason humans possess this inner voice. What it means is still a mystery to me. But that it exists in all cultures involving human beings I am fairly certain. So I call this voice our "natural laws" or principles. And recognize the way in which they effect how we view the human traits of honesty, integrity, courage trust, and trustworthiness. These traits have been admired in people from cultures the world over for thousands of years. And I have little doubt, will be admired for thousands of years to come. Michael

To: Dayuhan who wrote (74744)	2/20/2000 9:09:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Steven, I must apologetically again break a taboo here, just to show the absurdity of the particular argument you've found yourself engaged in. I used to take Neocon seriously, this particular post comes from the early days of the era of that particular posting machine on SI. The traditional understanding is that statecraft requires expedients that would be considered more harshly when employed for purely personal gain, because of the greater responsibility entailed in protecting the community. But, hey, I guess I'm not the dread "absolutist" either, but recognize circumstances in moral calculation. Message 7575181 If you go back up the chain, you'll find Neocon ranting about Eddie Bauer jackets, the decline of the west, the heroic lion king that he's devoted his life to worshipping, the rise of Hitler due to liberals, and various other things out of the grab bag. Well, it was early in the Neocon posting era, and he was more fun to argue with than the other Sanity types, but jeez, what a waste of time it all was. Cheers, Dan.