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: Sidney Reilly who wrote (87863)	7/10/2003 3:54:53 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

sorry...<g>

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (87863)	6/15/2004 1:44:12 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Why? The question is simple enough. Is 'well being' perceivable and sensible as a human characteristic. 'Well being' involves, in a nutshell, the condition of an organism existing in a good and proper manner, in and of itself, according to its circumstance. So, for example, a lovely apple is being well when it is growing on the tree, being eaten and giving health to the consumer, when it is providing fertilizer for a tree, etc. It is hard to think of a creature not being well in its natural circumstance, unless it is being wasted or poluted by misuse or abuse. On the other hand, a human being is not in a condition of well being if the human creature is engaging in some self abuse or abuse of others. Thus we have a slightly different view of well being when it comes to human beings; one that involves responsibility for the well being of self and others. So, with this distinction we must ask the question. Is 'well being' a sensible term and if it is, do human beings have a unique responsibility with regard to creation?