|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
 Posted - 02/03/2005 : 12:56:23
|
Before you read this I would like to point out that I am a human and am still subject to my hopes, fears, bias and human nature. I feel the following philosophy is correct and that if all were to adapt it it would probably spell doom for civilization. If you think like me please feel free to add snipits of your own wisdom which you think may fit in with what I have or insult my lack of logical clarity on certain points.
The following was written while I was drunk with the assumption that more than one planet has intelligent non-human life. My new philosophy doesnt have a cool name yet but I'm leaning towards Aspiritualism. You may suscribe to my new philosophy if you wish, for only 29.95$[US]per month.
-
Thought should not be wasted on that which is unknowable but defining the unknowable may take eternity.
-
"Time-space" and all particles behave according to definable parameters, these particle rules exist whether or not any organism has the ability to comprehend or define them exactly. All particles will behave thus no matter how they are perceived by each organism. Knowledge of how these parameters came to be and potential extra-universal influences are inherently unknowable due to the perspective from which we must view the universe, though many may profess to have this information.
One who exists as a product of the system cannot change the rules by any means; if one were to "break the laws of gravity" it would mean only that their initial knowledge of gravity was faulty.
By definition all possible sophilisms which can be used to explain any imagined senario("God did it" or the Matrix reality etc.) are equally valid and invalid. Extra-universal forces must use the defined particle rules to interact with the universe. So in the case of Moses and the burning bush we have three possibilities, (1) Moses made the whole thing up, possibly crazy or with help. (2) Moses burned a bush carved some words into rock (twice) and then lied to a bunch of desperate or desperately depraved people. (3) Undefined organism uses undefined method to combust a bush on a mountain which happens to be where a human named Moses was, organism uses undefined acoustic method to vocalize its orders for said human, organism then uses undefined method to etch Hebrew words into stones which are turned into great slabs for the human to carry to show to said desperate people to instruct them on the will of said undefined organism as relating to human behavior. Human smashes the stones, undefined organism later replaces them. Hebrew legend has it that same undefined organism is the same one that set the rules of particle interaction.
The word miracle can only be used to describe that which hasn't happened yet or that which is fantasy, all known past outcomes can be shown to be within system parameters.
Total knowledge of anything which is infinite is impossible. A godlike organism cannot know everything as there are an infinite number of possible particle combinations and interactions, at best it could develop an effective method of generating exact knowledge based on some sort of data request. First the godlike organism must have developed an exact working knowledge of the defined parameters of particle interaction, and then it may develop a system of recalling exact information in an infinite set. This system may be technological, mental or some other device. A savant or a human with a computer chip in its head, which could recall at will the billionth digit of Pi for example, while other organisms may not require technology to develop godlike abilities they will require the accurate knowledge and equations of the system.
All particles behave chaotically within the particle rules until such time as an organism develops the knowledge of the particle catalogue and the ability to manipulate it.
All concepts such as good, bad, love, hate, right, wrong, justification, hunger, life, death, order, power, and sentience are ideas th
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 02/03/2005 13:02:53
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2005 : 17:09:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
So as you can see it would not be benificial for the general population to hold these views becuase they would be use to justify anything which someone felt like doing
You are forgetting the power of self interest. Rational people act with their best long term self interest in mind. Personally I believe that the underlying basis for all ethics is this self interest, regardless of the vocal claims of the "faithful" that say their religion is the basis of ethics.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2005 : 21:21:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
[b]So as you can see it would not be benificial for the general population to hold these views becuase they would be use to justify anything which someone felt like doing.
I disagree. I think you're ignoring the fact that most humans have a capacity for empathy which guides their rationalizations about their behaviour.
 And now it's homework time:quote:
So I have to hold two points of view, first my opinions on anything which I have developed as a culmination of my life experiences...
Please compare and contrast the parts of your philosophy which deal with the human world with secular humanism, and...quote:
...and a second view removed from all that is human.
...please compare and contrast the parts of your philosophy which deal with the particle universe with philosophical naturalism.
Please note, these links are provided only as quick references to the specified philosophies, and not as be-all, end-all definitions of them. Take care to look them up elsewhere, too, before beginning this assignment. Feel free to find other philosophies which might fit better than either of the two suggested. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Plyss
Skeptic Friend
Netherlands
231 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 03:04:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
So as you can see it would not be benificial for the general population to hold these views becuase they would be use to justify anything which someone felt like doing. Personally I have no interest in breaking a bunch of laws as I am a stable boring guy who just wants thiests to leave me alone. So I have to hold two points of view, first my opinions on anything which I have developed as a culmination of my life experiences and a second view removed from all that is human.
I feel i must point out something. Even though i think our morality is made by ourselves as based on our cultural exposure doesn't mean it is without value. We can consider values like freedom, happiness and altruism to be good, without these values being self-evident from anything in nature or supplied by gods. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 09:02:04 [Permalink]
|
Also, I'd like to add, cooperation between members of a species is a very powerfull tool for survival. In our 500K year tour on earth I think this ability has been key to our continued presence.
We are far from the only animal species to exhibit cooperation either. It's really a rather widespread trait.
So even from an entirely naturalistic point of view, there is a basis for ethics.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 09:21:04 [Permalink]
|
Im sure it has all sorts of similarities to other philosophy, which I try to avoid in general.
On the issue of empathy and self-interest, I agree that most people would continue to act in a reasonable manner, but as you know it only takes one person to misinterpret something and use it to justify any insanity. (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion) All I was trying to say is that if this view that right and wrong do not exist becomes widespread there would be many more Hitlers.
This is due to the fact that right and wrong are keys to maintaing a civilization, the particles dont care whether civilization exists or not, so to adopt this mentality may be highly detrimental to organized civilization as we know it. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 10:38:54 [Permalink]
|
| But right and wrong do exist. They're just not absolute. And just because people's ethics don't conform to the restrictions of the "particle universe" doesn't mean that those ethics are worthless or non-existent. If I may direct your attention to "Whence Natural Rights?" I think Massimo does a better job of examining the issue than I. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 12:01:45 [Permalink]
|
Ok, this is just wrong, but the one thing that really stood out from the rest:
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
"At one point if you were living on the isle of Lesbos you might encourage your daughter to please every man at a party orally, after all it was the right thing to do."
Me, at a party, on the island of Lesbos.
Maybe I'm just horny right now....again sorry.
Oh and BigPapa, I would say that your view coincides with my own about 99%. I don't think this view being widespread would generate a higher rate of Hitler's. But then again I think basic morally is genetic. Bad seeds, Good seeds, and everything in-between kind of thing.
|
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
| Edited by - astropin on 02/04/2005 12:05:35 |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 12:06:06 [Permalink]
|
Perhaps I should rephrase, Right and wrong exist only if the observer catagorizes things as right or wrong. From the standpoint of the particle soup and its governing rules, murder, jayalking and supernova all have the same right/wrong value, which is none.
Also Im trying to say that no 'right' is more desirable than any other from the extra-human standpoint, while I still am subject to my developed views. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 12:13:09 [Permalink]
|
| On the more Hitlers issue, I was thinking that converts are not so much of a worry to do something anarchistic but those who are indoctorinated from birth would be much less predictable and likely to promote anti-civilization tendencies. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 13:26:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Perhaps I should rephrase, Right and wrong exist only if the observer catagorizes things as right or wrong. From the standpoint of the particle soup and its governing rules, murder, jayalking and supernova all have the same right/wrong value, which is none.
Also Im trying to say that no 'right' is more desirable than any other from the extra-human standpoint, while I still am subject to my developed views.
I agree
quote:
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
On the more Hitlers issue, I was thinking that converts are not so much of a worry to do something anarchistic but those who are indoctorinated from birth would be much less predictable and likely to promote anti-civilization tendencies.
I do not agree. Anti-civilization tendencies would seem to go against the perpetuation of the species. Perpetuation of the species is genetic and would therefore outweigh any anti-social tendencies you feel may be inherent in your philosophy. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2005 : 13:49:20 [Permalink]
|
Not nessisarily anti-species behavior, anti-civilization as we know it behavior. Im not trying to say that new types of civilization could not be more stable. I just dont think it would fly in the world of theism we currently have.
Edit: Although intentional anti-species behavior would probably increase as well. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 02/04/2005 13:53:47 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
