There's no question that the pursuit of the dollar often leads to a multitude of sins. Corporations have a long history of trying to get away with unethical practices in the name of cost cutting and profit. That's the primary reason why there are professional standards and binding legislative frameworks - to protect humans from corporate malfeasance, whether it be selling cigarettes or asbestos products. Like other companies, aged care service often cut costs to make money or 'increase profit' and this heightens risks which can lead to death/s. If your primary focus is on making money this is hardly surprising. And yes, politicians in granting contracts or cutting back laws, or passing others can be enablers for corporations to conduct some dubious business practices.

That said, there are many good companies which run aged care services and not all companies are bad. That's also obvious.

I don't know what your experience is, but it's generally not a matter of resources, instead, a matter of priority.

If you're saying that people can be full time mums or dads and work and do everything they need to do and be totally committed to this then you have a much friendlier idea of commitment. Which I welcome. I have not seen this in any of meditation communities I have known over the years; Hindu or Buddhist in derivation.

Of the all the people who do this sort of thing (very, very few), a minuscule amount of the them are actually willing to do what it takes to go for it. — synthesis

In my experience also, very few people have the available resources to do this.

So they always win.

Similar examples are common all over the globe and history.

Given this state of facts, the only conclusion is that morality is overrated and evolutionarily disadvantageous.
Why bother about other people, their lives and their property, when you can get away with endangering and damaging it.


I dare you to prove this wrong. — baker

I have lived in several homes around cities where the neighbors are concerned and upright citizens. Where they are considerate and mindful of how they behave. Where homes are safe and if there are any problems they can be settled peacefully following a discussion.

There are many safe and happy places like this all over the globe and in history.

Given this state of affairs, the only conclusion is that morality works and is evolutionarily advantageous.

Actually I don't make any conclusion based on my own experience or examples culled from elsewhere. How people behave in the world is a separate matter for whether or not morality or some code of conduct is useful. There are better and worse places to live and if people follow a code of conduct life tends to be better for all.

Sounds like your life is challenging and I don't minimize the risk you face.

The thing to remember is that people from all religions often find religions comforting, from the Parsi to the Muslim. Psychological help via Buddhism has also been massive in Western psychological services for some years. People also find social and sporting clubs really helpful. People are social creatures. Hardly a surprise.

I don't see how your conclusions follow from your ideas, sorry. I am a Hobbsian. No one lives without perversity to my knowledge. How would you even demonstrate this is a thing?

A society without government - can that even be described? Having said that, I am sure there are many labyrinthine Utopian theories of society out there.

Not trying to be rude but I can't see how this argument works.

Beauty and truth are words we use to describe particular things. Discussing the words truth or beauty in isolation, (in themselves so to speak), is usually circular and vague and unrewarding. What is truth? Who knows? Beauty? Ditto. We have a range of theories, epistemologies and/or metaphysical views to choose from.

It is generally more useful to look at a specific example of something - a proposition about the world, say or an artwork, for instance and then ponder whether this is true or not, or beautiful or not respectively. For me, truth and beauty are just words which don't have anything more to them except, associations, traditions and usage. The idea of an 'eternal truth' seems to me to be vague and suggests a remnant of Greek philosophy and not something I accept as useful. I totally reject any intrinsic connection between truth and beauty, that's a bit of old fashioned romanticism right there. But I do think being told the truth at the right time can be a beautiful thing

A few other disadvantages of organized religion could include:

- justification for prejudice
-Justification for bigotry
-justification for violent behaviour

Religion like corporations or governments can often be thuggish, intolerant and appallingly behaved.

[reply="Darkneos;502771" I've always found the idea that 'the only meaning there is is the one we chose to make' to be liberating and an aphrodisiac for living. The practical consequence of nothing matters does not need to be abyss. You can fill the space with a simple question. So what now? Nothing matters is also at the heart of Buddhism (not that I am an adherent).

I'm not aware of anyone saying Camus 'solved' nihilism. Only that his version of existentialism is one potential approach if you are of the view that life is absurd and pointless.

I think nihilism can make a lot of sense, but I have usually found it an empowering and uplifting notion rather than a depressing one. 'Nothing matters' doesn't have to come with a 'how awful' stamp unless you have already made the assumption that transcendent purpose is critical.

Sure, it can be argued that nihilism is circular - as in - if nothing matters than nor does nihilism. But many presuppositions we use in life are circular - eg, logic. You can't use logic to defend the use of logic. Will we now abandon logic?

Not sure I follow this. Can you express this via an example in action even if theoretical.

For me David Lynch often makes mainstream 'surrealist' movies full of self indulgent devices and visual non-sequiturs. I have often found his work to be grating, dull and repetitive stuff. Bombastic student movies are made like this all the time. Lynch's great talent is being a minor player in mainstream cinema despite his uncommercial material. How are you determining that Lynch's movie illusions are more real?