Well I was answering Agustinos' question: "Which head is nicer to deal with do you think?"
But faith is reality, you just admitted so much. And the "says you", "no says you" attitude is reality too. So it's nonsense to say "let's just remove faith from reality, and make this attitude go away, and then we can have a real discussion". A reality without faith is not real, therefore we have to deal with this attitude, it's very real. You can't assume that having faith in non-faith will make faith go away. — Metaphysician Undercover
I think we might need to have a few weekly prizes awarded on the Forum.
This one gets my vote for "Bleeding Obvious Comment of the Week". — charleton
As i said above, every man wakes up every morning and has to deny his natural sexuality. — charleton
Christianity has plenty to answer for, no doubt. But let's be fair: religion isn't the only player in determining the shape of our contradictions. Social practices, economics, politics, jurisprudence, and so on all apply torque. — Bitter Crank
One thing that is a constant, is that sex always finds a way. Everything from the most boring heterosexually normative sex within the bonds of marriage to exotic polymorphous perversity have all happened over, and over, and over, during every generation to have lived within the Christian sphere of influence (and outside that sphere). — Bitter Crank
And that doesn't make it immoral or wrong. That just means our culture's view on sexuality is very much twisted by christianity's sick view on sexuality. — BlueBanana
A particular problem is the duality of the oppressed: they are contradictory, divided beings, shaped by and existing in a concrete situation of oppression and violence. ^
Any situation in which "A" objectively exploits "B" or hinders his and her pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible person is one of oppression. Such a situation in itself constitutes violence, even when sweetened by false generosity, because it interferes with the individ ual's ontological and historical vocation to be more fully human. With the establishment of a relationship of oppression, violence has already begun. Never in history has violence been initiated by the oppressed. How could they be the initiators, if they themselves are the result of violence? How could they be the sponsors of something whose objective inauguration called forth their existence as op pressed? There would be no oppressed had there been no prior situation of violence to establish their subjugation.
Violence is initiated by those who oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons—not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognized.
I'm not a big fan of C.K. He's not my cup of tea, most of the time.
The Sun's appreciation of a large pair of tits has never been in question, but it is not my go-to source for an understanding of sexual politics. — unenlightened
I beg to differ... — unenlightened
I wasn't invited, and I would have enjoyed it (assuming he does it well). — Bitter Crank
:-d Care to provide some substance for this assertion?That just means our culture's view on sexuality is very much twisted by christianity's sick view on sexuality. — BlueBanana
There you go again...Reality = Iceland and Denmark are in the top five most peaceful countries in the world and the top 20 is dominated by western liberal democracies. — Baden
*facepalm*And to judge the "peacefulness" of Western society based on less than 100 years from what were the 2 most brutal and bloody conflicts in human history is childish. — Agustino
Oh yeah the GREAT Scandinavia :-} - Scandinavia is not peaceful at all. Anders Brevik was from there for example. There are also many Neo-Nazi groups in those Nordic countries too.
And to judge the "peacefulness" of Western society based on less than 100 years from what were the 2 most brutal and bloody conflicts in human history is childish. — Agustino
Well, evidently those means I mentioned aim to change the structure that has already been placed there by our culture & society through the way we were raised up. If you were raised up differently, in a different society and under a different culture and different circumstances, you would get a different structure in place by the time you grow up. We only need to change it, because our culture and society doesn't get it right from the first place.You've answered your own criticism, to change the structure of something is not to distill it out. How can one change the structure of something that is no longer there. :s — Baden
Depends on the epoch and how influential those practices/beliefs are in culture and society.Again, sure. And how does that work out in practice and why? — Baden
Hominization does happen precisely through cultural institutions, ritual, sacrifice, and prohibitions. If we eliminate those, it's not at all surprising that we start to return to chimp levels of behaviour.Kind of sounds like we're a bunch of chimps or something. :) — Baden
Oh yeah the GREAT Scandinavia :-} - Scandinavia is not peaceful at all. Anders Brevik was from there for example. There are also many Neo-Nazi groups in those Nordic countries too.And yet the most liberal societies (e.g.western Europe, particularly Scandinavia) are among the most peaceful that have ever existed. :s — Baden
I grant it may not be useful to have gone off on this tangent with Agu. I didn't intend to distract from the practical side of this issue. — Baden
Oh? Then what are we doing in advertising and marketing if not inflaming already existent and basic human desires, re-directing them, and so on so forth? :s What are we doing in psychotherapy, psychoanalysis, moral philosophy, etc. if not trying to change our structure of desire? — Agustino
That is true, but to suppose that human beings are primates in the same sense that chimps are is folly — Agustino
Reason can indeed only work with what it is given, but what is given isn't biological in large majority, but culturally mediated. — Agustino
All religions, but especially Christianity and some forms of Buddhism encourage the abandonment of imitative desire as the solution to the ills of the world. — Agustino
Your liberal society is not liberal at all, but illiberal. When rivalry is allowed to run amok, nobody can enjoy the object of desire - everyone is busy killing each other off, outplaying each other, competing, etc. - we all become fascinated with the rival, and the rival is more punishing than any law would be. — Agustino
Just because there is choice does not mean that there is freedom. The two shouldn't be confused. — Agustino
In one sense, I do understand why society is becoming "liberal" - sacrificial mechanisms no longer work to keep the peace. But this becoming more "liberal" is identical with becoming more violent - violence becomes harder to control. — Agustino
Right, you take the naive view that they are already inflamed, increased and redirected - naturally. Just look at chimps — Agustino
Well, this is it, really. — TimeLine
And Kudos to you for thinking through the "why" she did what she did and how you handled it would have ramifications that might just feed the dysfunction at home, that leaves her searching deeply for validation of feelings of love outside of her family. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
The problem is not liberal society and it is not primate behaviour, instinct genes, testosterone, or what women are attracted to. The problem is men behaving badly. Let's stop saying it's 'natural' and also stop saying it's acceptable or that women like it really. — unenlightened
Well since we're sharing, I was groped while working as a childminder by the neighbour's prematurely sexualised seven-year-old girl. A highly inappropriate, unwelcome piece of sexual harassment that was mildly traumatic for me, but I imagine was an expression of a much more traumatic upbringing from her side. But since I was the person of power in the relationship, I was able to deal with it. If I had had an ounce of respect for the local child social services, I might have talked to them, but as it was, I was confident they would only make things worse for everyone. — unenlightened
No Wos, it's actually quite a rational and mathematical reason. What's a superhuman? 1 in how many human beings? 1/10,000? 1/100,000? 1/1,000,000? If it's either of those 3, then the expected value of you having met such a person and known them rounds off to 0. You probably have met and known in your life less than 5,000 people. So you wouldn't exactly expect to have met and known a superhuman.Same reason I've never met a leprechaun, I suppose. — Wosret
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.