< 1 2
 
   
 

What is your philosophy on life?

 
J.C.
 
Avatar
 
 
J.C.
Total Posts:  231
Joined  18-10-2007
 
 
 
23 January 2008 21:43
 

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 16:51 by J.C.]
 
Dee
 
Avatar
 
 
Dee
Total Posts:  741
Joined  11-10-2007
 
 
 
24 January 2008 00:45
 

God is the mind- or maybe I should say the mentality of life it’self.

God is our search for beauty . God is our search for truth.

God has the exclusive understanding of truth , and of beauty—which are really the same .

God is our ability to be conscience of ourselves, and feel emotions , to know right from wrong- to rise above instinct .

God is our potential self- our ulimate self.

“We live in this life only to discover beauty- all else is a form of waiting . There is not religion or science above beauty “

One thing is for sure- my God id NOT the God of the bible, or any other religious document .

DEE

 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
24 January 2008 10:59
 

My “philosophy” is simple. As an individual I can control only my own actions and my own responses to events. I have no control over the rest of the universe, or the certainty of death, or the inevitability of much of suffering. There is no evidence that any of these are under the control of any person or any alleged supreme entity. My idea of “something larger than myself” is the vastness of the universe. That doesn’t mean I regard the universe or nature as conscious entities or intelligences - there is no evidence for that idea.

 
Yahun
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahun
Total Posts:  486
Joined  24-10-2007
 
 
 
25 January 2008 21:59
 
Joel Armstrong - 24 January 2008 02:43 AM
Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM
Joel Armstrong - 13 January 2008 02:03 AM
Yahsene - 10 January 2008 02:37 AM

What does the word God mean to you?

The source of life, whatever that may be, or whatever that may involve.

Seems pretty vague.

It is somewhat vague, I do not claim to have a complete understanding of what the source of life is, or exactly what it may involve.  But my experience and existence leads me to believe that there is a source.  How would you describe it, in a more strategically effective way that most people would easily understand?

Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM

What value is there in feeling connected to something that you cannot comprehend or even explain?

The answer to this question is in the question itself.  The value is that I feel connected to it.  In feeling connected to it, it reinforces my philosophy of nurturing, since the source of life is connected to the future of life.  Does anyone besides me ever feel all life is connected?  I guess this is all subjective, correct?  Well, you asked, so I gave as honest an answer as I could.  Other than explaining that my belief in God connects me to my philosophy, I will not go any further on the issue. 

Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM

Is it a form of comfort?

It would be too subjective for me to answer this.  I have a post-theological belief in God, so I shouldn’t be associated myself with religion by making it sound religious.

Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM

Just curious, I’m not trying to challenge you.

I don’t mind being challenged intellectually, it is a way to learn and grow.

Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM

If that is your view then that is your view, who is to say it shouldn’t be what it is. As Thoreau said, “If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” and “‘They pretend,’ as I hear, ‘that the verses of Kabir have four different senses; illusion, spirit, intellect, and the exoteric doctrine of the Vedas’; but in this part of the world it is considered a ground for complaint if a man’s writings admit of more than one interpretation.”

If this is an interpretation which you have gained from your own personal experiences in life then I congratulate you. If I were to suggest anything it would be to ask yourself what belief in this source means…

I understand and appreciate the first quote from Thoreau, but could you elaborate on your interpretation of the second quote about the value of “one interpretation”?  Does it have to do with a oneness with nature, is it about simplicity, or something else?

Yahun - 13 January 2008 02:18 AM

...and whether that belief changes your actual objective existence or only alters your subjective perspective of it.

Again, I don’t want to discuss the subjective nature of my post theological belief in God, other than linking it to my philosophy. 

If there is any objective value in it, a philosophy such as that of nurturing improves the probability of future generations chances to have a chance at experiencing the objective reality of the this world, and preserves the wonder and diversity of life on this planet.  Are these simply subjective hopes?

You had questions about my belief in God, but had no questions about my philosophy of nurturing which, in retrospect, is lacking in details.  What ideas do you have for creating a more sustainable world for future generations to live in?  What is your standard for living a lifestyle that will be healthy for any child that might someday inherit your DNA?


Thoreau was mocking people with the second quote who say that there can only be one interpretation to reality and that everybody must step according to the same music. I agree with him. There is nothing wrong with different approaches to life, so long as we can agree on the fundamental objective facts about the cosmos.

I’d personally like to give peace a chance. We’ve tried coercion and force. Didn’t work.

In regard to correcting the world . . . I dunno, brother. I’d say that if we want peace in our societies then we have to establish peace in ourselves first. We create from what we have within. If we are in chaos then we create chaos. If we are at peace then we create peace. Chaos doesn’t create peace and peace doesn’t create chaos. (My view of peace is not the modern Western idea of peace, which is nothing more than a preparation for more war)

My view on murderers is that they should be put to death if proven to be guilty through modern scientific evidence.

Rapists should be castrated.

Pedophiles should be whipped by the parents of the children (or by a court guard if they are the parents).

It sucks that we have to do set these sort of laws and liberals will cry out, “Inhumane! Inhumane!” but it wasn’t exactly humane when they murdered, raped or molested a child. There needs to be justice and justice is not forcing law abiding tax payers to carry these self-centered parasites for the rest of their life. Life in prison makes no sense. Put a murderer to death and be done with it. Yes, the death penalty sucks, but people who kill innocent people suck and the only alternative is that people who take care of them will suffer their money over to take care of those people who are ruining our societies.

Politicians should not be allowed to pardon criminals (like Bush did that big Cocaine distributor recently) and Clinton did his numerous criminal friends right before leaving office.

The punishment for assaulting a police officer should ONLY be given a higher punishment if police officers who break the law receive a higher punishment than regular citizens. That’s balanced. Their job is necessary and attacking them can’t be viewed the same, but they are carrying guns in public and so they should be twice as accountable for their actions.

Education should be International (possibly over the Internet) and governed by a scientific organization unattached to any individual Nation, Government or religious group.

Churches, Temples, Synagogues, Mosques and all of this other crap should be thrown out. The idea that God needs a house is just stupid. The only God that can possibly exist (which we now know for a FACT) is Spinoza’s concept of God, which isn’t really a God at all. These parasites need to get a real job. They could go to college and become a psychologist if they want to help people. If they just want to rip people off they should be punished. The idea that our government is allowing churches to sell “holy water from the Jordan” (which actually comes from the faucet in the back) to old ladies for their social security is absolutely appalling. And why are they not paying taxes? Why do they even have the legal right to collect money? God needs money? If they are running a church “for God” and “for the people” then they should be required to come out of their own pockets to maintain the church or temple. That would be a service to the people, not making money by manipulating them through fear and fantasies. Why isn’t fraud applied to religion? If they cannot prove their claims then they should be tried as criminals, or simply stop teaching it until they can prove it. It’s time the people wake up and start telling our politicians what they will do and hold them to it. If they don’t do what they are told to do , FOR the people, then they should be removed from office. If they will not leave office then they should be taken off of this earth. Tyrants must stop. Corrupt governments must stop. Human beings need the freedom to experience life however they wish (so long as they are not harming others or infringing on their right to exist and do the same).

Life is sacred only to those who treat life as if it is sacred. Those who disregard life have no claim to the sacred in life. This is clear to anybody with a hint of reason. If nothing is sacred in life then the unbeliever in the sanctity cannot claim to be sacred enough not to be punished.

I can’t comprehend how people can argue against the death penalty in cases like this Marine who slaughtered the pregnant woman and it absolutely baffles me that he won’t be tried for double homicide when the baby was 8 month along. The Mexican government wouldn’t even agree to hand him over to the United States unless they made a deal not to give him the death sentence. What sort of stupid, ridiculous shit is that? This man beat a pregnant woman to death . . . splattered her blood all over the house (even on the ceiling) and then buried her and her infant in a shallow grave in his back yard before running to Mexico with fake ID’s and a government on one side of an invisible border is telling another government on another side of an invisible border that they will not cooperate and hand him over unless he is allowed to live. This is how absolutely fucking retarded our world is. When people defend murderers and protect them then the people have become sick.

[ Edited: 25 January 2008 22:09 by Yahun]
 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
26 January 2008 10:39
 
Yahun - 26 January 2008 02:59 AM

When people defend murderers and protect them then the people have become sick.

Opposition to the death penalty doesn’t equate to defense of murderers. Just because that Marine doesn’t value the preciousness of life doesn’t mean we should not regard life as precious either.

Instead of putting that sick bastard to death, I would force him to relive his worst, most terrifying childhood memory over and over for the rest of his life. Or I might create an artificial memory for him where he was responsible for destroying the thing he most loved, and force him to relive that memory over and over. Or I might create a Room 101 where he was continuously exposed to his worst fear.

 
Yahun
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahun
Total Posts:  486
Joined  24-10-2007
 
 
 
26 January 2008 19:14
 
Carstonio - 26 January 2008 03:39 PM
Yahun - 26 January 2008 02:59 AM

When people defend murderers and protect them then the people have become sick.

Opposition to the death penalty doesn’t equate to defense of murderers. Just because that Marine doesn’t value the preciousness of life doesn’t mean we should not regard life as precious either.

Instead of putting that sick bastard to death, I would force him to relive his worst, most terrifying childhood memory over and over for the rest of his life. Or I might create an artificial memory for him where he was responsible for destroying the thing he most loved, and force him to relive that memory over and over. Or I might create a Room 101 where he was continuously exposed to his worst fear.


That is torture, not justice. Death is enough.

 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
26 January 2008 19:57
 
Yahun - 27 January 2008 12:14 AM

That is torture, not justice. Death is enough.

How is it torture? No type of harm that one person can cause another even comes close to the harm caused by ending another’s life. There may be exceptions, such as a person suffering from a malady that causes unbearable pain. American defenders of the death penalty often rely on Old Testament notions of justice. I’m more interested in rendering the murder emotionally incapable of repeating his heinous act.

 
Penumbra
 
Avatar
 
 
Penumbra
Total Posts:  4
Joined  01-02-2008
 
 
 
01 February 2008 22:51
 
Yahsene - 05 January 2008 06:24 PM

If you were to choose a philosophy which fully defines your view on life, which philosophy would it be and why?

To sum it up as succinctly as possible,

Human autonomy and reason should be valued and defended against above all else; they are the precursors to, as well as the fuel for, progress and happiness. 

There is a numinous, inspired state of mind to be found in contemplating the sheer size, complexity, and beauty of our universe.  Religious and supernaturally based world-views most often myopically interpret this grandeur of our universe/experience, ball it up and label it with nonsense, and effectively put a limit on our potential.  However, I put no emphasis on calling myself an Atheist, as I am more interested in expounding upon the things I DO believe in rather than the things I don’t.

Given our recent advances as a species in terms of technology and knowledge, it appears our future is nothing other than limitless potential.  Science, philosophy, and art are attempts to illuminate and actualize this potential. 

We are unimaginably lucky to be alive at this moment with the ability to share our subjective experience of this thing we call reality with others like ourselves; human solidarity and companionship is the only thing that makes life worth living.  We’re all individuals, but we’re all in this together, so we should attempt to create a more peaceful and intelligent world for ourselves as well as future generations.

So, that’s pretty much what I think.  I guess you could call it Humanism.

[ Edited: 01 February 2008 22:53 by Penumbra]
 
 
DuckPhup
 
Avatar
 
 
DuckPhup
Total Posts:  28
Joined  06-10-2007
 
 
 
15 March 2008 19:11
 
Yahsene - 05 January 2008 06:24 PM

If you were to choose a philosophy which fully defines your view on life, which philosophy would it be and why?

So many women… so little time.

Why? You have to ask?

 
 
Lapin Diabolique
 
Avatar
 
 
Lapin Diabolique
Total Posts:  2015
Joined  10-11-2006
 
 
 
15 March 2008 20:16
 
DuckPhup - 15 March 2008 11:11 PM
Yahsene - 05 January 2008 06:24 PM

If you were to choose a philosophy which fully defines your view on life, which philosophy would it be and why?

So many women… so little time.

Why? You have to ask?

Nice avatar DuckPhup. Reminds me of a younger Harry Dean Stanton.

And your honesty is refreshing.

When faced with the likes of Yahsene, or should I say Yahun, my philosophy is that I’d much prefer a bottle in front of me over a frontal lobotomy or reading any more of her bullshit posts.

 
 
Jack Shooter
 
Avatar
 
 
Jack Shooter
Total Posts:  863
Joined  23-01-2008
 
 
 
16 March 2008 11:15
 
Sander - 16 March 2008 12:16 AM
DuckPhup - 15 March 2008 11:11 PM
Yahsene - 05 January 2008 06:24 PM

If you were to choose a philosophy which fully defines your view on life, which philosophy would it be and why?

So many women… so little time.

Why? You have to ask?

Nice avatar DuckPhup. Reminds me of a younger Harry Dean Stanton.

And your honesty is refreshing.

When faced with the likes of Yahsene, or should I say Yahun, my philosophy is that I’d much prefer a bottle in front of me over a frontal lobotomy or reading any more of her bullshit posts.

Sander,

Are you saying that you turn to the bottle in order to cope with a point of view that you happen to disagree with?  That would be pretty extreme.

[ Edited: 16 March 2008 11:18 by Jack Shooter]
 
 < 1 2