Are you a child of God? Will you be God’s master or slave?

Page 5 of 6 [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

14 Jan 2015, 4:58 pm

Grommit wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:

Can you be happy if you are not living a moral life?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Most seem to think that centering on others is the highest morals but you seem to be centering on yourself.

Please listen to this presentation and see if you would rephrase your view.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

I agree that our happiness should be close to our highest desire but cannot see being happy if those around us are not.

Regards
DL


Which part would you like me to rephrase, I'm not sure what you mean or who your rephrasing about. I'm not sure what you mean about: can you be happy if you are not leading a moral life. Does it mean somebody living without morals, or does it mean somebody does not understand morals, or do we just give ourselves a hard time. I don't quite understand as I do live by my own morals which derive from my own feelings which would mean that I am self centred and would often wonder what it is I did to offend. I guess if you didn't live up to your own moral standards you could be unhappy, and if you didn't have any it wouldn't matter anyway. I am curious to what you mean by that?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Another question I don't understand, I suppose it depends for what purpose, If you spend more time focusing your energy on other people then you are talented person, but then I would hope that the morals where intended for that person and not just self satisfaction and corruption, which is also interesting because without self satisfaction there is no moral centre for others which presents a conundrum, or they coincide each person making each other happy or sad. Now I'm talking waffle and my brain has gone to pancake batter I'm just going to say what I originally wanted to say which is without understanding yourself is without understanding others and visa versa. Arghhhh overload.............. if there was no happiness we would cease to exist surely, who wants to live unhappy? Why would you want to hear this from me anyway did I do something wrong.

You can lead a horse to a lake but you can't make it drink.

So in a way I'm not self centred because I want to give people hope as much as I want hope, and it's information that keeps me fascinated

And who do you quote on not being happy, I don't know what this means everybody gets unhappy. Unhappiness sets a motion just does happiness. If it's you that can't see the happiness then I have described my happiness such as you have described yours about god. Everyone has to find there's it's part of living, even animals pleasure seek.
Happiness is your god to staying healthy, having happy cells and thinking more focused thoughts. Only you know what makes you happy. But I admit being happy is not easy and seeing other people suffer isn't easy either. But like I said happiness as well as sadness and fear is like a plague and it takes people to break or start a cycle.

Lol after all this I don't even know where this is going but I'm posting it anyway. Oh yeah happiness

I'm still sticking with my opinion that we are all god, and god does not hold all of the pleasure because he gave it all to us here. For me a metaphorical sense. 7 billion people and the planet, that's a huge responsibility for mankind. We all need to wake up and smell the coffee. I'm more interested about serving the planet than I am god. And even if I don't succeed well at least I tried.

Regards


Did you follow that link?

It does not sound like you did so I am not surprised that you did not get the gist of what I was trying to show.

Have a look and just do the one question.

Should our highest moral tenet be centered on others or self-centered?

Regards
DL



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

14 Jan 2015, 5:39 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:

Did you follow that link?

It does not sound like you did so I am not surprised that you did not get the gist of what I was trying to show.

Have a look and just do the one question.

Should our highest moral tenet be centered on others or self-centered?

Regards
DL


No....... Lol I will have to watch later my computer is slow for videos at the moment

Please could you tell me what the point is to the question?



GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

14 Jan 2015, 6:48 pm

Grommit wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:

Did you follow that link?

It does not sound like you did so I am not surprised that you did not get the gist of what I was trying to show.

Have a look and just do the one question.

Should our highest moral tenet be centered on others or self-centered?

Regards
DL


No....... Lol I will have to watch later my computer is slow for videos at the moment

Please could you tell me what the point is to the question?


I will, if I have to, after you view that short clip.

I need to know what level of intelligence I am dealing with before I phrase my reply.

If you cannot understand that clip then I will know.

Regards
DL



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 64,135
Location: Queens, NYC

14 Jan 2015, 8:12 pm

I believe we should think of other people at least as much as we think about our selves.

When I say we shouldn't rely on "logic," I mean the medieval "logic" systems which make use of syllogisms. What might seem a fallacy according to such a "system" might actually make sense in real life.

Obviously, one must make use of logic and reason in all things. But one must also make use of empirical experience.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,477

14 Jan 2015, 11:02 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:
Grommit wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:

Can you be happy if you are not living a moral life?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Most seem to think that centering on others is the highest morals but you seem to be centering on yourself.

Please listen to this presentation and see if you would rephrase your view.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

I agree that our happiness should be close to our highest desire but cannot see being happy if those around us are not.

Regards
DL


Which part would you like me to rephrase, I'm not sure what you mean or who your rephrasing about. I'm not sure what you mean about: can you be happy if you are not leading a moral life. Does it mean somebody living without morals, or does it mean somebody does not understand morals, or do we just give ourselves a hard time. I don't quite understand as I do live by my own morals which derive from my own feelings which would mean that I am self centred and would often wonder what it is I did to offend. I guess if you didn't live up to your own moral standards you could be unhappy, and if you didn't have any it wouldn't matter anyway. I am curious to what you mean by that?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Another question I don't understand, I suppose it depends for what purpose, If you spend more time focusing your energy on other people then you are talented person, but then I would hope that the morals where intended for that person and not just self satisfaction and corruption, which is also interesting because without self satisfaction there is no moral centre for others which presents a conundrum, or they coincide each person making each other happy or sad. Now I'm talking waffle and my brain has gone to pancake batter I'm just going to say what I originally wanted to say which is without understanding yourself is without understanding others and visa versa. Arghhhh overload.............. if there was no happiness we would cease to exist surely, who wants to live unhappy? Why would you want to hear this from me anyway did I do something wrong.

You can lead a horse to a lake but you can't make it drink.

So in a way I'm not self centred because I want to give people hope as much as I want hope, and it's information that keeps me fascinated

And who do you quote on not being happy, I don't know what this means everybody gets unhappy. Unhappiness sets a motion just does happiness. If it's you that can't see the happiness then I have described my happiness such as you have described yours about god. Everyone has to find there's it's part of living, even animals pleasure seek.
Happiness is your god to staying healthy, having happy cells and thinking more focused thoughts. Only you know what makes you happy. But I admit being happy is not easy and seeing other people suffer isn't easy either. But like I said happiness as well as sadness and fear is like a plague and it takes people to break or start a cycle.

Lol after all this I don't even know where this is going but I'm posting it anyway. Oh yeah happiness

I'm still sticking with my opinion that we are all god, and god does not hold all of the pleasure because he gave it all to us here. For me a metaphorical sense. 7 billion people and the planet, that's a huge responsibility for mankind. We all need to wake up and smell the coffee. I'm more interested about serving the planet than I am god. And even if I don't succeed well at least I tried.

Regards


Did you follow that link?

It does not sound like you did so I am not surprised that you did not get the gist of what I was trying to show.

Have a look and just do the one question.

Should our highest moral tenet be centered on others or self-centered?

Regards
DL


OMG! the answer is SO simple, per..
BOTH.
ONE SHOULD love others as they love their self.

And for folks that don't like themselves very much the HATE DOES USUALLY ENSUE.. PER THE ORIGIN OF HATERS who truly hate them self.

Jesus and many other well known philosophers, as reported historically, share this same sentiment per the GOLDEN RULE.

IT'S NOTHING NEW.

BOY DO you THINK you're smart! ;)

But anyway, thanks for linking that video on the morality of conservatives and liberals, it was interesting.

And truly folks who ARE OPEN to new experiences in life, are usually more liberal, and less ego oriented about how much smarter they THINK they are than everyone else.

Words are only one tiny part of human intelligences.

One can never tell how intelligent someone is based on written words alone.

Some folks who post here have symptoms of non-verbal learning disorder with extremely high verbal IQ's but little intellectual abilities in math or even identifying the facial features of family members.

Autism is an extremely wide spectrum of learning disabilities and potential causal factors.

Human kind is full of different brushes.. strokes.. and canvases of human intelligences...

There is verbal intelligence.. spatial intelligence.. musical intelligence.. poetry intelligence.. abstract intelligence.. concrete intelligence.. figurative intelligence.. existential intelligence.. proprioception intelligence.. visual intelligence.. smelling intelligence.. touch intelligence.. auditory intelligence.. sexual and sensual intelligence.. non verbal language intelligence.. physical intelligence.. emotional intelligence.. sensory integration intelligence.. focus intelligence.. executive functioning intelligence.. rote memory intelligence.. long term memory intelligence.. short term memory intelligence.. reading intelligence.. writing intelligence.. CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE.. AND OMG THE LIST GOES ON AND ON...

AND you BIG guy... are gonna tell 'us' that you can judge a person's intelligence by if they understand a video on the morality of conservatives and liberals....;)

OH YEAH... THERE IS COGNITIVE EMPATHY INTELLIGENCE.. EMOTIONAL CONTAGION INTELLIGENCE.. MIRROR NEURON INTELLIGENCE.. AFFECTIVE EMPATHY INTELLIGENCE.. and yeah that list goes on too...

And THAT'S THE KIND OF STUFF THAN CAN ALLOW one to potentiAlly UNDERSTAND how little one's Universe may be compared to someone else's potential FULLER UNIVERSE OF INTELLIGENCE...

One's practice of casually attempting to intellectually bully folks who one THINKS ARE inferior in intelligence to one..amuses me.. friend..;)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

15 Jan 2015, 5:51 am

aghogday wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:
Grommit wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:

Can you be happy if you are not living a moral life?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Most seem to think that centering on others is the highest morals but you seem to be centering on yourself.

Please listen to this presentation and see if you would rephrase your view.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

I agree that our happiness should be close to our highest desire but cannot see being happy if those around us are not.

Regards
DL


Which part would you like me to rephrase, I'm not sure what you mean or who your rephrasing about. I'm not sure what you mean about: can you be happy if you are not leading a moral life. Does it mean somebody living without morals, or does it mean somebody does not understand morals, or do we just give ourselves a hard time. I don't quite understand as I do live by my own morals which derive from my own feelings which would mean that I am self centred and would often wonder what it is I did to offend. I guess if you didn't live up to your own moral standards you could be unhappy, and if you didn't have any it wouldn't matter anyway. I am curious to what you mean by that?

Should your highest moral tenet be centered on others or on yourself?

Another question I don't understand, I suppose it depends for what purpose, If you spend more time focusing your energy on other people then you are talented person, but then I would hope that the morals where intended for that person and not just self satisfaction and corruption, which is also interesting because without self satisfaction there is no moral centre for others which presents a conundrum, or they coincide each person making each other happy or sad. Now I'm talking waffle and my brain has gone to pancake batter I'm just going to say what I originally wanted to say which is without understanding yourself is without understanding others and visa versa. Arghhhh overload.............. if there was no happiness we would cease to exist surely, who wants to live unhappy? Why would you want to hear this from me anyway did I do something wrong.

You can lead a horse to a lake but you can't make it drink.

So in a way I'm not self centred because I want to give people hope as much as I want hope, and it's information that keeps me fascinated

And who do you quote on not being happy, I don't know what this means everybody gets unhappy. Unhappiness sets a motion just does happiness. If it's you that can't see the happiness then I have described my happiness such as you have described yours about god. Everyone has to find there's it's part of living, even animals pleasure seek.
Happiness is your god to staying healthy, having happy cells and thinking more focused thoughts. Only you know what makes you happy. But I admit being happy is not easy and seeing other people suffer isn't easy either. But like I said happiness as well as sadness and fear is like a plague and it takes people to break or start a cycle.

Lol after all this I don't even know where this is going but I'm posting it anyway. Oh yeah happiness

I'm still sticking with my opinion that we are all god, and god does not hold all of the pleasure because he gave it all to us here. For me a metaphorical sense. 7 billion people and the planet, that's a huge responsibility for mankind. We all need to wake up and smell the coffee. I'm more interested about serving the planet than I am god. And even if I don't succeed well at least I tried.

Regards


Did you follow that link?

It does not sound like you did so I am not surprised that you did not get the gist of what I was trying to show.

Have a look and just do the one question.

Should our highest moral tenet be centered on others or self-centered?

Regards
DL


OMG! the answer is SO simple, per..
BOTH.
ONE SHOULD love others as they love their self.

And for folks that don't like themselves very much the HATE DOES USUALLY ENSUE.. PER THE ORIGIN OF HATERS who truly hate them self.

Jesus and many other well known philosophers, as reported historically, share this same sentiment per the GOLDEN RULE.

IT'S NOTHING NEW.

BOY DO you THINK you're smart! ;)

But anyway, thanks for linking that video on the morality of conservatives and liberals, it was interesting.

And truly folks who ARE OPEN to new experiences in life, are usually more liberal, and less ego oriented about how much smarter they THINK they are than everyone else.

Words are only one tiny part of human intelligences.

One can never tell how intelligent someone is based on written words alone.

Some folks who post here have symptoms of non-verbal learning disorder with extremely high verbal IQ's but little intellectual abilities in math or even identifying the facial features of family members.

Autism is an extremely wide spectrum of learning disabilities and potential causal factors.

Human kind is full of different brushes.. strokes.. and canvases of human intelligences...

There is verbal intelligence.. spatial intelligence.. musical intelligence.. poetry intelligence.. abstract intelligence.. concrete intelligence.. figurative intelligence.. existential intelligence.. proprioception intelligence.. visual intelligence.. smelling intelligence.. touch intelligence.. auditory intelligence.. sexual and sensual intelligence.. non verbal language intelligence.. physical intelligence.. emotional intelligence.. sensory integration intelligence.. focus intelligence.. executive functioning intelligence.. rote memory intelligence.. long term memory intelligence.. short term memory intelligence.. reading intelligence.. writing intelligence.. CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE.. AND OMG THE LIST GOES ON AND ON...

AND you BIG guy... are gonna tell 'us' that you can judge a person's intelligence by if they understand a video on the morality of conservatives and liberals....;)

OH YEAH... THERE IS COGNITIVE EMPATHY INTELLIGENCE.. EMOTIONAL CONTAGION INTELLIGENCE.. MIRROR NEURON INTELLIGENCE.. AFFECTIVE EMPATHY INTELLIGENCE.. and yeah that list goes on too...

And THAT'S THE KIND OF STUFF THAN CAN ALLOW one to potentiAlly UNDERSTAND how little one's Universe may be compared to someone else's potential FULLER UNIVERSE OF INTELLIGENCE...

One's practice of casually attempting to intellectually bully folks who one THINKS ARE inferior in intelligence to one..amuses me.. friend..;)


Lol, lol and furthermore Lols,
I'm liking the list of intelligence, interesting. And it's so true.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

15 Jan 2015, 6:14 am

Agnosticbishop My intelligence only heard politician, I'm not really that fond of politics. Nor do I trust them. And just for the record I still haven't watched the video so your better of just telling me what your actual point is?

I'm going to go with kraftiekortie to answer your question.

Peace



GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

15 Jan 2015, 11:08 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
I believe we should think of other people at least as much as we think about our selves.

When I say we shouldn't rely on "logic," I mean the medieval "logic" systems which make use of syllogisms. What might seem a fallacy according to such a "system" might actually make sense in real life.

Obviously, one must make use of logic and reason in all things. But one must also make use of empirical experience.


I have hard choice for you.

You are alone in a safety raft that holds two people and are careening down the river after a larger boat sank.
You are heading towards a man and his wife who will drown if you do not act and give your place to either one or two of them. Which of you three will die?

Regards
DL



GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

15 Jan 2015, 11:12 am

Grommit wrote:
Agnosticbishop My intelligence only heard politician, I'm not really that fond of politics. Nor do I trust them. And just for the record I still haven't watched the video so your better of just telling me what your actual point is?

I'm going to go with kraftiekortie to answer your question.

Peace


You are missing an intelligent presentation.

That aside.

I am please that your anser matches our friends but his answer was not as clear as I wanted and asked another question just above. Care to9 have a go at the answer?

Regards
DL



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,477

15 Jan 2015, 1:15 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I believe we should think of other people at least as much as we think about our selves.

When I say we shouldn't rely on "logic," I mean the medieval "logic" systems which make use of syllogisms. What might seem a fallacy according to such a "system" might actually make sense in real life.

Obviously, one must make use of logic and reason in all things. But one must also make use of empirical experience.


I have hard choice for you.

You are alone in a safety raft that holds two people and are careening down the river after a larger boat sank.
You are heading towards a man and his wife who will drown if you do not act and give your place to either one or two of them. Which of you three will die?

Regards
DL


Dude you have enough problem being respectful of folks on this Internet site, and you are seriously imposing an ethical imperative of this size.

Get respectful of people, HERE FIRST, and I for one will take your ethics and morality seriously, per the size of the challenge YOU are presenting here.

Until then, I have a hard time believing anything anyone says who can't even talk the talk they are talking about.

IT JUST DOES NOT WORK IN REAL LIFE or here.

Everything is recorded and TRANSPARENT HERE IN black and WHITE ethics and text.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

15 Jan 2015, 1:49 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:

I have hard choice for you.

You are alone in a safety raft that holds two people and are careening down the river after a larger boat sank.
You are heading towards a man and his wife who will drown if you do not act and give your place to either one or two of them. Which of you three will die?

Regards
DL


Well if it was me in the 2 man boat, probably all three of us would die because if I tried to save them I would probably fall out of the boat, I would probably be wondering what ever possessed me to get in a boat in such heavy rapids. The possibilities are actually infinite depending on the surroundings, heck I would have probably sailed right passed them just wondering what it was I was going to do.

How about you?



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,508
Location: x

15 Jan 2015, 5:34 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:
I have hard choice for you.

You are alone in a safety raft that holds two people and are careening down the river after a larger boat sank.
You are heading towards a man and his wife who will drown if you do not act and give your place to either one or two of them. Which of you three will die?

Regards
DL


These "who lives/who dies" dilemmas are always presented as an ethical choice between who lives and who dies. But I have always preferred to re-frame them as a pragmatic dilemma, specifically, "how can I change this situation so nobody dies?". Is it not moral to think outside the box and go for choices other than the two presented to you? Human morality seems to have progressed quite a lot by rejecting false dilemmas ("you have to choose either this or that, there is no third choice") and finding novel solutions.

The problem doesn't have to be "who lives and who dies?" It can just as easily be "how do you save 3 people in a 2 person boat?" Solution: by having 1 person in the boat and 2 holding onto either side while in the water- this balances. Think outside the box. It's the moral thing to do.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

15 Jan 2015, 6:00 pm

Janissy wrote:
GnosticBishop wrote:
I have hard choice for you.

You are alone in a safety raft that holds two people and are careening down the river after a larger boat sank.
You are heading towards a man and his wife who will drown if you do not act and give your place to either one or two of them. Which of you three will die?

Regards
DL


These "who lives/who dies" dilemmas are always presented as an ethical choice between who lives and who dies. But I have always preferred to re-frame them as a pragmatic dilemma, specifically, "how can I change this situation so nobody dies?". Is it not moral to think outside the box and go for choices other than the two presented to you? Human morality seems to have progressed quite a lot by rejecting false dilemmas ("you have to choose either this or that, there is no third choice") and finding novel solutions.

The problem doesn't have to be "who lives and who dies?" It can just as easily be "how do you save 3 people in a 2 person boat?" Solution: by having 1 person in the boat and 2 holding onto either side while in the water- this balances. Think outside the box. It's the moral thing to do.


And what if the river is infested with piranhas and crocodiles :D

Butterfly affect is a good film, it explained to me that you can't take full responsibility nor can any body else over the future, even if your intentions are good. No matter how painful life can sometimes seem.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,508
Location: x

15 Jan 2015, 6:25 pm

Grommit wrote:
And what if the river is infested with piranhas and crocodiles :D



I googled for that 'what if'. Crocodiles (say various websites) stick to slow moving (or still) water and in this scenario the boat is "careening down the river" so clearly the water is very fast moving. So no crocodiles. Piranhas are found in fast water but they would never attack something large zipping past them because 1)it's zipping past them and 2)it's large and can fight back(say yet more websites). They would rather attack something slow or stationary for their own safety (and contrary to some movies). The exception is when they are starving. But apparently that situation just happens when they've been marooned in slow moving water because it's the dry season. In this fast river, that's not an issue. Apparently plenty of people swim alongside piranhas in South America (locals only).

I stand by my solution.

And the point of my solution is that to me, the most moral choice is to reject false dilemmas and come up with novel solutions. When you consider only the solutions that somebody else presents to you, you are trapped in their system.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

15 Jan 2015, 6:42 pm

Janissy wrote:
Grommit wrote:
And what if the river is infested with piranhas and crocodiles :D



I googled for that 'what if'. Crocodiles (say various websites) stick to slow moving (or still) water and in this scenario the boat is "careening down the river" so clearly the water is very fast moving. So no crocodiles. Piranhas are found in fast water but they would never attack something large zipping past them because 1)it's zipping past them and 2)it's large and can fight back(say yet more websites). They would rather attack something slow or stationary for their own safety (and contrary to some movies). The exception is when they are starving. But apparently that situation just happens when they've been marooned in slow moving water because it's the dry season. In this fast river, that's not an issue. Apparently plenty of people swim alongside piranhas in South America (locals only).

I stand by my solution.

And the point of my solution is that to me, the most moral choice is to reject false dilemmas and come up with novel solutions. When you consider only the solutions that somebody else presents to you, you are trapped in their system.


Ok you have a good point. Lol

Ok thinking outside the box: if I ever get caught in this situation with a two man boat I will just make sure janissy is with me. Problem solved :D