Dissidents Philosophy Forum

Internet Philosophical Community
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Embracing Evil

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:54 pm

Isn't interesting that without evil there can be no good and that the so called righteous infact need someone to defame in order to exist in the first place where there cannot be one without the other?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
creasy
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 75
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:56 pm

The Fool wrote:
Isn't interesting that without evil there can be no good and that the so called righteous infact need someone to defame in order to exist in the first place where there cannot be one without the other?
Aren't you defaming the righteous? IOW haven't you just come up with a new evil. You call it righteous and you define it as those who split the world into good and evil.

Instead you have the ___________(people like you who think there is no good or evil, perhaps) and the righteous.

Is this really different?

How so?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
kriswest
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Number of posts : 264
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:59 pm

Unreasonable wrote:
kriswest wrote:
And just how does a male see such a display of pathetic attempts at self inflating vanity?
I guess, disgust & jealousy.
Ok, disgust and jealousy directed at who by whom? Is the attacker jealous or disgusted? Or are you talking about an outside male seeing this event happen??
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:03 pm

kriswest wrote:
Ok, disgust and jealousy directed at who by whom? Is the attacker jealous or disgusted? Or are you talking about an outside male seeing this event happen??
I am talking about the entire universe outside the male-ego observing the event as 'cruel'. That is Injustice!

It is when a person kills an insect ... just because he can. It redefined and represents futility, death, and all that we hate about ourselves & everything.

And this does not apply to females, because frankly, men don't see women as responsible for themselves. And I believe that's validated.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Advocatus Diaboli
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Male
Number of posts : 68
Age : 29
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:37 pm

creasy wrote:

Very. The amount of people out there who think they are experts about things they haven├Ąt experienced is enormous. Sure, some few can draw good conclusions from limited experience. But imagine your reaction to someone who says chairs are either made of wood or plastic.
I would say that is a fault of his reasoning not his lack of experience. If he has experience with even only one chair made of wood or plastic then he should conclude that chairs can be made of a material workable enough to form and hard enough to sit on, not that it can only be made of wood or plastic.

Quote :
Sure, but this doesn't really mean one should consider that they are forming judgments that are incorrect based on limited experience. I mean either you will consider this or you won't, but you seem to be saying that there is no need to consider the possibiity because some people can have good insights with limited experiences (sometimes, I might add).
I think you mean shouldn't in the first sentence, yeah?

And yes, I do have to agree with you to a certain extent; however, those incorrect judgements can be sorted out by arguing which is how we can check our reasoning. We can always point to a further experience and a further experience and more uncertainties but does that actually invalidate anything?

Quote :
They are afraid to notice that they believe in this rule. If you watch how they act you can see how much they defend, pre-empt attacks, etc.
Yes, they act in the ways that confirm what I am saying while denying that what I'm saying is true.

For instance on another forum (http://iloveopinions.com/index.php?topic=1964.570 I am No-one) there was a person (W.C.) who denied that discussion is an activity of dominance based on right/wrong and winning/losing, but, of course, as soon as he started discussing the very question with me, he immediately began trying to win and dominate me using various tactics and strategies. Pretty amusing.

Quote :
No. In the airy abstract realm we're in you 'could' be right. But no, you are wrong.

This says nothing.

It's not so abstract to me. I am talking about real behaviour in life.

Quote :
You could just say that you know you are right and you refuse to consider the possibility that I have experienced something different.
For that to be an argument you would have to explain what the experience is and how it is different.

I mean experience itself is a dominating. It's an imposition of yourself, your bodily form. Any movement is a conquering of various forces, an imposing. I use Satyr's example from the last page: to breathe is to rend.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
kriswest
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Number of posts : 264
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:07 am

Unreasonable wrote:
kriswest wrote:
Ok, disgust and jealousy directed at who by whom? Is the attacker jealous or disgusted? Or are you talking about an outside male seeing this event happen??
I am talking about the entire universe outside the male-ego observing the event as 'cruel'. That is Injustice!

It is when a person kills an insect ... just because he can. It redefined and represents futility, death, and all that we hate about ourselves & everything.

And this does not apply to females, because frankly, men don't see women as responsible for themselves. And I believe that's validated.

Now I have to thank you for that response,, I had to laugh so hard I needed to use the restroom.
You know I can't rise to that oh so obvious bait. Coming from you its too darn funny. I know we disagree on things but, that one went over the top, you little funny troll lol! Merry Christmas right back at you!!!!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:29 am

kriswest wrote:
Unreasonable wrote:
kriswest wrote:
Ok, disgust and jealousy directed at who by whom? Is the attacker jealous or disgusted? Or are you talking about an outside male seeing this event happen??
I am talking about the entire universe outside the male-ego observing the event as 'cruel'. That is Injustice!

It is when a person kills an insect ... just because he can. It redefined and represents futility, death, and all that we hate about ourselves & everything.

And this does not apply to females, because frankly, men don't see women as responsible for themselves. And I believe that's validated.

Now I have to thank you for that response,, I had to laugh so hard I needed to use the restroom.
You know I can't rise to that oh so obvious bait. Coming from you its too darn funny. I know we disagree on things but, that one went over the top, you little funny troll lol! Merry Christmas right back at you!!!!!
you have to understand that he is Aidan McMiserble.
He's a hypocrite, and that is why he accuses all of being impostors.
He is feminine, and that is why he perceives his denial of life as masculine.

He grabs onto justice as a plea for leniency because he is troubled by the indifference of natural selection and blind chance...like killing ants under your feet just by strolling in the park.

He cannot deal with this uncertainty - it fills him with anxiety and so he calls it unjust.

And who is the judge?
Well, if it isn't God, then he is.

It is unjust to him, therefore there is universal injustice...and life is miserable.

He has a conception of an ideal existence, with no suffering, no death, no injustice, like a child's fairy tale - utopia.


He is so weak that he does not even understand that suffering is life and pleasure but a temporary reprieve...He cannot cope with this fact and sop he accuses anyone that an of being a liar.

He must excuse his own inability to tolerate suffering, because one man's suffering is anther's...nothing.
Suffering is subjective.

One person, being raised in a sheltered environment, finds not owning a car a hell on earth. Another finds the fact that he go to eat that day, heaven on Earth.
It's all about habituation and individual levels of weakness.

To a man 200 lbs is heavy...to an ass it is not as heavy....to an elephant it is barely noticeable.

In the end it is just about that...getting noticed.

The baby that cries gets the bottle...and he whines, and cries and bitches and screams for attention.

His ideas are naive, simplistic and childish, but he feels the need to post them everywhere.

He is an absolutist thinker...cannot think with nuance.
He is Nihilist, he wants to spread his hatred so as to not feel shamed about his own.

This is not intended as an insult but he is psychologically and mentally stunted...retarded.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
kriswest
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Number of posts : 264
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:19 am

Ok so UR is Aidan, Realunoriginal is UR, then joker was is who? You all ought to be decent and keep one personna, hiding behind multiple names has no honor. In all the forums I have been to I keep the same. If I get banned then I never bother with them again, they would not be worth my effort. So why the games with names? What causes folks to do that?
Ego,, Ornriness, ? I can understand being downright ornery, but ego? No.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
creasy
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 75
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:18 am

Advocatus Diaboli wrote:
I would say that is a fault of his reasoning not his lack of experience. If he has experience with even only one chair made of wood or plastic then he should conclude that chairs can be made of a material workable enough to form and hard enough to sit on, not that it can only be made of wood or plastic.
And perhaps you would have been one of the few people who would have said to physicists, even before the double slit experiments, that light could be BOTH a wave and a particle at the same time. For even the geniuses their rationality said either or.

Quote :
For instance on another forum (http://iloveopinions.com/index.php?topic=1964.570 I am No-one) there was a person (W.C.) who denied that discussion is an activity of dominance based on right/wrong and winning/losing, but, of course, as soon as he started discussing the very question with me, he immediately began trying to win and dominate me using various tactics and strategies. Pretty amusing.
I can see how you use limited experience to support your claims.

Quote :
This says nothing.

It's not so abstract to me. I am talking about real behaviour in life.
And convincing yourself abstractly and defending limited experience.
Quote :

For that to be an argument you would have to explain what the experience is and how it is different.
Actually, no. At no point have you given the slightest indication that you are open to the possibility that your mentalizing could be limited. For me to go forward and describe and experience - which you can then project your model onto and thus easily convince yourself that REALLY it is the same, again without experience - would be pretty silly.

You can let us know if you have an anomalous experience that actually makes you consider the possibility that your ideas are not covering all of reality. Until then discussion seems moot to me.

Take care.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Advocatus Diaboli
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Male
Number of posts : 68
Age : 29
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:21 am

Why should I have to be open to the possibility that my mentalizing could be limited? Frankly, who cares what I think could be wrong or right?

If you think I am wrong then you should convince me that I am wrong, you should change my mind. Do you only argue with people who already agree with you?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:36 am

maryshelley wrote:
Unreasonable wrote:
misterhamtastic wrote:
social correctness limits us from seeking to achieve any goal we choose, from becoming an astronaut to raping and torturing the elderly...
Yes.

So no personal responsibilities then? No effort on the part of the individual to do or not do according to our, *ahem* appetities?

Responsibility is a moral code word.

How can one be responsible for an existence that is already pre-determined?

We are biologically determined and all of existence is determined too.

To say that a human is responsible for anything is a joke. We are all biologically programmed.

To say that human beings are responsible for specific actions is absurd as saying a robot is responsible for it's actions since it is a empty vessel programmed by another thus being powerless in the face of whatever actions it takes.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:42 am

kriswest wrote:
Why is it that injuring someone weaker has so much appeal to some? It certainly does not give proof of dominance or strength, it only proves that they are weak and weak minded.

Survival and evolution is the devouring of another creature or organism for your own benefit.

That's just the way things are.

You describing someone as weak or weak minded as a moral judgement I believe is the eponymy of weakness.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:55 am

creasy wrote:
The Fool wrote:
Isn't interesting that without evil there can be no good and that the so called righteous infact need someone to defame in order to exist in the first place where there cannot be one without the other?
Aren't you defaming the righteous? IOW haven't you just come up with a new evil. You call it righteous and you define it as those who split the world into good and evil.

Instead you have the ___________(people like you who think there is no good or evil, perhaps) and the righteous.

Is this really different?

How so?

Yes I do defame the righteous because in my eyes there is no good or evil, right and wrong.

To me there is only grey leaving the definitions of good and evil as useless superstitions of the weak or delusional.

(Good, evil, it's all the same to me. There is no difference between the two. The difference alluded is an illusion.)

One man's good is another man's evil and one man's evil is another man's good.


Last edited by The Fool on Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
kriswest
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Number of posts : 264
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:28 am

The Fool wrote:
kriswest wrote:
Why is it that injuring someone weaker has so much appeal to some? It certainly does not give proof of dominance or strength, it only proves that they are weak and weak minded.

Survival and evolution is the devouring of another creature or organism for your own benefit.

That's just the way things are.
Ok , sure false ego infalting is a benifit.... I get it.
You describing someone as weak or weak minded as a moral judgement I believe is the eponymy of weakness.

You do realize you just called yourself weak right?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MagnetMan
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Number of posts : 235
Registration date : 2008-12-19

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:18 pm

misterhamtastic wrote:
I don't understand. Isn't "evil" the antithesis of "good"? Aren't these properties relative to the person perceiving them? If so, what purpose is there in avoiding "evil" and embracing "good", except to limit us to a societally correct life?

An atomic universe is dynamic because of negative and positive polarities.
The symbolism of yin/yang by Taoist metaphysicians provides a clearer understanding of "good" and "evil" than do kabbalists.
There are natural forces of non-trespass that go to the heart of nuclear physics.
Right and wrong cannot be analysed.
Matter is energy
Energy is consciousness.
The sanctity of every atom is inviolate.
The right side of the brain has the ability to intuit trespass on any atomic associatiion.
It releases an electrical impulse that makes one feel "uneasy" when trespassing.
For instance - a fragile artifact "asks" you to be careful and not to drop it.
The higher your level of consciousness is, the more careful you are.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
creasy
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 75
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Fri Dec 19, 2008 3:34 pm

The Fool wrote:
creasy wrote:
The Fool wrote:
Isn't interesting that without evil there can be no good and that the so called righteous infact need someone to defame in order to exist in the first place where there cannot be one without the other?
Aren't you defaming the righteous? IOW haven't you just come up with a new evil. You call it righteous and you define it as those who split the world into good and evil.

Instead you have the ___________(people like you who think there is no good or evil, perhaps) and the righteous.

Is this really different?

How so?

Yes I do defame the righteous because in my eyes there is no good or evil, right and wrong.

To me there is only grey leaving the definitions of good and evil as useless superstitions of weak or delusional.

(Good, evil, it's all the same to me. There is no difference between the two. The difference alluded is an illusion.)

One man's good is another man's evil and one man's evil is another man's good.
But it seems implicit that you are saying the righteous are wrong. If you think they are wrong and you are right, how is your system different?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:13 pm

creasy wrote:
The Fool wrote:
creasy wrote:
The Fool wrote:
Isn't interesting that without evil there can be no good and that the so called righteous infact need someone to defame in order to exist in the first place where there cannot be one without the other?
Aren't you defaming the righteous? IOW haven't you just come up with a new evil. You call it righteous and you define it as those who split the world into good and evil.

Instead you have the ___________(people like you who think there is no good or evil, perhaps) and the righteous.

Is this really different?

How so?

Yes I do defame the righteous because in my eyes there is no good or evil, right and wrong.

To me there is only grey leaving the definitions of good and evil as useless superstitions of weak or delusional.

(Good, evil, it's all the same to me. There is no difference between the two. The difference alluded is an illusion.)

One man's good is another man's evil and one man's evil is another man's good.

But it seems implicit that you are saying the righteous are wrong. If you think they are wrong and you are right, how is your system different?

It then becomes a matter of relative interpretation and preference somthing that the opposing side never takes within consideration.

The opposing side ignores interpretation and preference that centers around relativity choosing the alternative of a solipstic absolutism where there only exists the duality of good or evil by the faith of their invented purpose where anything else including a existence of nihilism cannot be.

I admit that both dichotomies are very similar but alteast I have an understanding as to why people want to believe in the illusions of good and evil for closure in that I try to understand my opposition.

In contrast those who believe in the fallacies of concrete absolute forms of good and evil don't even try to understand people who oppose such superstitions.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
Aidan_Mclaren
Potential Contributor
Potential Contributor


Male
Number of posts : 41
Age : 30
Location : Australia
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:42 pm

Satyr, why is it not plainly obvious that you hate life?

You hate life because it is against you. You even said hatred is the feeling of something threatening you.

So why, if the whole world is set against your existence, do you persist with the notion that you don't hate it?

You are retarded. No, that isn't an insult; it's an accurate observation.

So feel privileged to know that you aren't an imposter! Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:58 pm

Aidan_Mclaren wrote:
Satyr, why is it not plainly obvious that you hate life?

You hate life because it is against you. You even said hatred is the feeling of something threatening you.

So why, if the whole world is set against your existence, do you persist with the notion that you don't hate it?

You are retarded. No, that isn't an insult; it's an accurate observation.

So feel privileged to know that you aren't an imposter! Rolling Eyes

Keep your arguements with Satyr in the designated thread you have created between you two as this post is off topic from the original one set for this thread.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Embracing Evil   

Back to top Go down
 
Embracing Evil
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» [b]VIDEO STORES EVIL SPIRITS HAVEN??????[/b]
» Dream of Old woman turning evil at sunset-other witnesses....
» a man with tatoos, evil spirits behind a curtain
» Dream of Church, funeral/euology,Pastor changing into an evil woman-Aged associate Pastor
» Evil man at the window

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Dissidents Philosophy Forum :: Religiosity-
Jump to: