|
|
| Normal Rooms | | General | 4 users
AntiStaticCleaningWi, melinda_halliwell_tu, Mistress_SinisterLov, littlegothgirlthatco |
|
|
|
|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 20 guests online !
|
|
|
 |
 |
Forums
You are not logged in | | |
|
|
|
Dolorosa
Extreme Fanatic   Posts: 856 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
 posted on 25/10/2005 at 05:31 AM |
I'm so cool I crap flaming baby jesuses riding wolverines! I'm so cool that
when I sneeze four year olds freeze and the Japanese make card games out of
my snot.
I can punch out god, impregnate a star and laugh poison nerve gas.
When I walk, the ground shys away from me, because it is not as cool as
I...and thus I have to fly, which I can do...because I am that cool.
Step up! You've been served! ____________________
In the valley of the Goats, the Goat Fucker is King
|
| |
| |
Dolorosa
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 856 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
 posted on 7/2/2006 at 05:44 AM |
Gothicmormon is so cool he once completely sidelined an entire forum
thread...
true story.
hehe. ____________________
In the valley of the Goats, the Goat Fucker is King
|
| |
W0rmW00d
Fanatic   Posts: 355 Registered: 5/8/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/2/2006 at 12:16 PM |
I don't think that the subjugated group would develop the idea of evil, as
such, it would be overlaid by the subjugating group in order to create the
shame etc that is the internal justification for ethical issues. If there
is no normative ethical base then this internal value system is its only
base, therefore if it does not exist it needs imposing. Over generations
(as few as two or three, I would imagine, although it depends on the scale
of the populations) it will become the only value system known to the
group and thus their good/evil concepts will arise.
Step 1 - Two groups, group1 and group2, two ideas of good, good1 and good2,
neutral concepts, and what shouldn't be done for expedient reasons, bad1
and bad2.
Step 2 - Group1 takes over group2 and needs its good1 to take precedent
over good2. It is notable that all conquering groups attempt to impose
their value systems upon others. Often, indeed, it is the reason for
conquering (or at least has been since the Judaic religions became the most
prevalent)
Step 3 - the 2 of good2 is discouraged, outlawed or otherwise designated
'evil' by group1 as are the bads, in order to impose this internal
justification.
Step 4 - Generations of knowing the moral system designed above lead it to
become unquestioned as the original reason for it becomes subsumed by
mythology, routine and all of the other things that makes any ethical
system stick.
This seems to make sense. There are, of course, assumptions, but each of
these steps is derived from a real life model. The motives I give will have
been given differently by group1 and group2, but there is certainly a
pattern of using ethics in this way throughout history.
Human thoughts are beleived to be two dimensional at the moment. I agree
that there are other motives, and motive has a part to play in the
definition of good and evil in most value systems (at least all which I
have studied), but it is not a part of the same spectrum. I do not thnk
that good and evil are generally motivational forces in many cases. It is
very rare that one would ever decide that 'I am going to be evil, now what
shall I do?'
Right isn't the same as good. Right is a subjective, context based concept,
whereas good is intended as an absolute, objective value, although we all
know how often that is the case.... ____________________
Eritis sicut Deus scientes bonum et malum.
And the third angel sounded, and a troll army did descend upon the world.
|
| |
callei
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 31/1/2006 at 04:29 PM |
W- I am sorry i misread that part. that whole section of your post read, to
me, as predicated on LOTS of assumptions, intrenched and only partically
acknowledged assumptions at that, again to my eyes and i responded with
alot of assumtions on my part.
IF two or more groups of people had a concept of "Good" and then one of
those groups got subgugated by another, HOW does it follow that the
subjugated group would develop the idea of evil? why not shame? why not
envy? or, in this "good/evil" paradiem do those states of being, or motive
forces come from somewhere else and not fall into that same line of
good---evil?
Also, Humans exist in Time (meaning 4 dimensions), or at least relate to
each other using the medium of time. Would not thier motive forces also
have more than 2 points? if you use a point on the good---evil line and a
point in time, that is only 3 dimensions. not the implied necessary 4 using
the 4+ dimensional model of the universe that western culture uses these
days. You cant use the human as the fourth point since the arguement is
that good and evil are seperate and independant of humanity themselves.
There are at least 6 billion people on the planet. At least 1/3 (ok yes i
agree, less than 1/3 does use this good evil thingy, but you dont argue
that in the middle of the good/evil arguement, at least not after making a
plea to pick one nit at a time) of those dont have or use the good-evil
stick to measure actions or motives. Yet it is still a valid way to process
life information.
Just to toss up another concept here... Is right action the same as
good?
(giggle) ____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
|
| |
W0rmW00d
Fanatic Posts: 355 Registered: 5/8/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 31/1/2006 at 01:15 PM |
I didn't say that the subjugation was evil, I said that the concept of evil
was imposed upon incompatible values within the subjugated ethical
system.
I don't agree that anything boredom related can be characterised in the
terms you describe.
When an action is described as thoughtless, one does not say that the act
itself was without thought since that would be nonsensical, but that it was
thoughtlessly acted, I have never encountered such a use of boredom in the
use of romance languages I have learnt. Similarly an ation could be
performed through boredom and yet one would still be able to attribute a
good or evil value. Far from binary, one can scale it from one to one
hundred, or any other scale with as many arbitrary points in between
absolutes (in as far as they exist), but one cannot scale it from one to
one hundred and include 'G.' G may cause 5 to be pushed to 10, similarly 50
may have mitigated L to a mere K, but they are seperate entities. ____________________
Eritis sicut Deus scientes bonum et malum.
And the third angel sounded, and a troll army did descend upon the world.
|
| |
callei
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 30/1/2006 at 05:07 PM |
While I can see your point about the development of good and evil, it makes
some assumptions about which I am uneasy. For example, why is it “evil” for
one group to subjugate another group rather than a neutral occurrence
(survival of the fittest) like subjugating a group of animals or plants
(agriculture and husbandry)? After all, if the conquers’ way of doing
things makes them more fit to their time and place, then isn’t it a “good”
thing to impose that better way of doing things? As a side note, I doubt
there is anything less moral than a moral code, but I do truly digress.
Though we tend to not speak of boredom as a property in and of itself, that
is merely a limitation of our language, not a limitation of boredom. Other
languages (romance languages at least) Do allow boredom to be used the same
way we linguistically use good and evil. And we often say an action is
thoughtless (not paying attention) or careless. To rob boredom of its due
and pass its measure to evil or good is to cheapen human experience. We as
people are more interesting than binary code (good and evil) and to use
that monochrome framework to explain the human gestalt is to lose much of
what it means and feels like to be human. I, at least, have felt the power
of boredom far more often than I have that of EVIL or GOOD and I have
certainly seen more careless, thoughtless actions than I have both good and
evil lumped together.
And it is easy to blend the conversations of "good vs evil" and "god" and
"moral codes" and "ethics" and those semi related topic, just like it is
easy to blend the conversations of "sex vs chasity" and "lust vs love" and
"what is love" adn those semi related things. But it is more fun, at least
in the mastubatory sense, to pick each nit one at a time.
____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
|
| |
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 29/1/2006 at 07:26 AM |
My, getting a bit off-topic, aren't we? I guess it's partially my
fault!
I personally have mostly ceased to think in terms of right and wrong, but
rather in terms of what is condusive or not condusive to acheiving my goals
and becoming the person I want to be. I do not lie because A.) it is too
easy to screw yourself over by getting caught, B.) I do not enjoy the
feeling of lying, and C.) I DO enjoy the feeling and benefits of being a
straight-forward, reliable person.
I also no longer tend to get too upset if someone else does something I
would not do myself. I am not so naive that I think everyone is going to
use the methods I would choose to acheive the goals I would choose. In
fact, I am quite aware that there are people who enjoy interfering with
others and causing them pain. However, this does not mean that I will sit
with folded hands and sigh "Ah, I'm sure they are only doing what they feel
they need to do." Because my goals do not include being a sitting duck.
And my methods definitely include some basic defensive and evasive
maneuvering, and, when necessary, a touch of the well-directed
counter-offensive. And hopefully, the opposing person will realize that
continuing in their present course of action is not accommplishing THEIR
goals, and try their business elsewhere, where they can find someone whose
goals seem to include becoming a victim.
But "right" and "wrong"? "Good" and "evil"? Those are words for those who
have the goal of controlling other people, or of allowing themselves to be
controlled by others.
Those who truly have the goal of pursuing actions labelled as "evil" are
not going to be deterred by definitions such as these. And those who have
a goal of pursuing "good" actions are only going to be hampered by wasting
time evaluating if what they are doing is really "good" or not. The only
person who benefits from these terms are those who have trouble figuring
out what they REALLY want to be or to get from life. It sets a course of
action for them that will hopefully cause a minimum of needless suffering
for themselves and others.
Perhaps, given the countless numbers of sheep that inhabit this world, it
is necessary to have such an artificial set-up in place to minimize chaos
and keep them out of the thinking people's hair. But since my goals don't
include being a shepherd of sheep, then I really don't concern myself too
much with such things.
____________________
"You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and the
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism"
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic  Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 28/1/2006 at 06:29 PM |
Whenever my old buddy Freidrich could be pulled down out of his loft, he
always chastised me to get beyond good and evil. But, since he was a grown
man who spent most of his days pouting in the belfry, I'll just call him a
crank. Hmmm... this attitude seems to be prevalent amongst manic
depressives now that I'm considering that. I remember that little wussy
from Denmark that used to mope around the hallways and never complained
about the playground beatings because "...there is nothing either good or
bad, but thinking makes it so". Oh, god, and then there was whiny little
Danish Søren... always with the Sickness Unto Death, and the
Stop With the Kicking and his epic work, I Just Know It's
Malignant.
But enough with the obscure, dead Europeans and their whinging.
I look at the good and evil question this way *tilting my head to the side
and squinting*: There is no such thing as dark or cold. Dark is the
absence of light, and cold is the absence of heat. Neither have an
independent existence. Similarly, there is no good. Good is the default
setting when some shithead doesn't wander by to screw things up. My day
doesn't have to be filled with lottery wins and hours of great sex... as
long as my creditors have remained at bay, I call it a "good" thing. ____________________
"I believe that woman is planning to shoot me again."
|
| |
W0rmW00d
Fanatic Posts: 355 Registered: 5/8/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 28/1/2006 at 04:38 AM |
What I find strange is the argument often given within these debates:
Without evil there can be no good. I am not sure if this is a
misunderstanding of the comparative nature of good and evil as opposites,
or whether people really, truly beleive that in a world with a normative
moral basis that something defined as good would cease to be good if all
evil was wiped out of existence. It is also one of those ersatz nihilist
points of view, 'Oh, how negative I am, if an ultimate victory is achieved
then defeat is assured.' It simply doesn't follow that dark should cease to
exist because light no longer shines (ok, I know, not a strictly analogous
argument due to the fact that good and bad are opposite, rather than one
being an absence of the other).
With regards to whether the chicken or the egg took precedence, I would say
that evil must have followed good, unless there is an absolute moral
framework (which I have yet to find evidence of) in which case they came
into existence siultaneously. My reasoning for evil following good is
simply that as the two are comparative one relies on the other for its
definition and it seems to me that, given the development, as far as is
known, of human life on this planet that a concept of evil would not have
come about until larger social groups started to collide. Good is doing
something for someone, whereas a leadership challenge amongst a tribal
group, or the death of someone would have been a neutral occurence until
the imposition of leadership upon other groups, and their subjugation
required the related imposition of the superior group's 'moral' code. May
not be right, but it seems to make sense.
Callei, I disagree with you that you can group bored, busy good and evil
together. They are states of being as well, but in this case good and evil
must surely be a property of an action, whether it be inherent or acquired.
It is very difficult to refer to actions as not paying attention, though
they are often attributed the quality of good or evil. I hear what you are
saying, though. Mental masturbation moral discussion may be, but it is an
important masturbatory experience. The questioning of our groundings for
beleif is easily facilitated by ethical debate because it is applicable and
often reductable to the very bases for dogmas, points of view etc. ____________________
Eritis sicut Deus scientes bonum et malum.
And the third angel sounded, and a troll army did descend upon the world.
|
| |
callei
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 17/1/2006 at 08:32 AM |
most of those arguements about good and evil forget or ignore that fact
that there are other states as well like bored, not paying attention,
asleep, and birth. I think that is why i find them all so funny. "is it
evil to kill someone" sometimes it is, but sometimes its logical or kind or
an accident or incidental. Good and Evil rarely impact a person's day, in
my experience. unhappy, happy, waiting, and busy happen much more often and
are less debated.
maybe cuz its hard to debate the roll of bordom in a meaningful life. Is
being busy "stronger" than being asleep? is happiness or bordom or
unhappiness our natural state and is there a higher power leading us to not
pay attention? see what i mean. good and evil gets more debate time, just
like porn gets more play than "basic skills needed to please yourself and
others in bed". cuz its not as real and present (for most of us at least) ____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and
vampires
/>
away.
|
| |
gothicmorman
Fanatic  Posts: 233 Registered: 11/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/1/2006 at 01:48 AM |
yeah i enjoyed that song when i was smaller... and in church.. and all
innocent and jazz like that. >.>
sort of offhand - i am taking part in a little debate thing on another
forum about "Good" and "Evil" (good and bad). The original question being
which is stronger? but then we got into what is good and what is evil then?
and it has been pointed out that they are really just adjectives to
describe what we agree and disagree with considering the fact that its all
a matter of perspective. It is kind of a fun debate because there are many
members that are quite young and still have the "bad is bad and good is
good duh" approach so in my last post i asked one to define what
characteristics or marterial objects were "Good" in every scenario because
he have this really simple answer that good came first and would prevail
and evil was a warped and twisted version of good and would die out. - so
what really came first? the chicken or the egg?
|
| |
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/1/2006 at 03:19 AM |
Damn, that brings back memories! We didn't sing the verse about the Devil
sitting on a tack. (The Devil being a Force to be Reckoned with, and not
an appropriate subject for Levity.) But we did sing "I have the beautiful
belief that will baffle the Bolsheviks" (a nice tongue-twister, and
apparently it's OK to laugh at Bolsheviks), and "I have the wonderful love
of my Blessed Redeemer way down in the depths of my heart." Which, of
course, was supposed to be sang with increasing speed with hilarious
results.
Ahh, the good old days, where good was good and bad was bad, and if you
weren't sure, you could ask a minister and he would tell you what to do.
Of course, it says something for the good old days that singing that song
was one of the high points. *sigh*
[Edited on 1/5/2006 by Schizo] ____________________
"You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and the
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest
of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism"
|
| |
MystryssRavynDarque
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 648 Registered: 24/9/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 4/1/2006 at 03:48 PM |
Hahaha I like that "joy joy joy down in your stomach" comment. It takes me
back to my days of singing "I've got the joy joy joy down in my heart,
where, down in my heart, where, down in my heart. If the Devil doesn't like
it he can sit on a tack, what, sit on a tack, what sit on a tack."
____________________
"People always say what we are looking for is a meaning for life…I don't
think that's what we're looking for. I think what we're looking for is the
experience of being alive." -Joseph Campbell
|
| |
gothicmorman
Fanatic Posts: 233 Registered: 11/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/12/2005 at 11:57 AM |
thats pretty spiffy...
did it give you the joy joy joy down in your stomach?
when you crapped did it sing praises to god?
|
| |
Dolorosa
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 856 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 20/12/2005 at 07:36 PM |
| Once I ate an entire bible... ____________________
In the valley of the Goats, the Goat Fucker is King
|
| |
gothicmorman
Fanatic Posts: 233 Registered: 11/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 18/12/2005 at 06:51 AM |
it doesn't really matter now.... none of us are comparibly cool anyway.
|
| |
dead-cell
Fanatic  Posts: 344 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 16/12/2005 at 08:28 PM |
| Damn it all! I had one all prepared... wait, that doesn't sound cool. ____________________
co-worker: "Your gay!?"
myself: "Didn't you see my rainbow pin?"
co-worker: "I just thought you liked skettles."
-(yes, it actually happened to me)
|
| |
pale-face
Fanatic  Posts: 478 Registered: 22/9/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 16/12/2005 at 02:57 PM |
| game set and match. with 2 words. devin is oviously the coolest. ____________________
fucking classy.
|
| |
Dolorosa
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 856 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/11/2005 at 05:34 AM |
Oddly enough I have taken his name in vain, quite recently...actually,
right after reading that.
it went something like this..."Devin damn it...you win...bastard." 
baha! ____________________
In the valley of the Goats, the Goat Fucker is King
|
| |
gothicmorman
Fanatic Posts: 233 Registered: 11/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 29/10/2005 at 05:38 PM |
thats what happens when you have a god on the site eh?
Devin is so cool that he doesn't even have to say he is cool, we just know.
|
| |
|
|
|
