Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 9354 Location: Village of Idiots
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 5:50 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
AlwaysThere wrote:
I will for the sake of time take this to an illogical extreme on order to prove a point. OK - murder and rape "work for me", and if it does work for me then it should be my right to do so.
It looks like you are talking about behavior, and not belief there.
So I don't really see your point in the context of discussing beliefs. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 5:57 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
Ludi wrote:
AlwaysThere wrote:
I will for the sake of time take this to an illogical extreme on order to prove a point. OK - murder and rape "work for me", and if it does work for me then it should be my right to do so.
It looks like you are talking about behavior, and not belief there.
So I don't really see your point in the context of discussing beliefs.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 9354 Location: Village of Idiots
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:00 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
Harmful beliefs lead to harmful behaviors, is that what you're saying?
How does this tie into the subject of this thread? Do you feel buddhism leads to harmful behaviors? _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 9354 Location: Village of Idiots
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:11 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
I'm still not seeing how AlwaysThere's response about the rape and murder answers your question, Big Tex. Maybe you can explain it?
Sorry.
What is the "reality" and who decides what the standard of "reality" is?
_________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:25 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
Ludi wrote:
I'm still not seeing how AlwaysThere's response about the rape and murder answers your question, Big Tex. Maybe you can explain it?
Sorry.
What is the "reality" and who decides what the standard of "reality" is?
BigTex has no standard of any kind, it is "whatever works". I accept the Bible as absolute truth which is what determines a persons reality and worldview.
BigTex also believes the Bible cannot be understood by a rational person and seeks "gray areas" instead of focusing on the understandable truth claims. Instead he questions silly anominalies like one Gospel speaking of the dead rising while others do not, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the Bibles central theme of the Sinner's relationship to God. That is the message of the Bible.
And to answer your question about the eyewitness accounts BigTex, the answer is no, there is no reason to not take the Bible literally because eyewitness accoutns differ...They are testimonies, not audio/video recordings.
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 2625 Location: Memphis Dojo
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:08 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
Ludi wrote:
AlwaysThere wrote:
I will for the sake of time take this to an illogical extreme on order to prove a point. OK - murder and rape "work for me", and if it does work for me then it should be my right to do so.
It looks like you are talking about behavior, and not belief there.
So I don't really see your point in the context of discussing beliefs.
What entity would be in a position to recognize or grant a right such as AlwaysThere posits above?
A discussion of "rights" is actually pointless. There are no rights. Here's how I know: if you believe you have a right to something, just try telling that to someone who would have their freedom curtailed as a result of the exercise of your "right." When you assert that you have the right, the other party will simply say that you don't. Then you will appeal to the state and the state will assist you in the enforcement of your right through the coercive apparatus of the state. But you see that without the coercive power of the state behind you, there is no right. With the coercive power of the state behind you, you may have what look like "rights", but in fact they are just manifestations of the coercive power of the state--i.e., exercises of power.
With all that said, what type of government would use its coercive power to support a right such as the one you posit above--i.e., the right to rape and murder? The answer is no government would support such a right with its coercive power (unless perhaps it was an authoritarian regime like under Saddam Hussein or a similar arrangement). If a government did support such a right with its coercive power, then you would, in fact, have the rights you are talking about, however crazy that may sound.
So even though I think it was kind of a strawman example, it does raise interesting issues about the nature of "rights." _________________
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 2625 Location: Memphis Dojo
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:18 pm Post subject: Re: Peak Oil from a Buddhist perspective
AlwaysThere wrote:
BigTex has no standard of any kind, it is "whatever works". I accept the Bible as absolute truth which is what determines a persons reality and worldview.
"Whatever works" is actually the standard that I would have to say most of the world applies with respect to everything. Why would someone do something that doesn't work?
Quote:
BigTex also believes the Bible cannot be understood by a rational person and seeks "gray areas" instead of focusing on the understandable truth claims.
I am a rational person and I understand the Bible. I don't seek gray areas but if I see a gray area I may say "that's a gray area."
Quote:
Instead he questions silly anomalies like one Gospel speaking of the dead rising while others do not, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the Bibles central theme of the Sinner's relationship to God. That is the message of the Bible.
I agree with you regarding the central theme (sort of), but I don't agree that the example I cited is a "silly anomaly. That's the problem with the infallibility argument--it requires you to defend every word, which can't be done (and there wouldn't be any point in trying, in my opinion).
Quote:
And to answer your question about the eyewitness accounts BigTex, the answer is no, there is no reason to not take the Bible literally because eyewitness accounts differ...They are testimonies, not audio/video recordings.
There was also a 20-40 year lag between when the events were witnessed and when they were recorded, right?
As testimonies, the time delay is fine. But if you are going to take every word literally, you have to account for a bit of embellishment, a bit of bad memory and a bit of interpretation. That's just what happens when you are dealing with human beings. _________________
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
