AVICENNA A.D., can you provide a valid link to what Anslem claims? I would like to read his words, not an interpretation.
His name was Job.
Most religious texts, similar to this parable, reveal a rather irrational, emotional, jealous God.
BTW: Islam rejects the anthromorporphic view of God that the Torah or Old Testament reveal.
I say this because Thirst4metal, at least I think it was thirst, discussed this in this thread.
[quote="Dr.Satanical
Another cynic, and I agree.
Anslem was moulded by his culture and papist beliefs, hence his philosophy regarding justice, free will, etc. If he was born in Medieval Japan, he would not have any idea of free will, Christianity, or justice, as justice was meted out by the ruling Shogun. The Shogun’s idea of justice would be to continue to hold sway over his fiefdom.
Humans, their language, culture, religions usually stems from within society’s social norms.
This whole debate appears to revolve around monotheistic ideals regarding how monotheists rationalize what is justice from their social lens. Pagans probably would see justice and free will from another lens.
I believe this audience understands.
Smiles,
A Deist
Aspacia, I only have Anselm’s works in hard copies. I do not use the internet in reading philosophy. Sorry.
No, I usually do not either, but I could not find any reference to him in my hardbacks.
A good practical example of this is your common crack head. The crack head becomes aware that he is a crack head. Does it make him any better off knowing that he is a crack head than when he was in absolute denial if he refuses to take the needed actions to break his cycle of addiction? No. If just being aware of something was all there was to justice and prasieworthiness, then philosophy degrees would actually be worth more than the paper they are printed on…Philosophers are no better than those who choose hapiness when they think that simply “being aware” constitutes any real virtue. If I pull out a gun and threaten to shoot an innocent person infront of you and you do nothing, you are just as bad (from the stand point of justice) as me. You are aware that allowing me to shoot the person is unjust, but due to your fear and love for self-preservation you are unable to throw yourself at me to stop me from shooting your neighbor. In this same sense, most peace advocates are just as unenlightened as the dictators they “oppose”, because they’ll verbally denounce them from a safe distance, but will allow them to kill whoever they want.
Actually, I tend to agree with you, this is one of the main reasons I am moving to another state, because the California teaching system is unjust. Most administrators are more concerned with their paychecks and avoiding lawsuits than teaching. It is a crime that they do not prepare students for the real world and to not enforce standards. Instead, if students show up (and the school collects its ADA$) said students are passed from grade to grade with zip skills. Then I have them in a college classroom. 
Would you apply to analogy to Iraq? Just asking. I am still furious regarding King George W.'s lies, but the Iraqis were under a brutal dictator. Considering what has happened there, I am not sure it is worth the blood and gold we have poured into this war. Is it a just or unjust war by your standards? What would Anslem say regarding this?
I know what many Europeans believe, but they turned over and took it in the chops with Hitler. You cannot appease a greed megalomaniac.
HuntedChild:
The point is, even the crack head can act on uprightness for its own sake. The important thing to take away from Anselm here is that he has the capacity to choose, he acts voluntarily, even if by habit. He is not acting as an ant does for example, purely on DNA encoding and instinct. Rather, the crack head acts on his will to his own happiness, to satisfy himself, whilst he can choose otherwise, not discounting the insurmountable conditions against him physiologically and otherwise. Nevertheless, I find Anselm’s claim regarding acting on uprightness and humans as defended.
The consequence of your thought, HuntedChild, is quite a strong assertion. Namely, that a crackhead does not have free will. You must understand that this is an ambitious statement to make. You are charging that he has been reduced to the state of an insect/lower order animal for instance. As for the rest of your post, I do not see its relevance or productive relationship to the topic of this thread.
Okay, it is a choice, but do humans really have a choice regarding the culture, and the cultural biases they inherit?
Certainly not. But the topic is about free will in itself, and its consequences on an All Good God vs. determinism, the Problem of Evil…not about socialization. Recognizing the distinction between the two subjects, let me respond to your thought by saying that inheriting a culture and acting on it are very different. We as humans have the sacred faculty of reflection and skepticism/criticism. The path I assume your thought takes in your mind is that, pardon the incomplexity of this characterization, that we are somewhat slaves to our nurture. Am I correct in assessing your view?
No, humans make choices, but often these choices are restricted to the confines of the social norms they live in. For example, kamakazi pilots flew suicide missions knowing that they would die and were willing to. The Allies often committed acts of heroism and suicide in the heat of battle, and without forethought. Doolittle’s force to deal a blow to Japanese security was a long shot, but there was a chance for survival.
I am suggesting that cognizant humans (excluding the insane) make choices within their social norms. A Shogan could order a man or woman to kill his or her children, and they would choose to do so as this was acceptable in their culture.
Even Tim McVey made a choice within in social norm in that he believed he was fighting against the US government’s infringement on his civil liberties. This stem back to the US revolution.
Would you or I do the same? I know I would not. I would try to escape with my child/children and seek revenge.
I wonder if any of our recent members would care to comment on this topic…
-Thirst
Mooo…
I wanted to say that, and this:
[size=134]The karmic-amalgam is one’s entire passed. This literally goes back to before one’s conception, as whatever was responsible for the parent’s existence is also going to go through them, and effect their children, etc. Bits and pieces of all time and the entire world – dig into, connect with, alter or effect the individual self. It would not be easy to calm the storming seas of human history, as their shadows dance upon the wall of the inner-self; who knows how long these forces have been repeating themselves in the same, old, unenlightened cycles? The mind must free itself from its passed, its future and its present. Enlightenment is similar to the burning sun, in that it is needed for growth and life; it does not suddenly happen and then end, but instead, it fuels and empowers growth in a special and constant way. Blame is only useful when clarifying the understanding of origin, whereas everything inside of you is your responsibility, whether it is “your fault” or not.[/size]