Hi Tab,
Yes you can analyse yourself into paralysis, and many people do. They hit the wall of confusion and die. Wish they’d lie down and quit breathing our air… 
Still, there is something in our makeup that says, this is right and that is wrong. It doesn’t have to be connected to any ‘conventional’ explanation. It doesn’t necessarily have any explanation at all. Its just there. Trouble with that is that its all internal and we can’t get away from it. And we do our own counting…
JT
Tentative wrote:
… or the most difficult. 
On the subject of our “nature,” perhaps it is possible to see human nature as inherently good with the potential to live toward that goodness or to exhibit a tremendous lack of that potential? What I’m thinking toward here is, how do we perhaps say that creation is “good” as the poetic creators in Genesis 1 pronounced it, but not include human nature with the rest of creation? Are we aliens in our own cosmos? Of course, that is working with the premise that one believes there is something inherently “good” about creation itself.
Good to know - I can give myself the benefit of the doubt once in a while.
Are there any conclusions here about “The nature of our nature” ? What do you say then is our nature?
Hi Tab,
Oh no you don’t. No benefit of the doubt for you or me. We know who we are, and we don’t dare allow ourselves. Pennance, my friend, there is only pennance for us. 
Hello Noos,
I agree. There is no way we can look at our world and all that is in it and honestly say that creation is evil, or even neutral. Those who cannot see the benefience of life are choosing blindness. As a part of that creation, we too share in that ‘good’ if we will allow it to happen. We may grow in that goodness as well. There are many who will choose to ignore their potential for goodness and wither and die, but for those who choose life, goodness follows. Of course, this only applies for us romantics.
Iron Dog, I can only say for myself, but I’m not sure that we have an inherent ‘nature’ Like others here, I believe that we have the capacity to see and choose, but only if we allow that. To the extent that we live in dualism, we are prone to failing ourselves and others. That is readily apparent just by looking around one’s self. Few are those who transcend themselves and find sincerity, but for those few, goodness radiates from them.
JT
Does it go back to the old saw - “Those that know what is right, will do right…” And the intuitive knowledge bit…? I hope not, but I guess I can live with it if it is…
Hi Tab,
Without starting a free will argument, i would only add to that old saw that those who know right must choose right, to do right… Its the choosing that keeps us on the hook, and you don’t have to extend that very far to see that this entire forum is the constant back and forth about choosing and choices… knowing right from wrong is our tasking. Choosing is the agony and ecstacy of life.
JT
Lets cut to the chase,
What exactly are you getting at , are you having a dig at heaven and its seeming intentions?
Or are you saying man is a beast with ethics learned and justified only from the lumpen mass and there is no spirit or heaven?
Iron Dog,
I’m not really sure what you are seeing in my statements, but it would appear that you’re reading into them a great deal more than anything I have intended.
I need a bit more specificity from you. What are you suggesting?
JT
How ironic. LOL
I mean, what are you saying here exactly? Are you saying it is to our detriment that we are dualistic? What Are you saying about the fact that we are prone to failure? It is indicative of what?
A Buddha doesn’t observe precepts, doesn’t do good or evil , isn’t energetic or lazy. A Buddha is someone who does nothing, someone who can’t even focus his mind on a Buddha.
A Buddha isn’t a Buddha. Don’t think about Buddhas. If you dont see what I’m talking about, you’ll ever know your own mind. People who don’t see their nature and imagine they can practice thoughtlessness all the time are lairs and fools.
They fall into endless space. They’re like drunks. They can’t tell good from evil. If you intend to cultivate such a practice, you have to see your nature before you can put an end to rational thought. To attain enlightenment without seeing your nature is impossible.
Iron Dog,
I now see your question. If you would like a bit of irony. I’ll refer you to your last post in the morality thread.
Cut off talking and thinking… That which is transcendence… If we understand and accept this, then our presence in ILP represents what? 
We are hoisted on our own respective pitards…
JT
As I have always maintained. The world is in chaos because many people are not aware of the way. Yes we must talk and discuss, but only because some people are trying to find their way.
You know yourself what I am saying. Any club where one can be reformed is only a consequence of how we choose to live as people. And there are many clubs of reform.
Iron Dog,
The world is only chaotic from the individuals perspective. Yes, collectively, mankind creates many ill-suited ideas that does violence to the way, but the nature of the world is just what it is. Chaos is only of mind.
We talk and discuss because we are trying to find our way.
That we have company in this effort to grow is noted. But we do not, and cannot stand outside and look back in. No one grasps the way. We can only attempt to walk the path.
JT
Something of a tangent here. We were not discussing the reasons for why the world is chaotic, but the fact that it is. The relevant point I was making is that because it is, we need discourse on these things. But it may not always be that way.
Not so true to say that.
Some grasp but perhaps cannot explain or describe the way in its entirety.
The way is partly explained by many respected zen monks , daoist preists.
To say that the way is so mysterious and otherwordly that it cannot be talked about would be ridiculous.
Yes it is true to say you cannot explain the way. But its a bit like saying you cannot explain space. We can to a certain degree, even although the majority of space is dark matter and cant be studied. We can still say that we know space, and explain it.
Good vs. Bad?
I think these are abstract- there is no definition what is good and what is bad. Everything depends on the certain person- how he defines these words. A guy may thing somebody for good boy, but another person can tell, that he’s bad. The main idea is, that we can’t tell what is good and what is bad, because every singular person can define it his own way 
"We must know that, within finitude, we may find the inspirations of a true religion, a religion that is equal to life because it is based on life itself. Then we shall be inspirited to rescue it from nuclear war and incendiary terrorism, the diminutions of pollution and overpopulation, and the depredations of ignorance.
Let us begin while we yet may. It is not, as you know, necessary to kill a tree entirely to find oneself sitting by while it continues to brown into a lifeless remnant.
Let us begin with what we know for certain: we have life. And then let us derive from that all of our beliefs. I suggest that the basic tenet of such a religion would be Faith In Life – a trust in its greatness and logic – and that it contains within it the religious expression of Faith Through Life, that through the natural care and fulfillment of life we may not only find in it considerate joy but also express our truest reverence to whatever created it. "
read the rest free at toreasonpublishing.com
Mirth
PS. I didn’t write the book but want to share its promise.
GOD and the MATERIAL WORLD.
* * *
It can, not be that the Nature was arranged so strange,
as the physics think of her. Their thinking is so strange,
that they offer paradoxical ideas.
Can we know anything concretely about God ?
Whether it is possible to explain religion with the help of the
physical and mathematical theorems?
Yes. It is possible.
Because to create all MATERIAL WORLD the God
could only working in any an absolute reference system
and only under any physical and mathematical laws.
If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site:
socratus.com
Thanks.
Israel Sadovnik .