I’d take it one step further and claim the concept itself, that is an “absolute morale”, as being something that “exists”, is not reasonable by definition.
Aye, this thread and the countless others like it is evidence to support you there.
-Mach
I’d take it one step further and claim the concept itself, that is an “absolute morale”, as being something that “exists”, is not reasonable by definition.
Aye, this thread and the countless others like it is evidence to support you there.
-Mach
War can be created by conflicting moral ideals of life with such ideals being operated by immoral means of violence hence war is relative.
Since morality can’t sustain itself without violence and enforced coercion it is also immoral but at the same time being relative too.
Athena, I get the idea you are referring to the Platonism thread, and see in mathematical necessities divine morals.
But that kind of code doesn’t go further than laws like “The shortest distance between two points is a straight line,” or what we discussed about the pentad. There is no judgement in these codes, just necessity.
the moral code , in essence , is about survival , of your tribe , village etc. the survival of Humanity
and about " ALL is fair in love and War " has no idea how this stupid , destructive , immoral , unkind and wicked it can be.
Smears:Athena:
Time for me to take a break.
What makes something moral or immoral is not anyone’s personal view, it is the law of cause and effect.
What is the effect of attacking another country?
What is the effect of defending?
I think people in the US have attacking confused with defending. We can determine the difference between an attack and defense, by determining where the damage is being done. When the damage is occuring in one’s own country, that is defense. When the damage is occuring outside of the boarders of one’s own country, that is attacking.
Does this include damage to the economy?
What do you mean? Are you saying you think the military defense of our economic interest around the world is okay?
If moral is a law of cause and effect. It doesn’t matter who starts the war or why. Damage is done. The moral is, you do this, the effect will be that. Our personal opinions do not change the fact.
I do think that it’s moral to use military force to defend our economic interests around the world. We have to stay in a position to maintain a position where we can see to it that ungodliness and such can be fought against. Once we finish bombing everyone we can introduce them to Jesus and get them started on becoming moral people instead of the kind of heathens which make what you’re calling immoral necessary.
Athena:
Smears:Athena:
Time for me to take a break.
What makes something moral or immoral is not anyone’s personal view, it is the law of cause and effect.
What is the effect of attacking another country?
What is the effect of defending?
I think people in the US have attacking confused with defending. We can determine the difference between an attack and defense, by determining where the damage is being done. When the damage is occuring in one’s own country, that is defense. When the damage is occuring outside of the boarders of one’s own country, that is attacking.
Does this include damage to the economy?
What do you mean? Are you saying you think the military defense of our economic interest around the world is okay?
If moral is a law of cause and effect. It doesn’t matter who starts the war or why. Damage is done. The moral is, you do this, the effect will be that. Our personal opinions do not change the fact.
I do think that it’s moral to use military force to defend our economic interests around the world.
We have to stay in a position to maintain a position where we can see to it that ungodliness and such can be fought against.
" ungodliness and such can be fought against "
don’t you understand that it is exactly the point of view of the people whom you are fighting against you idiot???
oh the insanity of religion.
religion will be the down-fall of Humanity
pardicat:
I don’t believe war is immoral. Conflict is very much a part of life. But just because it isn’t immoral doesn’t mean we have to like it. That said, I have to voice my agreement with Rhinoboy here:
My understanding is that with things regarding the human mind and oppinion, perhaps there is more truth to it than meets the eye, but due to our limmeted understanding of this aspect of the universe, (Just look at the inacuracy of psychology) its not something we should attempt to draw absolutes on just yet.
You should not eat your chicken undercookedExcept the chicken will probably never be ready to eat.
Lying and stealing are very much a part of life. I believe lying and stealing have harmful effects, therefore, lying and stealing would be immoral. Are you denying immoral acts have harmful effects, and that is why they are immoral? Are you saying there is no order of cause and effect? Do you mean war is not harmful, or that it just doesn’t matter how harmful war is? I am not grasping the logic of your argument.
Ahem I wouldn’t know about any of that. The most significant thing I said was war is not immoral.
Notices that everyone overlooked his reply. Typical.
Hey Joker at least you’re not being called names. This guy north disagrees with me but has no thoughtful rebuttal so he calls me an idiot. Classic.
Hey Joker at least you’re not being called names. This guy north disagrees with me but has no thoughtful rebuttal so he calls me an idiot. Classic.
Very true. People need new material…Idiot is so three hundred years ago. ![]()
Notices that everyone overlooked his reply. Typical.
LOL welcome to that particular club, happens all the time to me to… You get ignored because you are right and they are so wrong. They just hope you will go away… Thats my theory and I am sticking with it. ![]()
I have yet to try a temper tantrum, Do you think that might work?
A temper tantrum might be a good thing. As brilliant as I am, I have to admit that there’s probably something that I’m wrong about. When I figure out what it is, I’m going to start a thread and just go crazy defending it. Hopefully this will lead me to a more proper understanding of that yet to be determined subject.
Joker:
Notices that everyone overlooked his reply. Typical.
LOL welcome to that particular club, happens all the time to me to… You get ignored because you are right and they are so wrong. They just hope you will go away… Thats my theory and I am sticking with it.
I have yet to try a temper tantrum, Do you think that might work?
You being a chick throwing a tantrum might be hot to watch. ![]()
Rhinoboy:
Athena:
An axiom is as established principle, scientific law.
It appears the majority of people reject morals as a matter of scientific law. However, I insist a moral is a matter of cause and effect and is universal law. The word moral comes from the Latin word “mores” meaning- customs that are considered conducive to the welfare of society and so, through general observance, develop the force of law, often becoming part of the formal legal code.
It is challenging to bridge the consciousness of the past with the present, however, this must be done, because our understanding of democracy is vital to doing so. Democracy is an imitation of the Gods. We are as the Gods, because we can learn what is conducive to the welfare of society, and we can determine laws, equal to mathematical laws. This what makes self government possible.
Some want to argue war is not immoral. What is the truth of war? First off wars kill people. War kills innocent people who are not threat to the people who kill them, and who have done no wrong to those who kill them. Wars cripple and people, and destroy their businesses, and homes, leaving them in physical and economic ruin. Wars cause much grief and human suffering. Wars cause fear and fear becomes anger, and these negative feelings can last for several generations. Wars can divid humanity and was divided they may never be reunited. The Northern states and Southern states of the US are tentitively united, but the divid between them may never end. The divid between Muslims and Christians is as old as the crusades, or some might say, as old as Alexander the Great who is not seen as a Great man in the countries he plundered.
Are the sentments true?If true, is the axiom that war is immoral, true? From a universal point of view, a God’s point of view, including all of humanity, is war immoral?
I agree with the beginning of your post. Morality is like everything else governed by cause and effect. However this is when we break off. You see morality is not just what the first word said about it, its developed into something more over the years, your point makes alot of sense pertaining to that one aspect of morals meaning but as I said its not that simple, morality is now seen as something different. Everyone has personal ideas of what is and what is not moral.
My understanding is that with things regarding the human mind and oppinion, perhaps there is more truth to it than meets the eye, but due to our limmeted understanding of this aspect of the universe, (Just look at the inacuracy of psychology) its not something we should attempt to draw absolutes on just yet.
You should not eat your chicken undercookedOf course the chicken isn’t cooked yet. Gibran wrote, we speak when we are not at peace with our thoughts. This discussion is the process of cooking of the chicken, not the prepared meal.
I don’t think abstract thinking is about absolutes. I think those who believe they can know absolute truth, are absolutely dangerous. My thoughts are now drawn to the question of if Godel is a Platonist. What are the laws? I am saying there are moral laws and that we can know them. I have said the effect of war is harmful. I am speaking of a law, that acts of war cause harm. True or false? Are there any conditions in which war is not harmful? This is about law, not justifications.
Depends on your definition of harm. medical science does very well from it
There is no axiom for morality, morals are entirely subjective opinion of a specific collective.
There is no morality in or of war. War is necessary as a process. War is about resources, predicated on genetic dominance.
War can be prevented.
War can be insighted.
It is large-scale conflict.
Some beings dislike conflict, and cannot handle it.
Other beings rejoice in conflict, and love the corpses.
War can be prevented.
No it can’t, it can only be delayed.
War can be insighted.
I don’t understand what you mean by this statement.
It is large-scale conflict.
Not always, sometimes it is local.
Some beings dislike conflict, and cannot handle it.
The weak and fearful.
Other beings rejoice in conflict, and love the corpses.
We have too many humans, a little cleansing is to be celebrated. Dancing with the dead is an expression of life.
Kriswest:
Joker:
Notices that everyone overlooked his reply. Typical.
LOL welcome to that particular club, happens all the time to me to… You get ignored because you are right and they are so wrong. They just hope you will go away… Thats my theory and I am sticking with it.
I have yet to try a temper tantrum, Do you think that might work?
You being a chick throwing a tantrum might be hot to watch.
LOL, I don’t know about that, I throw a tantrum and people usually disapear real quick. I tend to lean towards the real violent side of tantrum, berserker you can call it. Last berserker tantrum I had, caused serious multiple bruises and contusions on large male friends trying to settle me down. Took 5 of them to hold me and all got hurt. I was informed of all of this a couple of days later. I was young at the time ,in my early 30s or late 20s. Unfortunately my mild tantrums seem to scare folks off too.
darlin, I don’t think you want to watch this chick in a tantrum, those that love me most , run or get defensive. It scares folks to see a 5’5" 110Lb redhead lose it
![]()
5"5’ and 110lbs and red hair… I’m stopping right there.
Hey Joker at least you’re not being called names. This guy north disagrees with me but has no thoughtful rebuttal so he calls me an idiot. Classic.
well you seem to see one side without relising the other side looks at the situation exactly the same way.
hence an impass
hence the circle of 300 yrs ![]()