How Che-Lives works...

[RAM]

Member A starts a topic
Members B, C and D look at the topic
Member B makes a comment on it often because that member has superior knowledge on the topic
Member A fights back with more knowledge
This process caries on for a while and comes quite bitter
These members are now raised there post count and now increase their position in the hierarchy
All Che-lives is about is knowledge and who has got the most knowledge
Is there any point to us spending hours on here a day posting knowledge and arguing about facts?
Why??

(You will probally ask for me to go now becuase I asked why?)

[chamo]

That is one hell of a theory. I especially like your comments on how people intentionally raise their post count by debate, not spam. No-one gives a hell about how many posts each other has, and no-one uses them in terms of "hierarchy". That's just what you automatically suspect.

"Is there any point to us spending hours on here a day posting knowledge and arguing about facts?"

Yes there is a very good point to debate and arguing. What there is no point to is spamming mindless drivel. If you don't like what the community is then why don't you just leave? You're the one complaining.

Goodbye.

[RAM]

Quote: from happyguy on 10:53 am on June 7, 2003
That is one hell of a theory. I especially like your comments on how people intentionally raise their post count by debate, not spam. No-one gives a hell about how many posts each other has, and no-one uses them in terms of "hierarchy". That's just what you automatically suspect.

"Is there any point to us spending hours on here a day posting knowledge and arguing about facts?"

Yes there is a very good point to debate and arguing. What there is no point to is spamming mindless drivel. If you don't like what the community is then why don't you just leave? You're the one complaining.

Goodbye.


(You will probally ask for me to go now becuase I asked why?)

What did I say you have proved my prediction true!

[chamo]

What did I say you have proved my prediction true!

Did I ask you to go because you asked "why?

No, I recommended you leave because you clearly don't like what this community is and the debates that go on here. This is not a spamming community.

I'm sure there are plenty of other forums and boards where you can spam all you like. Not this one.

Again I say, if you don't like it, leave it.

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from RAM on 9:49 am on June 7, 2003
Member A starts a topic
Members B, C and D look at the topic
Member B makes a comment on it often because that member has superior knowledge on the topic
Member A fights back with more knowledge
This process caries on for a while and comes quite bitter
These members are now raised there post count and now increase their position in the hierarchy
All Che-lives is about is knowledge and who has got the most knowledge
Is there any point to us spending hours on here a day posting knowledge and arguing about facts?
Why??

(You will probally ask for me to go now becuase I asked why?)






THe point is to here arguements that you haven't considered before

IT's to increase your own knowledge

personally I'd rather be acting...but once again *looks around* Tennesse

(Edited by Lardlad95 at 3:07 pm on June 7, 2003)

[Zombie]

RAM, I thought you made your last thread yesterday night.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

RAM, I'll use an example of how your hierarhcy-post count theory is shit. DonutMaster has much fewer posts than you, yet he has much more respect, respect that, i might add, did not come from his number of posts, it came from his quality of posts and insighful political views.


(Edited by Victorcommie at 3:21 pm on June 7, 2003)

[Dirty Commie]

Quote: from Victorcommie on 2:14 pm on June 7, 2003
RAM, I'll use an example of how your hierarhcy-post count theory is shit. DonutMaster has much fewer posts than you, yet he has much more more respect, respect that, i might add, did not come from his number of posts, it came from his quality of posts and insighful political views.

The same goes with LevTrotsky, he has few posts but is insightful and deserves more respect than a spammer who was three times the number of posts.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Dude, are you getting off by trying to be controversial or something.

This is a debating arena where people use their facts and knowledge to create their opinion and argue it against other people's opinions.

If you don't like it, stop posting dumbass messages like that.

[mentalbunny]

You're wrong, because the debates can be read by others to increase their knowledge, and as seen with the Marajuana debate, people can change their views through such debates.

[Totalitarian]

RAM:

I notice that on the front page alone there are 10 threads started by you. If you're having doubts about the purpose of posting on this forum, maybe you should ask this question to yourself?

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

My thoughts exactly.

[IHP]

That;s your theory on Che-Lives? I can't imagine you'd be doind to well in your ethics classes.

I believe your method is something like: "Look at me and lavish attention upon me."

There's a simple solution. If you don't like this site, go away. It is really quite simple.

--IHP

[Invader Zim]

I would like to point out that to an extent he is correct. As a bew member joins and see's a member of 2000 posts +, they are likley to give that member more respect as they believe them to be respected members of the community, whether its true or not. Over time they do of course that in theory rather than practise post count is meaningless, they do however respect most members with over 2000 posts by then as they have reasiles that nearly all of them are mods etc.

To completely discount RAM's comments shows ignorance and spam. Spam as you are so quick to attack now you fail to recognise good points etc.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Speak for yourself and RAM mate.

When I joined and heard what people like redstar were saying I didn't have any respect for them at all.

[Urban Rubble]

I kind of agree with you AK, when I first came here I recognized that people with more posts are more well known and therefore more liked/respected. Of course there are the exceptions to the rule, but it still applies, although very midly. It still doesn't really mean it's a hierarchy and that the members with more stars have some sort of "power".

I don't know why you always defend Ram so much though AK, it's as though you guys are real life friends. I personally just think this kid want dissent, he wants to start these topics to get people riled up and bring some conflict into his life, for some reason. He's probably just bored.

[RAM]

Che-Lives is so *****ie! Words like twat, twit, idiot, retard are used very commonly and people also like flamming each other as well!

A little obeservation from RAM!

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

RAM, please, for the love of Che, stop posting bullshit! You will be uncaged if you act like a civilized leftists. We are not trying to mufle your your oppinion, it is just that OI is not the place for that!

[RAM]

Do todays topics and posts on this board mean that I am going in the right direction or not?

[Felicia]

Quote: from RAM on 5:49 am on June 7, 2003
Member A starts a topic
Members B, C and D look at the topic
Member B makes a comment on it often because that member has superior knowledge on the topic
Member A fights back with more knowledge
This process caries on for a while and comes quite bitter
These members are now raised there post count and now increase their position in the hierarchy
All Che-lives is about is knowledge and who has got the most knowledge
Is there any point to us spending hours on here a day posting knowledge and arguing about facts?
Why??

(You will probally ask for me to go now becuase I asked why?)




all che-lives is about is knowledge? Uh..... since when is that a bad thing? And although I disagree with that, but none the less, it's a bit of a compliment to people here :-p

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 3:16 am on June 9, 2003
I kind of agree with you AK, when I first came here I recognized that people with more posts are more well known and therefore more liked/respected. Of course there are the exceptions to the rule, but it still applies, although very midly. It still doesn't really mean it's a hierarchy and that the members with more stars have some sort of "power".

I don't know why you always defend Ram so much though AK, it's as though you guys are real life friends. I personally just think this kid want dissent, he wants to start these topics to get people riled up and bring some conflict into his life, for some reason. He's probably just bored.




I do know RAM in real life and he is my friend, we are in the same geography class.

[Urban Rubble]

Oh, O.K.

I still don't buy that he's a smart kid. Maybe in Phsycoloy or whatever he was saying before, but not in politics, or basic human decency.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 12:34 am on June 11, 2003
Oh, O.K.

I still don't buy that he's a smart kid. Maybe in Phsycoloy or whatever he was saying before, but not in politics, or basic human decency.

Well he's really good at geography, also the internet does not really give people a fair view of a persons intelegance or charater etc.

[RAM]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 12:34 am on June 11, 2003
Oh, O.K.

I still don't buy that he's a smart kid. Maybe in Phsycoloy or whatever he was saying before, but not in politics, or basic human decency.


I am not an expert in Psycology you FOOL!!!!!

I am an expert in Philosophy, Ethics, Theology!

I am also good at Geography as well as AK47 will testify

(Please note that I did not use the world expert in Geography!)

Also dosen't my sig prrove some inteligence as that is a quote from some of my A grade Philosophy work on evil and sufering and AK47 acknowledged the sig to be a good one!

At least that my sig is my me and it not a quote from somebody else!



(Edited by RAM at 11:16 am on June 11, 2003)

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I reckon it proves nothing but the fact that you're up your own arse.

Especially now that you've actually gone so far to point it all out.

It was either Socrates or Zeus or Demogenes that once said, "I am the wisest man of all, for I know nothing". For you to go biggin' up your own knowledge by putting a "great" quote from yourself where others put quotes from legendary men and women proves you're nothing but a fool.

[Urban Rubble]

It says alot about a persons intelligence when he has to point it out to other people over and over. "Hey look at me, I'm smart".

[redstar2000]

[/b]I am an expert in Philosophy, Ethics, Theology! [/b]

Three carefully chosen fields, where "expertise" is always a matter of opinion.

:cool:

[Dhul Fiqar]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 5:06 am on June 12, 2003
It says alot about a persons intelligence when he has to point it out to other people over and over. "Hey look at me, I'm smart".


Very true :)

[RAM]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:44 pm on June 11, 2003
I reckon it proves nothing but the fact that you're up your own arse.

Especially now that you've actually gone so far to point it all out.

It was either Socrates or Zeus or Demogenes that once said, "I am the wisest man of all, for I know nothing". For you to go biggin' up your own knowledge by putting a "great" quote from yourself where others put quotes from legendary men and women proves you're nothing but a fool.


At least that I try and achive origninal Philosophical thought. I would think that I am a man of Gold

[RAM]

Quote: from redstar2000 on 9:16 am on June 12, 2003
[/b]I am an expert in Philosophy, Ethics, Theology! [/b]

Three carefully chosen fields, where "expertise" is always a matter of opinion.

:cool:


An expert is someone who is respected and well known in there field

[RAM]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 9:06 pm on June 11, 2003
It says alot about a persons intelligence when he has to point it out to other people over and over. "Hey look at me, I'm smart".


You admited in a previous topic that my work was 'good' so you obviously rated it!

[mentalbunny]

RAM take your head out your arse now, there's a good boy.

If you're so good just prove it to us, you haven't yet. Enough bullshit, where's the action?!

[Invader Zim]

You may think that RAM is an idiot but I am confident that he is smarter than you guys, but considering some of the childishness appearing in this thread that does not appear to be a challange.

[RAM]

Here is the action mentalbunny

Ok here is My Theodicy of Storeg Love: -

I am going to answer a philosophical problem that has troubled man from the begging of time. From Socrates to Hume. Why do we suffer with a all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving God? Why do we feel pain?

This has been sited as a reason against an all-powerful, all-loving and all-knowing God. He can’t exits because of our suffering. The problem is combining the 3 qualities so that God can have all 3 qualities at once. I believe that I have the answer to this problem. I accept that he is all knowing and all-powerful. If not then how was the universe created? My area of investigation is the all-loving part. We must ask what is love? What qualities must love have? I have decided that my answer will not be an it’s worth suffering in the end answer. It is this: -

God is all knowing
God is all-powerful
God is all loving

I believe that the love is an important characteristic of God. Who is to say what kind of love that is? Most of us have and do assume that God’s love is the love of Phila and Agape. The love of compassion and selfless love (in this case us humans his creation). What about if that love is the storge love. This love is different from the eros sexual lust love. God would with storge love create the universe out of storge love. This would then apply to our characters as humans and as emotions. This would mean that the pain that we feel would have been created by God in our characteristics that are now free from God in free will. We feel the pain because of the storge love. He created us like this because he does not love us as human beings with emotions but as storge. We are only people not humans. So as people he wanted to let bad things happen to us, as he does not have a loving lustful bond. You may then ask how can this be love? I would say that that is life. We have set backs and we learn from them. In the case of death we die and what happens to use after that is a matter for debate but it is the storge love of God that allows the suffering to happen.

I am also working on an mathmatical ethics theory as well! WIP!

(Edited by RAM at 6:34 pm on June 12, 2003)

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

This is fuckin pathetic.

Dude, take your head out of your arse.

You are not meant to go around saying how intelligent you are. That makes you an idiot.

I'm sure many people on here have produced work and whatever just as good, if not better than yours. We could all type some of our work on here, but that's not the objective of this place.

Your little chronie says you are clever, but in claiming to be clever and an "expert", you immediately cease to be clever at all.

[Zombie]

no offense but why do you have to bring your god theories everytime someone insult's your intelligence?
just start a thread about whatever essays you have written in the past and discuss about it there!

one more advice, like SoM said, if someone's telling you you're not very smart, it's not very bright to go and just brag about how much you are, it's a bit childish. I honestly don't care what others think about my intelligence, i couldn't give a crap about that. but i just don't respect people who think too highly of themselves, even if they were genius in their own rights ;)

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 6:58 pm on June 12, 2003
This is fuckin pathetic.

Dude, take your head out of your arse.

You are not meant to go around saying how intelligent you are. That makes you an idiot.

I'm sure many people on here have produced work and whatever just as good, if not better than yours. We could all type some of our work on here, but that's not the objective of this place.

Your little chronie says you are clever, but in claiming to be clever and an "expert", you immediately cease to be clever at all.

Try getting your own head out your ass, what gives you the right to judge someone like this. Save your pathetic insults and childish behavour for the capitalists. He would not have been posting the material that proves he is not an idiot if arrogant people like you with "their heads up there own smug arses" haddent called him an idiot and made him feal forced to defend him self with proof that he is not infact stupid but very good at many subjects.

If you want to take issue with this i will be happy to discuss it in the CC, Good bye.

[RAM]

Socialsmo o Muerte you clearly have no knowledge of how Philosophy works as if you did then you would know that no idea/ theory is perfect at all they all have advantages and critque. So you could be constructive and critque my work. Also I did not say that God was not all-powerfulll as that has been done in Process Theodicy by Alfred North Whithead (1861-1947). So all i was doing was doing a charecteristc that had not been challenges. There are also many other qualits that man associates with God e.g. these: -

One
Personal
Holy
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Omniscient
Immortal
Good
Immutable
Forgiving
Loving
Creator
Diligent
Worthy
Eternal
Loving
Judge
Saving
Forgiving

No ethical/ Philosophical theory is perfect and I will acept and critques that you could give me that would then be constructive!

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I'm now questioning whether or not his head is up his arse...

For the simple reason that I'm wondering if there is room due to the excess room your tongue is taking up in there.

He started talking about his intelligence. He called himself an "expert."

I'm quite simply stating that in doing that, he has made himself look an idiot. There are people here who will have produced much better work and probably possess knowledge far superior to his.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

It's not your work I am questioning.

I'm sure it is wonderful, although I know not what it takes to produce a good piece of work on the subject of Philosophy.

It's your pathetic fuckin attitude.

[RAM]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 7:18 pm on June 12, 2003
It's not your work I am questioning.

I'm sure it is wonderful, although I know not what it takes to produce a good piece of work on the subject of Philosophy.

It's your pathetic fuckin attitude.

So what is the problem with my attitude then?

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

You called yourself an expert.

You claim to have some kind of superior intelligence. You have knowledge, my friend. Lots of it, I'm sure. Just like many of the people here have proven that they have.

You do not have the intelligence you seem to think you have because, incorporated in intelligence, is modesty and not arrogance. One should never talk up his or her own work or intelligence.

[RAM]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 7:23 pm on June 12, 2003
You called yourself an expert.

You claim to have some kind of superior intelligence. You have knowledge, my friend. Lots of it, I'm sure. Just like many of the people here have proven that they have.

You do not have the intelligence you seem to think you have because, incorporated in intelligence, is modesty and not arrogance. One should never talk up his or her own work or intelligence.


I have never talked up my overal inteligence. I know that I am not an expert at all things. I never said that I was!

[anti machine]

Oh RAM...

I too am an admirer of philosophy. I write philosophical and theological essays and critiques myself. I do not, however, gloat. I do not flaunt some religious analysis and claim to be an intellectual. That is why I believe there isn't a person on this site who disrespects me.

You mention Socrates in your little theological half-ass-essay, which is basically a bland repition of "God is all loving" and filled with gross generalizations and jumps to conclusions. Socrates once said "The key to true wisdom is to admit that I know nothing". You, however, have flaunted what little you do know, like a peacock opening its mouth. Better to let people assume stupidity than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

RAM: one of the most self-righteous, vain, narcisistic religious zealots I have seen. Grow up, go read the Antichrist, and some Marx while you're at it.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from anti machine on 7:32 pm on June 12, 2003
Oh RAM...

I too am an admirer of philosophy. I write philosophical and theological essays and critiques myself. I do not, however, gloat. I do not flaunt some religious analysis and claim to be an intellectual. That is why I believe there isn't a person on this site who disrespects me.

You mention Socrates in your little theological half-ass-essay, which is basically a bland repition of "God is all loving" and filled with gross generalizations and jumps to conclusions. Socrates once said "The key to true wisdom is to admit that I know nothing". You, however, have flaunted what little you do know, like a peacock opening its mouth. Better to let people assume stupidity than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

RAM: one of the most self-righteous, vain, narcisistic religious zealots I have seen. Grow up, go read the Antichrist, and some Marx while you're at it.

I go back to the point I made just now, if people had not been so willing to pass judgment on his intelegance then he never would have felt forced to post his A grade work to prove other wise, the only reason he appears to be vein self rightious etc is because people like you left him with very little alternative.

And if you are into philisophy the please work out the meaning of life and not insulting RAM, like a pathetic child.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Wahey! My Socrates thing was right. What a guess.

RAM, I could type some of my Sociology work on here if I wanted. I've had Sociological research of education published in a book. I've had something read out in the House of Lords by a peer. But it really does not matter. Anyone could do the things I've done if they'd taken what I took in school. Just as many people could probably do what you've done if they'd taken Philosophy. And seeing as anti machine is in a position to be able to judge your work, and he has not judged it very highly, it makes me sure that someone could produce work like yours.

Get a grip and take your head out of your arse...like many people have said already.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:01 pm on June 12, 2003
Wahey! My Socrates thing was right. What a guess.

RAM, I could type some of my Sociology work on here if I wanted. I've had Sociological research of education published in a book. I've had something read out in the House of Lords by a peer. But it really does not matter. Anyone could do the things I've done if they'd taken what I took in school. Just as many people could probably do what you've done if they'd taken Philosophy. And seeing as anti machine is in a position to be able to judge your work, and he has not judged it very highly, it makes me sure that someone could produce work like yours.

Get a grip and take your head out of your arse...like many people have said already.

As I have said if you and your pathetic group of RAM haters had not insulted him and said he was an idiot then we would hot be having this conversations. Try getting your own head out your ass and admiting your mistakes and errors.

As I have said If you want to take issue with my analasys of your childishness then the CC is always available.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I joined the debate on RAM's apparent shitty posts quite late. People, I see, claim he makes pathetic and pointless threads. I take it this is what you and he see as the questioning of his intelligence.

If he wants to prove them wrong and prove he has intelligence, he should simply post more intelligent things, not create a post in which he begins to explain how intelligent he is.

[anti machine]

Fine AK, I went a little overboard. Maybe. I actaully agreed with RAM at the beginning of the thread (it seems like so long ago) that the stars and popularity make it difficult for intellectual new-comers to be accepted here. Yeah RAM, that's life. I don't agree with the stars either.

But RAM is not the sort of member who can speak from experience. I believe we have already outlined why he is not looked upon in the same light as Dhul, Redstar, etc., so there is no need to open that wound again.

alright AK, i'm going to go figure out the meaning of life. I appreciate you sticking up for the kid, and maybe i got a bit out of hand. However, i don't think people like ME are the reason he feels he needs to be accepted as an intellectual. This desire probably stems from his own individual insecurity and inflated head.

[RAM]

OK then I acept that my work may not be that good by how does one rate "good" work in quantative, critique and advatages or qaulity of the advantages and critique, or by revolutionsing thought?

I apologise for my view that I have had

[RAM]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:01 pm on June 12, 2003
Wahey! My Socrates thing was right. What a guess.

RAM, I could type some of my Sociology work on here if I wanted. I've had Sociological research of education published in a book. I've had something read out in the House of Lords by a peer. But it really does not matter. Anyone could do the things I've done if they'd taken what I took in school. Just as many people could probably do what you've done if they'd taken Philosophy. And seeing as anti machine is in a position to be able to judge your work, and he has not judged it very highly, it makes me sure that someone could produce work like yours.

Get a grip and take your head out of your arse...like many people have said already.


Please do post some of your Sociology work I would be intrested to read it!

[RAM]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:12 pm on June 12, 2003
I joined the debate on RAM's apparent shitty posts quite late. People, I see, claim he makes pathetic and pointless threads. I take it this is what you and he see as the questioning of his intelligence.

If he wants to prove them wrong and prove he has intelligence, he should simply post more intelligent things, not create a post in which he begins to explain how intelligent he is.


What are these inteligent posts that you talk about?? Posting a news articel about commies, posting some bad stats about captalism, having a debate about a past commie??? There is the chit chat forum as well for fun stuff which is where I would post if I could!

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 8:16 pm on June 12, 2003
Fine AK, I went a little overboard. Maybe. I actaully agreed with RAM at the beginning of the thread (it seems like so long ago) that the stars and popularity make it difficult for intellectual new-comers to be accepted here. Yeah RAM, that's life. I don't agree with the stars either.

But RAM is not the sort of member who can speak from experience. I believe we have already outlined why he is not looked upon in the same light as Dhul, Redstar, etc., so there is no need to open that wound again.

alright AK, i'm going to go figure out the meaning of life. I appreciate you sticking up for the kid, and maybe i got a bit out of hand. However, i don't think people like ME are the reason he feels he needs to be accepted as an intellectual. This desire probably stems from his own individual insecurity and inflated head.


There is a fundermatal problem to finding out the meaning of life. How woud one know when one has found the answer? It could be anything! What would be the end condition on which sucess depended on anti machine?

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:12 pm on June 12, 2003
I joined the debate on RAM's apparent shitty posts quite late. People, I see, claim he makes pathetic and pointless threads. I take it this is what you and he see as the questioning of his intelligence.

If he wants to prove them wrong and prove he has intelligence, he should simply post more intelligent things, not create a post in which he begins to explain how intelligent he is.


The fact that you joined the debate or flame fest directed at an individual to be more accurate, whatever you want to call it all tye same to me, is clearly obvious. As this post shows: -

"People, I see, claim he makes pathetic and pointless threads. I take it this is what you and he see as the questioning of his intelligence."

I was infact refering to the far less subtle: -

"RAM your an Idiot."

"RAM your a fool."

"RAM your Ignorant."

etc.

When the simple fact of the matter is that I know him in real life and can vouch that he is not any of the above. People did not believe me and the abuse continued so RAM posted evidance in the form of work to prove the contrary.

[anti machine]

"There is a fundermatal problem to finding out the meaning of life. How woud one know when one has found the answer? It could be anything! What would be the end condition on which sucess depended on anti machine?"

First of all, I was being facetious. AK told me to go figure out the meaning of life but to not critique you, so I tried to crack a joke.

BUt now that you have brought it up, I suppose a discussion sounds good. In short, it is not possible to know that one has found the answer. In existentialist schools of thought, the meaning of life takes on whatever form the individual wishes it to, as it is the individual who percieves and creates his reality.

In my estimation, the meaning of life is to never cease to ask the question "what is the meaning of life." THe struggle to fill the inherent void, which exists in us all, is the ultimate and over-arching theme of existence. It is the reason we keep on. Those who believe they HAVE found something, religious persons for example, have subscribed to an answer that they hold with them until they die, where supposedly their reward for 'holding' their belief will be granted to them.

The meaning of life is the adventure of wading through the great sea of nihilism in search for the meaning of life.

Oh, and AK, I'm not advocating that RAM be caged, as you seem to assign to people like me who you believe are hard on RAM. Let him be free. He hasn't done anything to my knowledge. I simply critiqued, a rather poor and fleeting critique all-be-it, his work and opinions concerning his position in this community.

RAM-be free dude!
AK47-lay off dude!

[RAM]

Has my philosophical question improved your view of me anti machine?

[anti machine]

To an extent. You obviously think alot, and the phrasing of the question provided an excellent outlet for a philosophical response. YOu've just got to organize your thoughts better than how you have. I do apologize for being harsh earlier. My first impression of you, which I acted upon, is probably not an accurate perception. It wasn't your question which changed how I saw you, although that is a logical conclusion. It was my temporary anger wearing off that changed my mind.

I still think your religious proof is below par. You seem to know what you want to say, but the reader only sees the holes you have left in your writing, which are possibly filled in YOUR mind. You've got to fill them in pen, then people will offer REAL intelligent critique.

[mentalbunny]

Oh my god, that's grade A? At what standard? That's really lame, I'm sorry but it is. I'm not at all impressed by that bit of "theology" or whatever it was. I'm not usually really negative and stuff but this is just begging for a ripping.

Ok, from a Christian perspective like my mum's it looks pretty correct, but that's coming from faith and that's something that most of us don't have, not in this Christian God. I don't know how many times I've heard what you said but it's a lot, classic response to the question, it would be too easy for you to just regurgitate that stuff without having to really think for yourself. All you have to do is watch some kinds of parents, they know the only way their kids will learn is if they make mistakes, so it figures that the Christian God, if He/She/It exists would be like that.

Personally I'm not convinced cos I just don't believe in the Christian God.

[RAM]

I am sorry but that was not actual A grade work but this is: -

Philosophy Questions on Evil and Suffering

2ai) Natural evil comes from the physical world and is generally not the fault of humans. Examples of these are earthquakes and volcanoes. Man cannot stop this and a best can be prevented. Moral evil comes from man. Examples of this are the Holocaust and 9/11. It depends on whether you believe in hard determinism (All our actions are controlled by God and that we are not responsible for our actions) or do we have free will, which would make us free to choose good, or evil and that we therefore responsible for our actions.

ii) Each type of evil challenges a belief in God. Natural evil would challenge their belief due to the fact that it is uncontrollable by man in some cases. It could be put down to God entirely. It would not be mans fault but a possible design fault by God in the world. I accept that some of the evil in the world was essential for the formation of the earth e.g. flooding in the form of water. We would need this water to live so having flooding would be essential. Some natural disasters like earthquakes are not essential to the formation of the earth. I would think that man would find natural evil worse then moral evil as it is nor in our control. All we can do is prevent or reduce the effects. Only being able to prevent the effects of natural evil is a lot worse because none of it can be prevented.

Where as with moral evil we are all responsible and this evil can be attempted to be stopped. E.g. speed cameras. These prevent us from going fast and causing an accident, which would prevent evil from happening. There may then be another problem with this, which is our human nature. Do we have free will? Do we have predestination and what is evil? Why did God create people to have a potential for evil? If we have free will then was God surprised when man committed evil? If we have predestination then why does God create some people deliberately evil e.g. Hitler? Why do we all have the ability to affect each other lives for the worse? Why did God create evil in the first place? We could have a world free from the potential of evil. This process of speaking hyterthetically of the world is called counterfactual hypothesis. This is not the case unless you believe in Monism where ever thing is good and there is no such thing as evil. It is an illusion in our minds. These are some of the problems that are faced by people weather religious or not by the two kinds of evil, which are natural and moral and will continue to be a problem until a solution is found to explain why the all loving and all powerful people to suffer. Some may use the eternal cop-out clause, which is where you say that there is some deep meaning for evil and suffering and that only the divine can know the answer.

Comment: -

A/B very pleasing

Here is some of my own private work: -

Why God is responsible for Evil

God Exists

God created the Universe

He is omnipotent. He can create everything including emotion. He is also all knowing so he knows what will happen in the future and the past

God created the world

God created everything in world including Adam and Eve

God created human nature

God put the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden and the Serpent

Because God created man he would have known what would have happened when the tree was placed

Because he knew what would happen he is responsible for tempting Adam and Eve

Evil came from God and he deliberately brought evil into the world

I am not going to pblish any more work as I want to end this topic So I will not post anymore work!


(Edited by RAM at 10:12 pm on June 12, 2003)

[RAM]

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:06 pm on June 12, 2003
Oh my god, that's grade A? At what standard? That's really lame, I'm sorry but it is. I'm not at all impressed by that bit of "theology" or whatever it was. I'm not usually really negative and stuff but this is just begging for a ripping.

Ok, from a Christian perspective like my mum's it looks pretty correct, but that's coming from faith and that's something that most of us don't have, not in this Christian God. I don't know how many times I've heard what you said but it's a lot, classic response to the question, it would be too easy for you to just regurgitate that stuff without having to really think for yourself. All you have to do is watch some kinds of parents, they know the only way their kids will learn is if they make mistakes, so it figures that the Christian God, if He/She/It exists would be like that.

Personally I'm not convinced cos I just don't believe in the Christian God.


Would you agree with any of these qualaties: -

One
Personal
Holy
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Omniscient
Immortal
Good
Immutable
Forgiving
Loving
Creator
Diligent
Worthy
Eternal
Loving
Judge
Saving
Forgiving

????

(Edited by RAM at 10:15 pm on June 12, 2003)

[anti machine]

You presuppose that evil does, in fact exist, and this question is never addressed as you spout off evil instances in nature and man's history. Philosophically speaking, that simply won't cut it.

Your definition of evil is derived from your belief in a loving God. That which is defined as evil in the Bible is and shall ever more be considered evil.

I'm not going to lie to you. I hate religion. I hate the sort of arguments that stem from the Christian principle of good and evil, where god is equated with good.

Still full of holes bro. You are simply laying out faith-based common sense suppositions that, sorry, have already been visited before by the "great" theologians.

[RAM]

Well it was good enough for an A/B grade!

Although thanks for the critique! Have you produced any work anti machine that I could see?

[anti machine]

Moreover, evil, from the Christian perspective, is easily justified by the concept of inherent original sin. We can't blame HItler for what he did, his nature is to be sinful. I stole your car. Oh well, you should say, according to Christ, he's sinful. It's his nature.

"The Christian resolve to see the world as bad and ugly has MADE the world bad and ugly."-Nietzsche

Jesus Christ. Now I know why Sartre hated arguing religion. Now I know why Marx called theology "every philosopher's spot of infection."

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 10:33 pm on June 12, 2003
You presuppose that evil does, in fact exist, and this question is never addressed as you spout off evil instances in nature and man's history. Philosophically speaking, that simply won't cut it.

Your definition of evil is derived from your belief in a loving God. That which is defined as evil in the Bible is and shall ever more be considered evil.

I'm not going to lie to you. I hate religion. I hate the sort of arguments that stem from the Christian principle of good and evil, where god is equated with good.

Still full of holes bro. You are simply laying out faith-based common sense suppositions that, sorry, have already been visited before by the "great" theologians.


Yes but the alternative to evil not existing is Monism whihc is a very dangerous theory to go one as it gets rid of moral responsibility through the idea that its in your mind when for many people that is not the case!

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 10:39 pm on June 12, 2003
Moreover, evil, from the Christian perspective, is easily justified by the concept of inherent original sin. We can't blame HItler for what he did, his nature is to be sinful. I stole your car. Oh well, you should say, according to Christ, he's sinful. It's his nature.

"The Christian resolve to see the world as bad and ugly has MADE the world bad and ugly."-Nietzsche

Jesus Christ. Now I know why Sartre hated arguing religion. Now I know why Marx called theology "every philosopher's spot of infection."


I find the idea of original sin to be a intresting one. Woudent God have known what Adam would do becuase he created human nature. So he knew that Adam would eat the fruit! As a result death entered the world as evil was already in the world from the fall of Satan!

[anti machine]

"monism" is not the only alternative. Jesus tap-dancing Christ. Call it what you will, but there are numerous alternatives to seeing the world as something other than "good and evil".

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 10:39 pm on June 12, 2003
Moreover, evil, from the Christian perspective, is easily justified by the concept of inherent original sin. We can't blame HItler for what he did, his nature is to be sinful. I stole your car. Oh well, you should say, according to Christ, he's sinful. It's his nature.

"The Christian resolve to see the world as bad and ugly has MADE the world bad and ugly."-Nietzsche

Jesus Christ. Now I know why Sartre hated arguing religion. Now I know why Marx called theology "every philosopher's spot of infection."


Don't some say that Christ paid the price for sin the past, present and future?

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 10:43 pm on June 12, 2003
"monism" is not the only alternative. Jesus tap-dancing Christ. Call it what you will, but there are numerous alternatives to seeing the world as something other than "good and evil".


Well even so I perosnally find all the alternatives unaceptable!

I would rather never exist then live in this world!
Would I care that I never existed? No becuase I would have never existed to care!

(Edited by RAM at 10:48 pm on June 12, 2003)

[anti machine]

exactly RAM. GOd cannot be defined as 'good' according to the the principles of 'goodness' as defined by Judeo-Christian doctrine. In all likelihood, God is a sadistic, vain fuck. Far from the conventional conception of good.

And yes I do write. But I'm not going to post a philosophical proof on an online forum, free of copyright laws and for only your satisfaction.

[Invader Zim]

What??? Can you guys explain this to me... I sorty of lost the plot ages ago... So now you have come to the joint conclusion that gods a *****...

[RAM]

Quote: from anti machine on 10:49 pm on June 12, 2003
exactly RAM. GOd cannot be defined as 'good' according to the the principles of 'goodness' as defined by Judeo-Christian doctrine. In all likelihood, God is a sadistic, vain fuck. Far from the conventional conception of good.

And yes I do write. But I'm not going to post a philosophical proof on an online forum, free of copyright laws and for only your satisfaction.

So do we agree? If we do wow!!!!

Some Philosophical Jokes: -

(Source: - http://www.workjoke.com/projoke70.htm)

Dean, to the physics department. "Why do I always have to give you guys so much money, for laboratories and expensive equipment and stuff. Why couldn't you be like the math department - all they need is money for pencils, paper and waste-paper baskets. Or even better, like the philosophy department. All they need are pencils and paper."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.

The Second Law of Philosophy: They're both wrong.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Descartes is sitting in a bar, having a drink. The bartender asks him if he would like another. "I think not," he says and vanishes in a puff of logic.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The French existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre was sitting in a cafe when a waitress approached him: "Can I get you something to drink, Monsieur Sartre?"
Sartre replied, "Yes, I'd like a cup of coffee with sugar, but no cream".
Nodding agreement, the waitress walked off to fill the order and Sartre returned to working. A few minutes later, however, the waitress returned and said, "I'm sorry, Monsieur Sartre, we are all out of cream -- how about with no milk?"



A boy is about to go on his first date, and is nervous about what to talk about. He asks his father for advice. The father replies: "My son, there are three subjects that always work. These are food, family, and philosophy."

The boy picks up his date and they go to a soda fountain. Ice cream sodas in front of them, they stare at each other for a long time, as the boy's nervousness builds. He remembers his father's advice, and chooses the first topic. He asks the girl: "Do you like potato pancakes?" She says "No," and the silence returns.

After a few more uncomfortable minutes, the boy thinks of his father's suggestion and turns to the second item on the list. He asks, "Do you have a brother?" Again, the girl says "No" and there is silence once again.

The boy then plays his last card. He thinks of his father's advice and asks the girl the following question: "If you had a brother, would he like potato pancakes?"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I passed my ethics exam. Of course I've cheated.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philosophy is a game with objectives and no rules.
Mathematics is a game with rules and no objectives.
Theology is a game whose object is to bring rules into the subjective.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A renowned philosopher was held in high regard by his driver, who listened in awe at every speech while his boss would easily answer questions about morality and ethics.

Then one day the driver approached the philosopher and asked if he was willing to switch roles for the evening's lecture. The philosopher agreed and, for a while, the driver handled himself remarkably well. When it came time for questions from the guests, a woman in the back asked, "Is the epistemological view of the universe still valid in an existentialist world?"

"That is an extremely simple question," he responded. "So simple, in fact, that even my driver could answer that, which is exactly what he will do."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One more final exam:

Q: Is this a question?
A: If this is an answer!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A philosopher went into a closet for ten years to contemplate the question, What is life? When he came out, he went into the street and met an old colleague, who asked him where in heaven's name he had been all those years.
"In a closet," he repied. "I wanted to know what life really is."
"And have you found an answer?"
"Yes," he replied. "I think it can best be expressed by saying that life is like a bridge."
"That's all well and good," replied the colleage, "but can you be a little more explicit? Can you tell me how life is like a bridge?"
"Oh," replied the philosopher after some thought, "maybe you're right; perhaps life is not like a bridge."


Raymod Smullyan, "5000 B.C."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two freshman philosophy students see the following bulletin posted on the wall of their lecture hall:


Crash Course in Logical Assumptions
Saturday, September 26, 1998, All Day


Neither of them knows what it means and they are both curious. The pair decide to find the professor and ask some questions. When they locate the professor's office, the bolder of the two enter the building while the other remains outside.
Student: "Uh...Sir..What does Crash Course in Logical Assumptions mean?"
Professor: "Well, it involves taking information that you have, forming assumptions using logic, and then creating new information. Let me try to answer your question by asking you a question. Do you own a car?"
Student: "Uh...Yes, I do."

Professor: "Well, then I can now logically assume that you drive."
Student: "Yes, I drive. "

Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you drive on weekends."
Student: "Yeah, I drive on weekends, I go out on dates."

Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you have date partners."
Student: "Well, yes, I have a girlfriend."

Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you are heterosexual."
Student: "Uh...hell yes! OK, I think I understand what this course is about now. Thanks a lot for your time."

Once back outside, his friend asks him: "So, what's it all about?"
"Its about using information and stuff...Let me answer your question by asking you a question. Do you own a car?"
"No."
"Uh...Then you're homosexual, dude!"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't LOOK at anything in a physics lab.
Don't TASTE anything in a chemistry lab.
Don't SMELL anything in a biology lab.
Don't TOUCH anything in a medical lab.
and, most importantly,
Don't LISTEN to anything in a philosophy department.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as to seem not worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it.


Bertrand Russell, Science and Religion


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If metaphysics is being qua being;
and if epistomology is knowing qua knowing;
then metaphilosophy must be... qua qua qua.




What's the difference between a philosopher and an engineer?
About 50,000 a year.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Graduate student lends his advisor a book on tensed logic by Arthur N. Prior. Advisor reads it, then tells his student that he dropped it off in the student's mail box. Moments later the student returns, and breathlessly exclaims: "Professor, professor. Someone's stolen my Prior."

To which the professor sagely replies: "You're lucky around this department they haven't stolen your posterior."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A philosophy professor walks in to give his class their final. Placing his chair on his desk the professor instructs the class, "Using every applicable thing you've learned in this course, prove to me that this chair DOES NOT EXIST."

So, pencils are writing and erasers are erasing, students are preparing to embark on novels proving that this chair doesn't exist, except for one student. He spends thirty seconds writing his answer, then turns his final in to the astonishment of his peers.

Time goes by, and the day comes when all the students get their final grades...and to the amazment of the class, the student who wrote for thirty seconds gets the highest grade in the class.

His answer to the question: "What chair?"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you hear about the guy who went to the solipsist convention?
Nobody showed up.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What happened to the existentialist who had a flat tire in the middle of a very busy street?
He just sat in his car holding his head and repeating. "The spare, I only reach the spare."

Will Reed


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monism is the theory that anything less than everything is nothing.
Saul Gorn "S. Gorn's Compendium of Rarely Used Cliches"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.


Ambrose Bierce


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A great truth is a truth whose opposite is also a great truth.


Christopher Morley


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zenophobia: the irrational fear of convergent sequences.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How philosophers do it...

Philosophers do it deeper.
Philosophers do it a posteriori.
Philosophers do it consistently.
Philosophers do it conceptually.
Philosophers do it for pure reasons.
Philosophers do it with their minds.
Philosophers think about doing it.
Philosophers wonder why they did it.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb?
"Hmmm... well there's an interesting question isn't it?"
"Define 'light bulb'..."
"How can you be sure it needs changing?"
Three. One to change it and two to stand around arguing over whether or not the light bulb exists.

How many Hegelians does it take to change a light bulb?
Two, of course. One stands at one end of the room and argues that it isn't dark; the other stands at the other end and says that true light is impossible. This dialectic creates a synthesis which does the job.

How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to change it, and one not to change it.

How many existentialists does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of Cosmic Nothingness.

How many Kuhnian constructionist philosophers of science does it take to change a light bulb?
You're still thinking in terms of 'incremental change'--what we really need is paradigm shift...we don't need a bulb with more attributes added on, we need ubiquitous luminescence.

[RAM]

Quote: from AK47 on 10:52 pm on June 12, 2003
What??? Can you guys explain this to me... I sorty of lost the plot ages ago... So now you have come to the joint conclusion that gods a *****...


From the fact that the God of Classical Theism and Judeo-Christain Theology can' exist in the face of evil and the qualties of God not working togeather

(Edited by RAM at 10:59 pm on June 12, 2003)

[anti machine]

If you agree with me, that would be an even sadder predicament for you. It would mean that what you are saying is so confusing and helter skelter, moreover, poorly thought out, that i didn't understand your point. Already I don't exactly gather a point per se from your arguments.

Those jokes are great though.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from anti machine on 11:20 pm on June 12, 2003
If you agree with me, that would be an even sadder predicament for you. It would mean that what you are saying is so confusing and helter skelter, moreover, poorly thought out, that i didn't understand your point. Already I don't exactly gather a point per se from your arguments.

Those jokes are great though.

No i think he was saying that in light of your input he see's that there are flaws in his theorys after viewing what you have said, and has now come to agree with you.

However, well thats what i gathered.

[mentalbunny]

Sorry to ressurrect this, but what the hell is RAM talking about? Can we get rid of the whole reigion thing, I think we've realsied now that it's pointless.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from mentalbunny on 4:38 pm on June 16, 2003
Sorry to ressurrect this, but what the hell is RAM talking about? Can we get rid of the whole reigion thing, I think we've realsied now that it's pointless.

What??? Im confused... you want to end this debate so you ressurect it after it died... perhaps I missed something on the way.

[mentalbunny]

When did I say I wanted to leave it?

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:35 pm on June 16, 2003
When did I say I wanted to leave it?

Good point, I misread...