On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:14 AM, John Luke Gibson <eaterjolly@gmail.com> wrote:


The mountains of religious thought pumped into this thread has it
visibly oozing (I mean no offense). Firstly, the speaker in that video
linked @zap I'm familiar with and is very unreliable when their claims
are checked or researched. Secondly, Nietzsche explores that so-called
"trap". The thing is that religion presents the concept of morality
which fills the space created by ennui and lack of obstacles to
self-preservation. Noam Chomsky popularized abit the thought that the
consistent trend in nature is more intelligent species tend to go
extinct after a shorter period than obviously less intelligent ones
(i.e. beetles), this is due to genetic drift and inbred weaknesses due
to a lack of obstacles to their survival. Ethics is an artificial
obstacle we present ourselves in order to keep us strong (Nietzsche
referred to the model used by Christianity as Slave Morality,
suggesting that the ethics therein enslave the subscriber to the whims
and desires of the less fortunate, and thusly purporting the existence
of less fortunate as ENDEMICALLY NECESSARY because without less
fortunate people then there would be point to the ethics of
christianity and therefore there would be no obstacle to occupy
ourselves with and therefore genetic drift would set in and we would
die as a species. In other words, Nietzsche considered christianity so
obsessed with compassion, that in a world without suffering it would
utterly and completely fall apart.).

Nietzsche's life's work was dedicated to attempting to create a
well-developed replacement to both religion and "Slave Morality".

I don't know if I support Nietzsche's alternative of "Master Morality"
(where the obstacle is to become the best human possible, the
so-called "ubermensch"), but I do say that "trap" is hardly a "trap"
rather it's just a human need for an obstacle or conflict, and by
rejecting religion all one is doing is rejecting the type of conflict
which that religion endorses.
Well said. I read on a neurology book that the human brain is made in such a way that if we pumped ourselves with dopamine and endorphin all day we would end up committing suicide. We are designed to need both pain and happiness in our lives to keep ourselves balanced. If you think about it it makes sense: pain does exist in the world and we are bound to feel it at some point, we might as well design ourselves in such a way that we actually need it. A bit of evolution 101 there. Also I like to think of ethics as the way that we prefer to make society work. As someone who bases his world view on logic, I prefer a set of ethical rules that benefit society as a whole the most. Others prefer ethics deriving from religions. 
Thirdly,
______

.................| ->   vvvvvvvv
______

On the subject of Relativity:
______

.................| ->    ^^^^^^^^^
______

"The only rule is everything changes, even this rule." is the best
misquoting of Heraclitus I've heard and has rather impacted my view of
"Relativity". Ultimately building off of the concept that the meaning
of life is just any arbitrary form of conflict, then sometimes
constant values contribute to having an increased selection of types
of conflict. Technology of modern day allows us to have simulated
battles over the net, and, without a whole slew of discovered
constants (such as ways of making the voltage across a wire consistent
with what is intended to deliver a message), then that would not be
possible. I believe the universe only stays as consistent as it needs
to be for every life to have a potentially unique purpose given work
to discover new constant attributes to apply to a new purpose to
assume. I believe it is quite possible high-fantasy magic might have
existed at one point and that it was merely purged by the work devoted
to the infinitely more rigorous "science". That's just my perspective,
and it is also my perspective that science could be replaced with
high-enough degree of arbitrary work dedicated to discovering
attributes of the universe incompatible with modern science. This
would require a large influx of unfulfilled persons highly motivated
to transform the status quo and contradict conventional wisdom.

Maybe. But As Arthur C. Clarke said, Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. At that point I don't care if it's magic or god or too advanced technology, it's just way beyond my
 reach and that's what matters the most.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk