Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 2529
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:48 pm

Walker wrote:
Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:22 pm
No need to go spinning out of control with personal premises and hare-brained conclusions.


You simply said, "Thought and action are coupled."


Well, that is not always the case, as you can prove to your own self via experience, by sitting still and thinking, without the action of moving anything.


You are correct in this sense:

Some folks lack the ability to uncouple identity and action from thought.

These slaves serve the Master of Thought, worshipped (or resented) as MOT.


It is possible to make thought the servant, and not the master.

And, it is advisable to be the master of thoughts, rather than the slave.

Why?

To be master of another's thoughts is to be enslaved, which goes against the grain since folks have a hankering for freedom.

:)
If one thought is directed to another, then thought itself is not just action, but action is multifaceted as one set of actions (thought) can be directed to another set of actions (physical).

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 2529
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:49 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Wed Nov 21, 2018 6:49 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Nov 21, 2018 4:12 am
TimeSeeker wrote:
Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:30 pm

They are? You don't need to assume anything if you have data. Even a rough approximation are more useful than a thumbsuck.

And we live in a world where data is a Google away so you have very few excuses to rely on assumptions. Even when errors are inconsequential. It just encourages sloppy thinking.


I seriously disagree ;)
How can you be so ignorant and stupid if you are claiming to be scientific minded?
Science's credibility - other than the essential requirements - has to be grounded on certain basic and relevant assumptions.

Basic assumptions of science
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions
How can you be such an arrogant absolutist?

All models are wrong (<--even this one). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong

I don't claim to be "scientifically minded" - I claim to USE science. Well aware of its limits.

My primary mindset is winning. With no particular ritual (science or otherwise) in mind.

Whatever works! Pragmatism.
Relativism is an absolute and all absolutes are observe approximately through relativism. Hence what we understand of truth is fundamentally a synthetic progress between the two and and existing through the two with the Golden rule being a constant but manifesting in infinite variations as extensions of it.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 2529
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:51 pm

delete
Last edited by Eodnhoj7 on Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 2529
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:55 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:51 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:03 am
TimeSeeker wrote:
Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:44 am


Assumptions are the mother of all fuckups. You don't get to ASSUME what "the only purpose" of theism is! The people who find pragmatic utility in theism get to decide what value (other than dealing with existential crisis) they derive from theism.
LOL.. lol :mrgreen:

What a joke!

You are quoting your own statement from your own post
viewtopic.php?p=384140#p384140
and fucking your own stupidity.
What have you been smoking or injecting?

All you want is to retort for its sake and you will do that blindly.
All your retorts lack substance and depth.
Actually, in his defense (not that he really needs it ever) he is one of the few people I ran across who can actually think and has substance to his thoughts. He is actually right the majority of the time with majority being in the 95+ percentile and whatever "wrongness" either being limited to a lack of understanding which cannot be judged and standard human error relevant to all positions regardless of intelligence.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 1537
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sat Nov 24, 2018 5:48 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:55 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:51 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:03 am

LOL.. lol :mrgreen:

What a joke!

You are quoting your own statement from your own post
viewtopic.php?p=384140#p384140
and fucking your own stupidity.
What have you been smoking or injecting?

All you want is to retort for its sake and you will do that blindly.
All your retorts lack substance and depth.
Actually, in his defense (not that he really needs it ever) he is one of the few people I ran across who can actually think and has substance to his thoughts. He is actually right the majority of the time with majority being in the 95+ percentile and whatever "wrongness" either being limited to a lack of understanding which cannot be judged and standard human error relevant to all positions regardless of intelligence.
A kindergarten boy [5 years old] will think the first/second-grader [6-7] is extremely intelligent/smart.

TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by TimeSeeker » Sat Nov 24, 2018 9:56 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:49 pm
Relativism is an absolute and all absolutes are observe approximately through relativism.
Yes it is. From the perspective of the relativist. There are 7.5 billion perspectives on Earth.

So all 7.5 billion are absolute? If we answer 'yes' then we clearly need some boundaries between so many absolutes... :)

Human rights.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:49 pm
Hence what we understand of truth is fundamentally a synthetic progress between the two and and existing through the two with the Golden rule being a constant but manifesting in infinite variations as extensions of it.
The synthesis/unification of perspectives is what I call consensus.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 2529
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sat Nov 24, 2018 10:35 pm

TimeSeeker wrote:
Sat Nov 24, 2018 9:56 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:49 pm
Relativism is an absolute and all absolutes are observe approximately through relativism.
Yes it is. From the perspective of the relativist. There are 7.5 billion perspectives on Earth.

So all 7.5 billion are absolute? If we answer 'yes' then we clearly need some boundaries between so many absolutes... :)

Human rights.
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:49 pm
Hence what we understand of truth is fundamentally a synthetic progress between the two and and existing through the two with the Golden rule being a constant but manifesting in infinite variations as extensions of it.
The synthesis/unification of perspectives is what I call consensus.
The Golden Rule considering all axioms are dependent upon directed movement and this directed movement is axiomatic through the point, line, circle as universal axioms which maintain themselves but are open to perpetual progress and free choice. One can observe a universal moral system while still allowing for free choice considering all laws as the manifestation of limits are the creation of limits, with limit enabling order and order allowing freedom. Without order, there can be no freedom as freedom to choose requires consequences for the acts chosen. These consequences effectively are the creation of limits.

The Golden Rule as a Constant, inherent geometric nature dependent upon the point, line, circle of the Monad. To while the Golden rule is constant it is subject to infinite variations of relative to property ownership, rights to life, relationships, etc. with these subcategories stemming from the Golden Rule existing through a continuum of subcategories in themselves while still subject to the Golden Rule.

So while The Golden Rule may be a constant, and the nature of killing be a relativistic interpretation of the Golden Rule, as an approximation of it the nature of Murder (respectively being right or wrong) is still a constant while the various situations through which the nature of killing may exist (war, vengeance, self-defense, etc.) still being constants as extensions of the Golden Rule with this progressive continuum (subjective situations in war, vengeance, self-defensie, etc.) still being extensions of the Golden Rule necessitating a moral constant regardless of the situation.

In these respects this can be observed in the three prime Laws:



1. All axioms are points of origin; hence all axioms as progressive linear definition and circularity are points of origins. The point of origin progresses to another point of origin through point 2 and cycles back to itself through point 3 with this linear progression and circularity originating from themselves, through eachother and point 1.

Point 1 is original and exists through points 2 and 3 as points 2 and 3.

As original Points 1,2,3 are extension of eachother as one axiom, while simultaneously being nothing in themselves as points of origin that invert to further axioms respectively; hence originate as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws.


Where all morality originates with:

1) the individual
2) society
3) Natural environment



2. All axioms are progressive linear definition; point 1 and 3 progress to point 2 as respective points of origin observed in point 1 while this linear progression from one to another through alternation and exists as circulation between points 1 and 3 to point 2 and point 2 progressing to points 1 and 3.

Point 2 is definitive and defines points 1 and 3 with points 1 and 3 defining point 2.

As definitive Points 1,2,3 progress from one to another and are inherently seperate. As seperating one from another they are connected under a common function of "seperation"; hence are defined as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws.


Where all morality projects through:

1) the individual
2) society
3) Natural Law





3. All axioms are maintain through a circularity, as linear alternation through point 2, and points of origin as point 1, with point 1 and 2 circulating through each other as point three while circulating through themselves as each other. Point 3 maintains itself as circular and maintains points 1 and 2 as circular while points 1,2 and 3 circulating through eachother maintain eachother.

Point 3 is circular and exists through 1 and 2 as 1 and 2.

As circular Points 1,2,3 are maintained through eachother as eachother as one axiom, while simultaneously dissolving into further axioms as eachother; hence they circulate as 1 and 3 through 1 and 3 as 1 and 3 laws.


Where all morality is maintained through:

1) the individual
2) society
3) Natural Law



With the origination, progression and maintainance of morality observing the Golden Rule as Divine Reason that stems through all being as being but not limited to such being.

Now this synthetic factor to the golden rule can be observed as inherent within it.



The Golden rule necessitates a choice in not just values and value formation but effectively expresses moral actualities and potentialities by allow a form of generosity where the individual maintains some degree of choice and inherent nature of generating the boundaries of their personal condition.

The dualism of the good man and evil man, both practicing there respective choices, observes the one forms the other and this personal freedom of "value" necessitates an inherent element of synthesis and creativity where the person creates the judgements they will be judge by in the face of a percievable inversive opposition conducive in form and function to void.

In simpler terms a person forms themselves in the encapsulation of darkness and chaos through there use of reason from which they will be simultaneously judged by.

It is not a moral conundrum but rather a foundation of generation through synthesis.


viewtopic.php?f=23&t=24073

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest