The Perfect Being [Archive]

In Dust and Ashes

07-28-2005, 02:54 PM

my friends made me watch The Fifth Element. I feel asleep right after it started, but I woke up in time for the airport scene.
anyway, it was a terribly lame movie, but it got me thinking...
what would be the qualities of a perfect being?
personally, I already have an example in mind that doesn't go along with the qualites of the red headed chick in the movie.
would a perfect being have qualities that have situational exceptions? for instance, the chick in the movie was all torn over war and all that, but when the aliens attacked her, she totally kicked their butts.

anyway...if any of that makes sense...discuss.

Spaced

07-29-2005, 12:20 AM

The 'Perfect Being' would have to be adaptable to all situations and circumstances or they would not be the Perfect Being.

Kinbote

07-29-2005, 12:29 AM

One could never say, as what constitutes "perfection" is a subjective judgment.

XenonDreams

07-29-2005, 01:10 AM

fifth element is not a lame movie

Herr Lipp

07-29-2005, 08:53 AM

Gary Coleman.

Jackal

07-29-2005, 08:42 PM

To be perfect is to not be human.

In Dust and Ashes

07-30-2005, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by XenonDreams
fifth element is not a lame movie

you'll have to explain how that movie is anything more than low budget crap. although, it is rather amusing...

It does seem that the answer to this would be subjective, but I don't really think it is. rather, our opininons on the matter are subjective. which is why I ask...I want to know what you guys think, so stop coping out and tell me :-p

spaced, what do you mean by adapatble? are you saying they'd change according to the situation? so perfection is not constant?

XenonDreams

07-30-2005, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
although, it is rather amusing...

thats why its not lame

In Dust and Ashes

07-31-2005, 07:04 PM

is it supposed to be that laughable?

Spaced

07-31-2005, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
spaced, what do you mean by adapatble? are you saying they'd change according to the situation? so perfection is not constant?

My point was that true pefection must be all things at all times. Perfect to everyone and everything. Which you may realise is impossible.

Six Ways

07-31-2005, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
you'll have to explain how that movie is anything more than low budget crap. although, it is rather amusing...

I'll tell you the one reason above all others (and there are others) it's not lame:

GIMME THE CASSSSSSHHH!!!!!!

Nice hat.

YA LIKE ITTTT????!!!

In Dust and Ashes

07-31-2005, 09:08 PM

I don't remember that part....maybe I was asleep.

In Dust and Ashes

07-31-2005, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by Spaced
My point was that true pefection must be all things at all times. Perfect to everyone and everything. Which you may realise is impossible.

I don't think so. I think we all have different ideas of what is perfect, but those ideas may be warped. I believe that if we all saw perfect, we would recognize it. and personally...I believe we will.

Herr Lipp

08-01-2005, 05:21 AM

Chris Tucker is :yes: in 5th Element.

Barbara

08-01-2005, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
I don't think so. I think we all have different ideas of what is perfect, but those ideas may be warped. I believe that if we all saw perfect, we would recognize it. and personally...I believe we will.

I believe you will be dissapointed, but that's just me.

In Dust and Ashes

08-01-2005, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by Walter Sopchak
Chris Tucker is :yes: in 5th Element.

yeah, and he's only funny for about 2 minutes. after that, he's just annoying.

Spaced

08-01-2005, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
I don't think so. I think we all have different ideas of what is perfect, but those ideas may be warped. I believe that if we all saw perfect, we would recognize it. and personally...I believe we will.

So recognition of this Perfect Being would require everyone to drop years of ingrained prejudice and accept this being, providing such a being is possible. I admire your optimism.

In Dust and Ashes

08-01-2005, 11:17 PM

not really. it's more like....hmmmmm....let me see if I can come up with a really corny metaphor......how about a blind guy metaphor....

so theres this blind guy that has never seen day light before. some people try to tell him what it's like, but he has no clue. in his mind he may have ideas and maybe he thrives off of those ideas and believes them in everything, but when the time comes that he can actually see the day light, all his previous ideas vanish and he recognizes exactly what the light is.

right now we're all living in an imperfect world. nothing is perfect. but I think that if we were all given the chance to see perfect and be in the presense of perfect, we would all recognize it as being perfect, no matter how many different conflicting ideas we might have had about it before hand.

catch my drift?

In Dust and Ashes

08-01-2005, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by Barbara
I believe you will be dissapointed, but that's just me.

the bible says I wont be and I put my trust in the bible. :)

Spaced

08-02-2005, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
not really. it's more like....hmmmmm....let me see if I can come up with a really corny metaphor......how about a blind guy metaphor....

so theres this blind guy that has never seen day light before. some people try to tell him what it's like, but he has no clue. in his mind he may have ideas and maybe he thrives off of those ideas and believes them in everything, but when the time comes that he can actually see the day light, all his previous ideas vanish and he recognizes exactly what the light is.

right now we're all living in an imperfect world. nothing is perfect. but I think that if we were all given the chance to see perfect and be in the presense of perfect, we would all recognize it as being perfect, no matter how many different conflicting ideas we might have had about it before hand.

catch my drift?

I agree with your sentiments regarding aesthetic perfection, but do you also believe that practical perfection is possible?

vordabois

08-02-2005, 03:33 AM

Originally posted by XenonDreams
fifth element is not a lame movie

Dude. :yes:

Barbara

08-02-2005, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
the bible says I wont be and I put my trust in the bible. :)

Which is why rational debate is not possible here, so have fun :)

In Dust and Ashes

08-02-2005, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by Barbara
Which is why rational debate is not possible here, so have fun :)

haha....
I don't see what's difficult about this. my beliefs are no harder to get around than yours. the point here is to exchange ideas. I want to know what you guys think.

In Dust and Ashes

08-02-2005, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by Spaced
I agree with your sentiments regarding aesthetic perfection, but do you also believe that practical perfection is possible?

intresting question.
biblicly, it is possible. but i doubt I'll ever see it happen.

Jackal

08-03-2005, 10:45 AM

Why do we have to be dead to finally see perfect? Unless your're saying that believing in Jesus makes reality perfect, which I know you're not. If God is perfect, and all powerful, then why didn't he make humans and the Earth perfect?

Why didn't he make everything nicer? To me that makes God seem like a cruel God. Like we are his toys and he gaves us sins to make the show more interesting for him to sit and judge.

He can make miracles happen but doesn't everytime. I can understand picking out who to save on a one by one basis, but how do you explain instances of multiple deaths. Attacks, bombings, plane crashes, floods. It's kinda freaky to think all those people were at the wrong place at the same time because God needed all those people just then, and they happened to be together.

I NEED answers! :)

In Dust and Ashes

08-03-2005, 10:57 PM

well I wasn't really saying any of that at all. the bible says that if we put our faith in Jesus Christ, we can be made perfect through him. It's not all that simple though...I think theres a lot of debate over what that really means and such...

anyway...
God did make Humans and Earth perfect...but he gave us free will and we used that to screw things up. Remember, when God first made the world, he said it was "Good". it's not good anymore and that's our fault.

you're questions are more like traps and I don't really care to step in them, but you do deserve answers. I know this will sound like a cop out, but all the answers are in the bible. I'm discovering that myself the more I read. I highly suggest that to be the first place you look for answers...
I'm willing to try and help out as much as I can, but in order to fully answer your questions, I'd have to pretty much recite everything God said in the bible so it's pretty pointless.

Herr Lipp

08-04-2005, 06:00 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
anyway...
God did make Humans and Earth perfect...but he gave us free will and we used that to screw things up. Remember, when God first made the world, he said it was "Good". it's not good anymore and that's our fault.

so God is weak, because he can't control the actions of some men? or he's retarded for allowing us, modern good people, to still be getting murdered and raped by, in your theory, the past evil actions of some of gods creatures? I dont accept "cos he wants us to come to heaven" as a reason for murderers etc either, thats a kop-out. Religion is just a crappy idea intended to prevent the ills of modern society, and even so its lame, the worlds a horrible place.

someones spiining you a yarn here, you're sonna be sour as hell when you die and nothing happens! but whatever floats your boat as the old addage goes.

Jackal

08-04-2005, 10:42 AM

I wasn't trying to trap or fight with you. Or spite God or the Bible. I think everyone can believe whatever they want.

I've never read the Bible. And haven't been to church as an adult. I was always put off of church by the old Christian women looking down their noses at me with those hateful, cruel faces. The men checking out the women. And people spouting how Christian they were and then hearing gossip about how they really acted. I was an eavesdropping child.

I saw adults going to church on the weekend asking for forgiveness. I just couldn't understand why they didn't control themselves and be good all the time. So church to me is where people lie and say they are sorry. I couldn't see why we had to go to a certain building to pray if God was everywhere. And why Preacher's, who I saw as equal human beings, were qualified to tell us what to do and think.

I finally settled on Buddism as my religion a few years ago, and while studying it I learned that the religious leaders in the past were able to have a bunch of boys to have sex with, so I put the book down and never went back.

I've never cared to learn anything about any other religions because as soon as I try, there's info I don't like or can't believe in and I reject it.

So yeah, all my problems about religion stem from childhood observances and are still childish in nature.

Herr Lipp

08-04-2005, 10:46 AM

oh and hambakmeritu im in the same boat as Jackal my post wasnt geared towards you specifically.

Jackal: whaddya expect? religion is mans creation.

Jackal

08-04-2005, 11:15 AM

I come from a pretty religious family. My parents never took us to church past age 4 or 5. But us neighborhood kids went to summer Bible school because we got to ride the bus, and do art projects.

We never prayed at home, but we were taught that God and Jesus were #1 basically.

So I don't know. I agree with you somewhat, but my brainwashing second guesses things.

Like last night, after I talked poorly about God on the internet, my dog had a scary seizure, and I thought she was dying. Like God was pissed and wanted to spite me. But later, the vet will give me a logical explaination.

Herr Lipp

08-04-2005, 11:52 AM

maybe my constant questioning of God is the reason I have micropenis :(

yes that is a joke!

Jackal

08-04-2005, 01:51 PM

In Dust and Ashes

08-04-2005, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Walter Sopchak
so God is weak, because he can't control the actions of some men? or he's retarded for allowing us, modern good people, to still be getting murdered and raped by, in your theory, the past evil actions of some of gods creatures? I dont accept "cos he wants us to come to heaven" as a reason for murderers etc either, thats a kop-out. Religion is just a crappy idea intended to prevent the ills of modern society, and even so its lame, the worlds a horrible place.

someones spiining you a yarn here, you're sonna be sour as hell when you die and nothing happens! but whatever floats your boat as the old addage goes.

:rolleyes:

if I thought for a minute that you actually cared I would attempt to answer that, but you're really not worth my time.

In Dust and Ashes

08-04-2005, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by Jackal
So I don't know. I agree with you somewhat, but my brainwashing second guesses things.

Like last night, after I talked poorly about God on the internet, my dog had a scary seizure, and I thought she was dying. Like God was pissed and wanted to spite me. But later, the vet will give me a logical explaination.

that's not brainwashing. that's inherent. go to anywhere in the world and the people will have such thoughts. it's in our nature to believe in such things and I'm sick of people playing the victim of brainwashing. it's an abuse of terms and you don't even know the meaning of true brainwashing.

In Dust and Ashes

08-04-2005, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by Jackal
I've never cared to learn anything about any other religions because as soon as I try, there's info I don't like or can't believe in and I reject it.

yes...reject everything that you don't like. that'll make life better. :rolleyes:

one man once said "never build your theology around your desires."
theres a lot in the bible that even I have a hard time accepting. but that doesn't make it any less true, important, or right.

In Dust and Ashes

08-04-2005, 05:03 PM

oh and by the way, Jackal, it sounds like every time you have a problem with a religion, it's because of how people abuse and misues the religion outside it's acutal bounds. I haven't studied buhdism that much, but I'm pretty sure that the religion itself doesn't condone such acts. my suggestion to you is to stop looking at what people do and start looking at what the religion itself actually teaches. theres usually a big difference.....saddly.

Jackal

08-04-2005, 07:17 PM

You probably have some valid points there, but you don't know me well enough to assume I'm as stupid as you think I am. What I've written is just certain points and thoughts-not everything about me and what I know and think. You really come off as being offended and defensive if anyone says anything against Christianity. Maybe you should I guess, defend yourself.

You've held a grudge against me since about my 4th post. I am only discussing, not trying to be mean or put you down. You are always condecending to me no matter what I write anywhere, I've noticed.

Yes I know about true brainwashing. I'm just gabbing on the internet, not writing a thesis.

I don't play the victim ever. I don't feel "brainwashed" or used or lied too.

Me accepting it doesn't make it true or right or important either.

I do find it sad that I can't learn about a religion from it's followers. But everything in the world is that way, unless you try it you never really know about it.

In Dust and Ashes

08-04-2005, 08:07 PM

I've never called you stupid and I never thought you were. I may think your ignorant and maybe a tad foolish, but even then, i'm oversteping my bounds of judgement.
it takes a lot to offend me. you two just get on my nerves and I have a tendency to want to straighten bad misjudgements about the one thing in the world that I belive with all my heart and live every day of my life. it may come off as defensive, but I think it's rather reasonable. especially considering you're flawed ideas about my faith is the root of a lot of mockery and mockery is one thing that I do disdain (hense why I reacted so harshly to you're first post directed at me).

inspite of everything you've ever said, I don't hold a grudge against you. but I can't say I think very highly about you. I don't mean to condicend anyone, if it comes off that way, I do appologize, but a lot of what you say does irk me.

for your other points:

I never said accepting it makes it right. my point is that how pleasant it sits with you shouldn't play any part on accepting it as truth or not.

oh and trying things doesn't really mean you know it very well either. again...it's sad that that statement is evident in a lot of religious cases.

Herr Lipp

08-05-2005, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
if I thought for a minute that you actually cared

you'd be wrong.

religion....pfft....I suppose you think Jesus is waiting for "the right time" to come back to earth too dont ya? If Jesus came back tomorrow he'd probably be mugged and/or beaten and/or killed a whole lot quicker than it took the Romans to fuck him up. Then again, theres more chance of Elvis coming back :rolleyes: .

Haaaaaaaaaaallelujah

Jackal

08-05-2005, 09:36 AM

I guess we feel the same about eachother then.

Who know's, maybe one day we will agree on something. :)

In Dust and Ashes

08-05-2005, 02:34 PM

Bumblebee mouth

08-05-2005, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Walter Sopchak
you'd be wrong.

religion....pfft....I suppose you think Jesus is waiting for "the right time" to come back to earth too dont ya? If Jesus came back tomorrow he'd probably be mugged and/or beaten and/or killed a whole lot quicker than it took the Romans to fuck him up. Then again, theres more chance of Elvis coming back :rolleyes: .

Haaaaaaaaaaallelujah

What if Jesus came back as Elvis? Now that would be fucking tits.

Oh, about the whole god made everything perfect then we fucked it up thing: Isn't it a bit unfair that we're screwed now just because Eve got tricked into eating an apple? Not trying to be mean, I'd just like your input.

In Dust and Ashes

08-05-2005, 07:02 PM

we all would have done the same thing. I know this will totally trap me in words and ideas and really, this is something that chrsitian philosophers are still fighting over, but we were predestined to fall into sin. but it is through that that many good things are able to come, which is why God allowed it.

In Dust and Ashes

08-05-2005, 07:04 PM

so yeah...back on topic...

tell me about you're preception of perfection. would a perfect being ever hurt someone? even in self defense?
Jesus never hurt anyone, but he did get angry at people. he even through a temper tanturum in a church. is that perfect? why or why not?

Jackal

08-05-2005, 07:34 PM

I would say a perfect human shouldn't hurt anyone. Or throw temper tantrums.

Why? Because they should be above that if they are perfect.

In Dust and Ashes

08-05-2005, 07:38 PM

above what? emotion?

Jackal

08-05-2005, 08:17 PM

Above reacting to their emotions.

Jackal

08-05-2005, 08:19 PM

Ouch! But then I thought of other emotions besides anger.

Hmm. I'll have to change my perfect human now.

Jackal

08-05-2005, 08:25 PM

After drinking some. The perfect human really becomes a lot of personalized things only I could love. So it would be MY idea of a perfect human-that most would find hideous.

Because it would be very furry for one. And involve lots of abnormal characteristics most wouldn't find perfect at all.

Ok. now it involves some animal characteristics.

I just can't answer now.

Spaced

08-08-2005, 01:26 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
so yeah...back on topic...

tell me about you're preception of perfection. would a perfect being ever hurt someone? even in self defense?
Jesus never hurt anyone, but he did get angry at people. he even through a temper tanturum in a church. is that perfect? why or why not?

Jesus was never meant to be a perfect being. All the "he became incarnate and was made man" stuff. Therefore he existed on earth with all the weaknessess of 'ordinary humans'. So the example is invalid. That anyone would try to attribute perfection to any humanoid being though is laughable in itself.

Spaced

08-08-2005, 01:39 AM

Originally posted by Jackal
After drinking some. The perfect human really becomes a lot of personalized things only I could love. So it would be MY idea of a perfect human-that most would find hideous.

Because it would be very furry for one. And involve lots of abnormal characteristics most wouldn't find perfect at all.

Ok. now it involves some animal characteristics.

I just can't answer now.

I think we decided earlier that at least the aesthetic qualities of the perfect being should be above subjective/personal reasoning. :rolleyes:

Jackal

08-08-2005, 11:00 AM

So our idea of a perfect human being should not have any outsides? j/k.

I just think this will go nowhere. I don't believe in perfect. I don't believe there is a collective perfect human we can agree on. Because we are all too different.

The things we would all consider bad qualities are in our nature. Because we are mammals.

I could list unwanted traits but in the end there would be just a big glowing ball of acceptance and love. Which some people desribe God as I guess. But that's not human.

Bumblebee mouth

08-08-2005, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
God did make Humans and Earth perfect...

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
we were predestined to fall into sin.

These statements seem contradictory to me. The latter also makes god look cruel. Also, if we are predestined to sin, that contradicts the notion of free will.

Six Ways

08-08-2005, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Bumblebee mouth
These statements seem contradictory to me. The latter also makes god look cruel. Also, if we are predestined to sin, that contradicts the notion of free will.

Just what I was thinking. And I know you said that it would trap you etc etc, but I'm still gonna ask you about it Jacki: What good could possibly come of sin which would outweigh the good in having zero sin? Not fantastically worded there, sorry, but I'm sure you get what I mean. All I can think of is maybe god was bored, kinda like a policeman on duty in a town full of absolute saints. Which doesn't paint a good picture of god.

In Dust and Ashes

08-08-2005, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Spaced
Jesus was never meant to be a perfect being. All the "he became incarnate and was made man" stuff. Therefore he existed on earth with all the weaknessess of 'ordinary humans'. So the example is invalid. That anyone would try to attribute perfection to any humanoid being though is laughable in itself.

the bible says that He had all the temptations of sin, but he never gave into them. he was all man, but he was also all God (another one of those 3 in one deals that get complicated).
let's put it this way, if Jesus had sined....at all...if he had even lied once, he would not be good enough to die for the world and conqure death for us, therefore, he would not be my saviour and he would not be God, because God is perfect.

In Dust and Ashes

08-08-2005, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by Bumblebee mouth
These statements seem contradictory to me. The latter also makes god look cruel. Also, if we are predestined to sin, that contradicts the notion of free will.

I know...the statements are contradictory though. together they say God made the world perfect, but he allowed it to fall into sin, with a sin potential. I guess you could argue over a sin potential being imperfect, but I"m too dizzy to even start thinking about that.
the predestination and free will thing is super tricky. I'm still trying to peice it together in my head. some christians believe souly in free will, other believe souly in predestination and some (including me) believe in Both. I havn't quite figured out how to explain any of that, but after reading as much as the bible as I have, I see both in there and I've asked my pasters about it and they've helped me understand it a little.
I try every so often to explain it on here, but I get all screwed up. it's best you asked someone that really knew.

In Dust and Ashes

08-08-2005, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Just what I was thinking. And I know you said that it would trap you etc etc, but I'm still gonna ask you about it Jacki: What good could possibly come of sin which would outweigh the good in having zero sin? Not fantastically worded there, sorry, but I'm sure you get what I mean. All I can think of is maybe god was bored, kinda like a policeman on duty in a town full of absolute saints. Which doesn't paint a good picture of god.

hmm I don't know if I can work this out, but I"ll try.
Imagine creating someone that is only allowed to love you and be with you and blah blah blah...
it's like robots (overused analogy, I"m sorry), and robots can't really love you. it's not real love when they're forced.
another way to look at it is that, you can't appreciate love unless you know hate and you can't understand how great it is to be with God unless you know what it's like to be seperated from him.
the good is amplified when the bad is present. God wanted us to understand what love really is and to want it--not just do it because we were programed to.

does that make any sense?
I"m sure that'll definately create more questions, but I"m pooped for now, so bring htem on, and I'll do my best to tackel them some other time.

Bumblebee mouth

08-09-2005, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
if Jesus had sined....

If Jesus had done trigonometry? Sorry, couldn't pass up the opportunity for a bad math joke.

Bumblebee mouth

08-09-2005, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
I know...the statements are contradictory though. together they say God made the world perfect, but he allowed it to fall into sin, with a sin potential. I guess you could argue over a sin potential being imperfect, but I"m too dizzy to even start thinking about that.
the predestination and free will thing is super tricky. I'm still trying to peice it together in my head. some christians believe souly in free will, other believe souly in predestination and some (including me) believe in Both. I havn't quite figured out how to explain any of that, but after reading as much as the bible as I have, I see both in there and I've asked my pasters about it and they've helped me understand it a little.
I try every so often to explain it on here, but I get all screwed up. it's best you asked someone that really knew.

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
hmm I don't know if I can work this out, but I"ll try.
Imagine creating someone that is only allowed to love you and be with you and blah blah blah...
it's like robots (overused analogy, I"m sorry), and robots can't really love you. it's not real love when they're forced.
another way to look at it is that, you can't appreciate love unless you know hate and you can't understand how great it is to be with God unless you know what it's like to be seperated from him.
the good is amplified when the bad is present. God wanted us to understand what love really is and to want it--not just do it because we were programed to.

I would argue that a predestination for sin and a potential for sin are not the same. Also, I think a predestination for sin is an imperfection. I also think free will is an all or none concept. If you are predestined to do something, then you are not completely free.

Regarding the you-can't-know-good-without-bad argument: I think this argument is a false dichotomy. It assumes there are only two extremes: love and hate, good and bad, pleasure and pain, etc. For example, I don't need to punch myself in the face right before I orgasm to know it feels good. Anyway, that's all for now.

In Dust and Ashes

08-09-2005, 02:44 PM

wow um...vivid and terribly unexpected example...

Six Ways

08-10-2005, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Bumblebee mouth
For example, I don't need to punch myself in the face right before I orgasm to know it feels good.
:yes:

Bumblebee mouth

08-10-2005, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
wow um...vivid and terribly unexpected example...

I'm going to take that as a compliment.:) Let's just say it's better than the first idea I had (which was going to involve either urination or defecation).

Seriously though, thoughts?

In Dust and Ashes

08-10-2005, 04:27 PM

I think I big problem that we're running into here is that we're arguing on a "what would it be like if this didnt exist" basis and all that comes from that is speculation. it's hard to know what the world would be like if we didn't have pain. if our constant was all pleasure, would we know it's greatness? they say that nothing can be appreciated to it's fullest until it has to be attained.
as vivid and seemingly suitable as you're metaphor is, I don't think we can compare the ups and downs of physical pleasure in the reality we know today to a "what if bad didn't exist" senario that none of us have ever known.

does that make sense or does it just sound like I'm making up a bunch of stuff?

Spaced

08-11-2005, 04:23 AM

The conepts of bad things, evil and 'sinful' actions does not need a religios framework for them to exist. Put simply, bad and evil things are anything that threatens our survival, or things that we wouldn't want done to us. Animals have this basic morality just as much as humans do.

The notion of no pain equals pleasure is also false. In the absence of pain, it is more likely the constant would be numbness, possibly interspersed with 'pleasure'.

Six Ways

08-11-2005, 08:02 AM

Originally posted by Spaced
The conepts of bad things, evil and 'sinful' actions does not need a religios framework for them to exist. Put simply, bad and evil things are anything that threatens our survival, or things that we wouldn't want done to us. Animals have this basic morality just as much as humans do.

The notion of no pain equals pleasure is also false. In the absence of pain, it is more likely the constant would be numbness, possibly interspersed with 'pleasure'.

Well hang on, didn't you just contradict yourself? You just said that there is an absolute sort of evil, or pain, or whatever, and then that pleasure is totally relative and we wouldn't understand it without pain. How can one be relative and the other absolute?

Bumblebee mouth

08-11-2005, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by hambakmeritru
I think I big problem that we're running into here is that we're arguing on a "what would it be like if this didnt exist" basis and all that comes from that is speculation. it's hard to know what the world would be like if we didn't have pain. if our constant was all pleasure, would we know it's greatness? they say that nothing can be appreciated to it's fullest until it has to be attained.
as vivid and seemingly suitable as you're metaphor is, I don't think we can compare the ups and downs of physical pleasure in the reality we know today to a "what if bad didn't exist" senario that none of us have ever known.

does that make sense or does it just sound like I'm making up a bunch of stuff?

Spaced already beat me to this, but my example was just to show that the we-can't-know-good-without-bad argument is fallacious because it is a false dichotomy. I just chose pleasure and pain because those are more tangible concepts. In other words, there is more than just good and bad; there is a whole spectrum of things in between. Now it is possible that good wouldn't seem as good to us without something as diametrically opposed to it as bad. But the key phrase there is "as good." Certainly we would still recognize good even without bad because it is better than neutrality.

Spaced

08-11-2005, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Well hang on, didn't you just contradict yourself? You just said that there is an absolute sort of evil, or pain, or whatever, and then that pleasure is totally relative and we wouldn't understand it without pain. How can one be relative and the other absolute?

I never said that we wouldn't understand pleasure without pain. I was alluding to the opposite!
That is, without pain, and no reason to feel pleasure, we would feel just plain "so so".

Jackal

08-11-2005, 09:10 PM

I can feel so-so for hours and days and still recognise pleasure.

Six Ways

08-17-2005, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by Spaced
I never said that we wouldn't understand pleasure without pain. I was alluding to the opposite!
That is, without pain, and no reason to feel pleasure, we would feel just plain "so so".

Well in that case, the pain isn't the deciding factor - the deciding factor on whether you're feeling pleasure or not is whether or not you're feeling pleasure! Which is of course completely circular....maybe I'm just not geting what you're saying here. All I can get from what you said there is 'If you're not feeling pleasure or pain, you're feeling so-so.'

Spaced

08-17-2005, 10:27 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
All I can get from what you said there is 'If you're not feeling pleasure or pain, you're feeling so-so.'

Is there anything wrong with that argument?
What I'm basically getting at is that there is no inherent interelation between pleasure and pain.

Six Ways

08-19-2005, 08:17 AM

No, there's nothing wrong with it, it's just that it's an irrelevant argument. It doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of interrelation between pleasure and pin, just that if you're feeling neither....you're feeling neither! However, the argument that ther are not related as such does make sense, but you didn't make that very clear when you were talking about things which are intrisically bad or painful.

TheImplodingVoice

08-20-2005, 12:09 PM

Back to topic..

I think perfection is imposible because I think a perfect being would be useless and unnecesary, there's a failure there... I think the closest ting to perfection is the human form, specially because of its mistakes...

Anyway, Mila Jovovich..sigh..wow

Six Ways

08-20-2005, 07:59 PM

Originally posted by TheImplodingVoice
I think the closest ting to perfection is the human form

You're supposed to think that! Thing is, when you look at it completely objectively, a lot of stuff about humans is really quite horrible. I mean, one doesn't think so, because the human body is great and all, but if you really thought about it you'd probably conclude that, in fact, for instance, the vagina is a very ugly thing. That's not to say I don't love it, I do! And I think they look wonderful! But is it me or my hormones talking?

BTW, the reason I didn't use the example of the penis is because I already think it's a horrible, horrible thing. Not that I avoid looking at mine when necessary, but I try to avoid other penises, because they look awful.

theburk

09-10-2005, 07:02 PM

firstly i gotta say the fifth element is one of my favorite sci fi movies, i loved it,

secondly, im not realy going to think of the attributes because there can never be a perfect being, even christ had his imperfections (he was human after all, he went to the bathroom like the rest of us, and well it didnt smell like flowers, he had a short fuse, and got pissed real easily, but then again that was the point of christ is that he was human.)