Violent Messiah

We are opening a new discussion thread here - but just to answer bgponder....

Yes, I know that we are living in a relative world - and there is no absolute truth. But there is a concept of truth - as far as the correspondence and coherence theory goes. This concept allows us to basically - live in order.

If I choose to believe my reality - without any inhibitions whatsoever - what hinders me from raping all the beautiful girls and killing all my enemies. If my reality is that which I must be a killer - I am going against the reality of others that they must live. Our ideas clash. Can I argue with relativism when I am put into court - NO!

If you really are a proponent of subjective reality - then don't you dare contest Albert's opinions nor mine - coz they are our reality.

rainbow walking

If I choose to believe my reality - without any inhibitions whatsoever - what hinders me from raping all the beautiful girls and killing all my enemies.


The law


If my reality is that which I must be a killer


Join the military. I'm sure Reverand Bush would be glad to have you...and Albert, too. There might even be a few rapable women in Iraq who would welcome the distraction.


- I am going against the reality of others that they must live.


Well, that fact has never hindered the faithful before...so...why let it stop you now?

Our ideas clash.


Conflict and change are the essense of reality. Existence exists is the one absolute truth...unless you can refute it without existing to do so.

Can I argue with relativism when I am put into court -


Maybe...if you have enough money and lawyers, who knows, anything is possible. After-all, justice is not color blind and is very receptive to green, gold and plastic.

NO!

Then you plead guilty by association? Say, isn't that a subjective experience?

Darth Dane

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Choose to believe your reality!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If I choose to believe my reality - without any inhibitions whatsoever - what hinders me from raping all the beautiful girls and killing all my enemies. If my reality is that which I must be a killer - I am going against the reality of others that they must live."

Nothing except yourself hinders this! you know pretty much waht the society you live in will do to you, if you choose to rape an d so on.

"Our ideas clash. Can I argue with relativism when I am put into court - NO!"

No, because in teh court it is thousands of others opinion against yours, majority rules, thats our way of life: "democrazy"


"If you really are a proponent of subjective reality - then don't you dare contest Albert's opinions nor mine - coz they are our reality."

I am not contesting them, I am trying to find out who you are! What makes you tick and do we have anything in common.
Huge difference IMO




DD - Your choice Spliff

Albert Cipriani

Hi, Rainbow Walking,
Good to hear from you after all this time. Even tho what I hear is this:
You should know better. As I explained yesterday, much to the chagrin of my wife, I’m already taken by my herd of female goats.

But you went on to say something genuinely interesting:
It’s silly. But a lot of things that are silly can be interesting too. For example, I’m ashamed to admit that I still find myself interested in Michael Jackson’s exploits.

Conflict and change cannot be the basis of any coherent metaphysics because they express totally subjective realities. For example, from my perspective I would be having a conflict-free traditional picnic in the park with my wife and goats. But since my wife is consumed by paranoid jealousy over my goats and I had consumed lamb chops, from her perspective and from the lambs' perspective and from their close cousins my goats' perspective, the situation was highly conflicted.

Sorry, kid. Back to the drawing boards. – Cheers, Albert the Traditional Catholic.

My Religious Philosophy List

rainbow walking

Hi Albert,
Sorry if you got dragged into this one, I was just tugging on the string that was left dangling to see how far it would unravel. Now let's see....you said:

Conflict and change cannot be the basis of any coherent metaphysics because they express totally subjective realities.[/b]

Oh, I don't know Albert, conflict and change are the only consistant attributes of this universe and hardly subjective. You see them everyday in nature and the cosmos as well as in people. They pretty much cut across the whole spectrum of what we call "existence" regardless of how we view them. Good to hear from you and hope all is well with the...uh...family and herd.

Albert Cipriani

Rainbow Walking slumps into a crawl as follows:
And I thought Einstein’s theory of relativity has been being verified for half a century now!

Rainbow, if time itself depends on how fast you are going in relation to how fast your identical twin is going such that he ages into an old man while you haven’t changed a bit, how can you continue to assert that “this universe is hardly subjective”? Of course it is subjective. It depends upon how fast its SUBJECTS are going.

Ditto for conflict. What constitutes the antithesis of conflict, a bone-softening mind-numbing session of sunbathing for me on the beach is the most violent of nuclear wars for the atoms on the sun. Trust me, conflict and change is not the stuff of metaphysics. Deeper thinking is required of you. – Cheers, Albert the Traditional Catholic

rainbow walking

Oh my...Albert, have you been smoking that goat shit again?


And I thought Einstein’s theory of relativity has been being verified for half a century now!



Rainbow, if time itself depends on how fast you are going in relation to how fast your identical twin is going such that he ages into an old man while you haven’t changed a bit, how can you continue to assert that “this universe is hardly subjective”?

Now listen closely Albert. Einstein's theory is in reference to objects approaching the speed of light...if that were possible. But, even this has zilch to say in support of your contention that it's all subjective. If you were magically hurled through space at a speed approaching that of light your body would be creating inumerable conflicts and effecting a tremendous change to your immediate surroundings. The conflicts would begin on a sub-atomic level as the cells and atomics of your body began colliding with those of the environment in which you were being hurled at such a speed, (presumably outer-space since you could never approach such speeds in the earth's atmosphere but would almost immediately burn up). These conflicts on this sub-atomic scale, as worlds collide, would effect a tremendous change in your physical structure. Now maybe your perception of this phenomenon is subjective but the phenomenon would occur, nonetheless, even if you were completely unconscious and incapable of percieving anything. Conflict on every scale is taking place around you with every tick of the clock Albert, conflict that produces change, neither of which require your conscious awareness or subjective acknowledgement.


Of course it is subjective. It depends upon how fast its SUBJECTS are going.

Neither speed or motion are determined subjectively unless you are going to delve into semantics here. Please tell me that's not where you're going with this Albert.

Ditto for conflict.


You think the collsion of two galaxies is subjective? But of course you do. Hell you've so mastered your cognitive dissonance that you even think biological pain sensors were created to coerce men to believe in a god. I wonder if the unpleasant aromatic experience of goatshit wafting through the kitchen window in the morning has ever led anyone to an epiphany Albert?


What constitutes the antithesis of conflict, a bone-softening mind-numbing session of sunbathing for me on the beach is the most violent of nuclear wars for the atoms on the sun.


What is the anti-thesis of conflict Albert, peace? And what do you think those ultraviolet sunrays are doing when they conflict with your skin cells? What visible, objective CHANGES occur while you're soaking up the rays?

Trust me, conflict and change is not the stuff of metaphysics.


That's right Albert, it's real physics in real time in real live digital and analog and on every level of existence.


Deeper thinking is required of you. – Cheers, Albert the Traditional Catholic

That's a bit condescending don't you think...coming from someone who believes in fairytales? Have a fun loving and peaceful day. Rainbow Walking

Violent Messiah

Exactly my point....there's this concept of law that hinders me to do that. It loses its subjectivity. If we're talking about criminal law - then we are dealing with something accepted by all that I must be stopped from doing it - hence, I am not able to practice my subjectivism.



Who said it isn't? Change is the world's constant? Definitely. But the variations are with respect to what - you cannot call it change unless you have some idea of the former nature of the matter. See, you are still holding to some truth regarding things that you very well know will change.



Falling into the trap....

I said you are contesting them - but you flat-out denied contesting it. So in essence you are contesting me. Why? You profess we live in a subjectove world...why are you not accepting my ideas.

You are still holding to some concept of truth my friend....

hinduwoman

Albert, in one of the more sophisticated Hindu versions, the One realized that only It exists. So It decided "I shall be many" and thus the universe came into existence.
But why did Yehowah become three?

Albert Cipriani

Dear Hinduwoman,
The Trinity was not created. One God did not create two more Gods. Rather, the nature of God, as the nature of reality, as the nature of geometric space, is triune.

As someone correctly noted here a few days ago, if there were only one God, He couldn't know about it. He couldn't know Himself at all, not even enough to know that He was alone, for to know is to detect contrast. And if One God was all there was, He could not detect any contrast.

Now, the concept of contrast involves three things:
1) that which is
2) that which is not, and
3) the nexus between the two

Catholic theologians describe this triune nature of God not in static terms as I have above, but as two Divine procession. The Son proceeds from the Intellect of the Father by way of Generation (like how we form a word in our mind that expresses a concept). The Holy Ghost proceeds from the will or love of the Father and the Son (like how we actually speak the word that expresses our mind's concept).

The essence or nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is the same. They differ only in being different persons. The Catholic Church accepts the classical definition of "person" proposed by the Medieval philosopher Boethius: A person is an incommunicable substance of a rational nature. Thus, each of the three Persons in the Blessed Trinity is what It is as a function of It being incommunicable to the other Persons in the Blessed Trinity.

To illustrate, the experience of the Father generating the Son (aka, The Word) is unique to the Father and incommunicable by the Father to the Son or the Holy Ghost. The Son's experience of being generated by the Father is incommunicable by the Son to the Father or the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost's experience of proceeding from both the Father and the Son is incommunicable by the Holy Ghost to the Father or the Son.

Since the substance of God subsists in three incommunicable rational natures those natures are indeed separate persons. Ergo, the Triune formula: One God, three persons. - Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic


My Religious Philosophy List