Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 01:52 pm

That's an awfully simplistic way to put it. But having faith in the absolute truth of a certain intersubjective belief is the only way we can know that we are right.

For instance, I believe in God, and I can only have faith in my belief's absolute truth within a single intersubjective frame of reference. The same is true for any ethical system. And while I recognize the objective "frame of reference," which is basically just a theoretical state in which no bias exists, I by no means accept it, because it is impractical and does not appeal to my values or the really the values of anybody.

While we can only note this in our philosophical discussions, it really gets us nowhere. And thus, in real life, we must look to intersubjectivity or we will be utterly lost.

And by the way, why would Dean be pleased? Is it because he's just out selfishly out to secure his fame and be "right" about the world, rather than the world with every fiber of his being? He seems like a crook to me.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 02:00 pm

quote
but if u are saying as a philosopher i know there is no superoir morality or view
then go kill someone and as u stick the knife in her bely you say to her hey philosophically i know u r not bad but my culture says you r so instead of going against my culture i will kill u -but dont take it personally cos i know u r not bad but i must do it cos my culture says u are bad
wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww that really says some powefull things about you epistemologist

or do u prefere to do your killing in an air conditioned room at the pentagon where u just push a button and a villiage in afganistan gets anIhilated with all the kids and women and when your finger gert tied go have a nice ecoffee breack chating up the spunky women who just blow up 200 kids in iraq

i bet it is better than looking at the yes of the one you r killing and say hey dont take it personally i know u r not bad but i am just fiollowing my cultures values

WOOOOOOOOOOW

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 02:23 pm

Such is the natural order of cultural conflict. Different ideas are a threat to your own ideas. To ensure the survival of your own way of life based on those ideas, you must thus eliminate those opposing ideas. Since you can't always change the ideas of other people, the only optimal alternative to getting rid of those ideas is eliminating the people themselves, who, in this view, are considered mere vessels of those ideas.

But of course, such a view is brutal. But like I said, it's the natural order, and we see it all the time. In each of our cultures, we automatically dislike anything from opposing cultures.

Anyway, I think this discussion is a bit off-topic for this thread.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 02:27 pm

but answer the question first
do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 02:34 pm

Wow I haven't killed anyone. But I suppose for me, it would be physically safer for me to be at a distance. However, it's the way of the soldier to see my enemies, so the latter would be better at least initially. Don't get me wrong, in the general context, killing is horrible, and it's awful that it has to be done, but the only optimal way to achieve peace is through war.

And besides, there are all sorts of different cultural contexts defined according to interests, religions, and even species, etc; for instance, in the movie Crash, the white racist cop felt compelled to save a black woman from a burning car because of an intraspecies cultural connection.

Thus, we would feel bad about destroying other human beings, because to some extent, we are betraying a cultural connection albeit a relatively minor one vis-a-vis our main culture. And I suppose it's either this context or judgment based on a single criterion (e.g. minimization of killing) that motivates you to say "Woooooow" and other such remarks.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 02:44 pm

but answer the question first
do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 02:53 pm

What are you getting at? I thought I answered that question in my previous post.

To alleviate some of your concerns, I should give an example. Criminals are cultural enemies. And often, they are executed, i.e. killed, by an institution (usually the government) representing the specific culture. Do cultures kill them close up? Generally yes, via agents, e.g. executioners.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 03:03 pm

but answer the question first just 1 or 2
option 1
do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims

2or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 03:05 pm

Complex question. How could I answer this if I've never done it. But to satisfy you, I'll say option 2 because I'd like to think of myself as a brave person.

But before you start condemning this and that, consider my examples, such as that of the criminal.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 03:16 pm

hey in stalinist russia they had purges got the crimminals to confess then shot them so you would kill a criminal as dfined by any state you happened to be born in whether it is nazi germany stalinist russia
and hey what about the killing of jews defined to be enemies of the state in nazi germany hey would u just go along with this if you where born in these state as the good" i do what my culture says"

or are you saying only people in your culture are alowed to kill whoever yyour cultures say to kill but all the others in the world should not just kill who their culture says - AM I GETING YOUR POINT CLEARLY

**Matt W** · Mar 22, 2007, 03:38 pm

pam, please don't derail your own thread. Focus, please, and stick to the topic.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE.
Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 04:34 pm

Wow pam. Anyway, yes, sometimes the anthropological models can be used as propaganda, but so what? They may be slightly off, but so what? We can still gain some understanding about ourselves. And I think we've at least been close to answering the question of what women get out of relationships because of such analyses.

If you want to go about in a Deanesque world full of systematically pluralist cultures, puppies, and dandelions, you go ahead, but keep in mind you're going no where, with no practical solutions to our problems. Your cultural momentum is 0 kgm/s if you get my gist.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 05:36 pm

just for the record

quote
or are you saying only people in your culture are alowed to kill whoever yyour cultures say to kill but all the others in the world should not just kill who their culture says - AM I GETING YOUR POINT CLEARLY

reply from epistemoloihst
quote
Wow pam. Anyway, yes

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 05:37 pm

Uh you clearly took that "yes" out of context, because I was referring to what we were discussing before you went off-topic. Now we should stay on topic pam.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 05:44 pm

ok so what do womenm getv out of relationships some say sexd some say kids some say security
hahahaha no one has said love-seems to be not a big point for women hahahaha

**Matt W** · Mar 22, 2007, 05:45 pm

*shrugs* The question is, is love a cause or an effect of a relationship?

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 05:52 pm

but no one said they get love out of a relationship VERYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY INTERESTING

looks like for all the hype love not that important in relationships

Epistemologist · Mar 22, 2007, 05:53 pm

Theoretically, I think that love can be either a cause or an effect of a relationship. For instance, there are many love marriages that occur between two people who loved each other before starting a relationship. Indeed, most I suppose were in some sort of relationship before marriage, but perhaps it's still possible to do it without being in a relationship. On the other hand, there are arranged marriages where love is effected over the course of the marriage.

Perhaps we should reevaluate the meaning of the word "relationship" though. Maybe love is neither the cause nor the effect of the relationship; rather, love is the relationship. Anything else, such as lust, possessiveness, or needs for security, are just superficial.

Quote:

Quote by: pam699

but no one said they get love out of a relationship VERYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY INTERESTING

looks like for all the hype love not that important in relationships

Maybe that's because your questions are often confusing, and it was thought you were talking about the general anthropological sense. Talking about love per se is sort of philosophical.

pam699 · Mar 22, 2007, 05:55 pm

yes but up till now no one said they got love out of a relationship so that does say it must not be that imporant for all thev hype around LOVE

**Matt W** · Mar 22, 2007, 05:55 pm

Not at all. Of course love is important, extremely so. But do people view it as coming from a relationship, or directed at a relationship? If I love someone, I don't automatically look for that love to be returned. In the context of a relationship, I don't look to get love out of a relationship - I view it as something I put in.

Mar 22, 2007, 01:52 pm	#61 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	That's an awfully simplistic way to put it. But having faith in the absolute truth of a certain intersubjective belief is the only way we can know that we are right. For instance, I believe in God, and I can only have faith in my belief's absolute truth within a single intersubjective frame of reference. The same is true for any ethical system. And while I recognize the objective "frame of reference," which is basically just a theoretical state in which no bias exists, I by no means accept it, because it is impractical and does not appeal to my values or the really the values of anybody. While we can only note this in our philosophical discussions, it really gets us nowhere. And thus, in real life, we must look to intersubjectivity or we will be utterly lost. And by the way, why would Dean be pleased? Is it because he's just out selfishly out to secure his fame and be "right" about the world, rather than the world with every fiber of his being? He seems like a crook to me. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 02:23 pm	#63 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	Such is the natural order of cultural conflict. Different ideas are a threat to your own ideas. To ensure the survival of your own way of life based on those ideas, you must thus eliminate those opposing ideas. Since you can't always change the ideas of other people, the only optimal alternative to getting rid of those ideas is eliminating the people themselves, who, in this view, are considered mere vessels of those ideas. But of course, such a view is brutal. But like I said, it's the natural order, and we see it all the time. In each of our cultures, we automatically dislike anything from opposing cultures. Anyway, I think this discussion is a bit off-topic for this thread. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 02:34 pm	#65 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	Wow I haven't killed anyone. But I suppose for me, it would be physically safer for me to be at a distance. However, it's the way of the soldier to see my enemies, so the latter would be better at least initially. Don't get me wrong, in the general context, killing is horrible, and it's awful that it has to be done, but the only optimal way to achieve peace is through war. And besides, there are all sorts of different cultural contexts defined according to interests, religions, and even species, etc; for instance, in the movie Crash, the white racist cop felt compelled to save a black woman from a burning car because of an intraspecies cultural connection. Thus, we would feel bad about destroying other human beings, because to some extent, we are betraying a cultural connection albeit a relatively minor one vis-a-vis our main culture. And I suppose it's either this context or judgment based on a single criterion (e.g. minimization of killing) that motivates you to say "Woooooow" and other such remarks. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 02:53 pm	#67 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	What are you getting at? I thought I answered that question in my previous post. To alleviate some of your concerns, I should give an example. Criminals are cultural enemies. And often, they are executed, i.e. killed, by an institution (usually the government) representing the specific culture. Do cultures kill them close up? Generally yes, via agents, e.g. executioners. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 03:05 pm	#69 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	Complex question. How could I answer this if I've never done it. But to satisfy you, I'll say option 2 because I'd like to think of myself as a brave person. But before you start condemning this and that, consider my examples, such as that of the criminal. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 02:00 pm	#62 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	quote but if u are saying as a philosopher i know there is no superoir morality or view then go kill someone and as u stick the knife in her bely you say to her hey philosophically i know u r not bad but my culture says you r so instead of going against my culture i will kill u -but dont take it personally cos i know u r not bad but i must do it cos my culture says u are bad wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww that really says some powefull things about you epistemologist or do u prefere to do your killing in an air conditioned room at the pentagon where u just push a button and a villiage in afganistan gets anIhilated with all the kids and women and when your finger gert tied go have a nice ecoffee breack chating up the spunky women who just blow up 200 kids in iraq i bet it is better than looking at the yes of the one you r killing and say hey dont take it personally i know u r not bad but i am just fiollowing my cultures values WOOOOOOOOOOW

Mar 22, 2007, 02:27 pm	#64 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	but answer the question first do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Mar 22, 2007, 02:44 pm	#66 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	but answer the question first do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Mar 22, 2007, 03:03 pm	#68 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	but answer the question first just 1 or 2 option 1 do u prefere to do your killing at a safe distance so that you cant see your victims 2or close up and see their eyes as u dig the knife into her belly

Mar 22, 2007, 03:16 pm	#70 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	hey in stalinist russia they had purges got the crimminals to confess then shot them so you would kill a criminal as dfined by any state you happened to be born in whether it is nazi germany stalinist russia and hey what about the killing of jews defined to be enemies of the state in nazi germany hey would u just go along with this if you where born in these state as the good" i do what my culture says" or are you saying only people in your culture are alowed to kill whoever yyour cultures say to kill but all the others in the world should not just kill who their culture says - AM I GETING YOUR POINT CLEARLY Last edited by pam699; Mar 22, 2007 at 03:26 pm. Reason: add

Mar 22, 2007, 04:34 pm	#72 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	Wow pam. Anyway, yes, sometimes the anthropological models can be used as propaganda, but so what? They may be slightly off, but so what? We can still gain some understanding about ourselves. And I think we've at least been close to answering the question of what women get out of relationships because of such analyses. If you want to go about in a Deanesque world full of systematically pluralist cultures, puppies, and dandelions, you go ahead, but keep in mind you're going no where, with no practical solutions to our problems. Your cultural momentum is 0 kgm/s if you get my gist. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex Last edited by Epistemologist; Mar 22, 2007 at 04:34 pm. Reason: Added clarifications

Mar 22, 2007, 05:36 pm	#73 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	just for the record quote or are you saying only people in your culture are alowed to kill whoever yyour cultures say to kill but all the others in the world should not just kill who their culture says - AM I GETING YOUR POINT CLEARLY reply from epistemoloihst quote Wow pam. Anyway, yes

Mar 22, 2007, 05:37 pm	#74 (permalink) (top)
Epistemologist God is good Location: Down by the river, stealing your water Posts: 1,518	Uh you clearly took that "yes" out of context, because I was referring to what we were discussing before you went off-topic. Now we should stay on topic pam. But what's to stop the manic tide, The suicide of our own pride? The Complex

Mar 22, 2007, 05:44 pm	#75 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	ok so what do womenm getv out of relationships some say sexd some say kids some say security hahahaha no one has said love-seems to be not a big point for women hahahaha

Mar 22, 2007, 05:45 pm	#76 (permalink) (top)
Matt W Moderator Location: Reading, UK. Posts: 7,198	shrugs The question is, is love a cause or an effect of a relationship? I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. -George Best, on being asked what he did with his footballing fortunes.

Mar 22, 2007, 05:52 pm	#77 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	but no one said they get love out of a relationship VERYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY INTERESTING looks like for all the hype love not that important in relationships

Mar 22, 2007, 05:55 pm	#79 (permalink) (top)
pam699 BANNED Posts: 583	yes but up till now no one said they got love out of a relationship so that does say it must not be that imporant for all thev hype around LOVE

Mar 22, 2007, 05:55 pm	#80 (permalink) (top)
Matt W Moderator Location: Reading, UK. Posts: 7,198	Not at all. Of course love is important, extremely so. But do people view it as coming from a relationship, or directed at a relationship? If I love someone, I don't automatically look for that love to be returned. In the context of a relationship, I don't look to get love out of a relationship - I view it as something I put in. I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. -George Best, on being asked what he did with his footballing fortunes.