An interesting premise

[hwarangdo-adam]

i like that quote by my buddy albert

 

[OUMoose]

I don't strive to live by the commandments; however, I keep them in mind. Engaging in adultry with another man's wife might cause problems for me and my daughter. Stealing and murder could end in seperation from my daughter. Puting another god before God could only end in my daughter learning and doing the same. Honoring thy father and mother is again an example set for your offspring. I ask you which commandment is up for debate?
Sean

Before this gets off the thread's original topic, I wasn't debating the commandments themselves. Moreso, I was pointing out the premises that the commandments are based off of, and their appeal as "good" or "evil" to their intended audience. Sorry if there was a miscommunication.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Before this gets off the thread's original topic, I wasn't debating the commandments themselves. Moreso, I was pointing out the premises that the commandments are based off of, and their appeal as "good" or "evil" to their intended audience. Sorry if there was a miscommunication.

I was arguing the commandments are pro-family for the Sib Kinship system and are therefore good for that system.
Sean

 

[heretic888]

I enjoyed the story. I believe as Last Fearner. I will take it a bit further, I think that "negative" things do not exists. They are in fact abcenses of what would make them a good thing.

I find it a little odd when people claim "positive" things exist, but "negative" things do not. This is basically like claiming that there is definately an up, but down just isn't there. It's nonsensical.

Afterall, God did not create evil just to amuse himself. He gave man free will and the rest is as they say history.

Or, in this case, mythology....

 

[Sigung86]

Heretic,

Just an assumption on my part that maybe you are over intellectualizing the concepts of good and bad....

If, assuming you are male, I walk up to you and slice off your tallywhacker with a razor sharp knife and throw it in the, also, assumed, river running by us, and you can not recover it... What context would that be even remotely considered good that is realistic, except and unless you had a very virulent tallywhacker cancer? ....

Hmmm... Maybe I answered my own question? :rofl:

Nevermind...

But, WAIT!!!!
If the cancer wasn't known to exist by you or me, then is the deed still good in any sense of the ideal?

 

[heretic888]

Heretic,

Just an assumption on my part that maybe you are over intellectualizing the concepts of good and bad....

Nope. I'm just recognizing them for what they are: social constructions. Which doesn't mean they're worthless or arbitrary, mind you, but it does free us from the prerational fantasy that our moral precepts somehow have a metaphysical or absolutist status.

In regards to your rather crude question, genital emasculation is often seen in a positive light within certain contexts at certain points in history. Usually, there is a religious motivation involved here (i.e., deliberating making oneself into a eunuch for monastic celibacy).

Which was the prior point I was making. All concepts of "good" and "evil" are dependent on certain biological, psychological, social, and cultural contexts that we inherit. The notion that we somehow magically have developed a context-free morality while our ancestors were awash in silly historically-conditioned rituals and such is rather disingenuous, in my opinion.

In 500 years, our descendents will look upon much of our morals and ethical notions in the same way that we now look upon genital emasculation. The scale is always sliding.

Laterz.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Nope. I'm just recognizing them for what they are: social constructions. Which doesn't mean they're worthless or arbitrary, mind you, but it does free us from the prerational fantasy that our moral precepts somehow have a metaphysical or absolutist status.

In regards to your rather crude question, genital emasculation is often seen in a positive light within certain contexts at certain points in history. Usually, there is a religious motivation involved here (i.e., deliberating making oneself into a eunuch for monastic celibacy).

Which was the prior point I was making. All concepts of "good" and "evil" are dependent on certain biological, psychological, social, and cultural contexts that we inherit. The notion that we somehow magically have developed a context-free morality while our ancestors were awash in silly historically-conditioned rituals and such is rather disingenuous, in my opinion.

In 500 years, our descendents will look upon much of our morals and ethical notions in the same way that we now look upon genital emasculation. The scale is always sliding.

Laterz.

I am willing to admit I may be missing your point here, but if I follow, (and admittedly this is a simplification) basically what is considered good in one society or one group or at one point in history can be considered evil by another society or another group or at another point in history.

And I have to say as far as I can tell this is very true. What is the divine wind to one society is just a bad storm to another if you will.