Friends of the Secular Café: Forums
Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
Talk Freethought
Rational Skepticism Forum
EvC Forum: Evolution vs. Creation
Living Nonreligion Discussion Forum
The Round Table (RatPags)
Talk Rational!
Blogs
Blue Collar Atheist
Camels With Hammers
Ebonmuse: Daylight Atheism
Nontheist Nexus
The Re-Enlightenment
Rosa Rubicondior
The Skeptical Zone
Watching the Deniers
Others
Christianity Disproved
Count Me Out
Ebon Musings
Freethinker.co.uk
 
       

Go Back   Secular Café > Intellectual Debate and Discussion Forums > Philosophy & Morality

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24 Apr 2012, 01:43 PM   #358262 / #76
justme
babble rouser
 
justme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquez View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
I don't think it's possible to adopt someone else's reasons for existence.
Not only is it possible to adopt someone else's reasons for existence, it is, unfortunately, the norm. Look, for example, at the large numbers of people who adopt their parents' religious values.
A framework for thoughts and feelings does not create thoughts and feelings. Even I'm not dumb enough to state that all religious people have the same motivations and desired outcomes in life simply because they were brought up in the same belief system. You are only correct in the most general sense, but the argument collapses when the individuality of each person comes into play.
The question then is, At what point is a person completely an individual. I had a very hard time disposing of the quirks and the guilt of not configuring my life to that of the Christian community, after I left The Witnesses. Are we ever truly free of the attitudes and ideals that we were brought up with.

I still hold to the ideals of the treatment of people and still have the tendency to favor some over others. Is that because of me being human or me being brought up as a Chritain, I have no clue.
justme is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 24 Apr 2012, 01:54 PM   #358268 / #77
Valheru
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,995
Default

You are unique even if you're the most brainwashed droid out there. Humans aren't carbon copies of each other.
Valheru is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 24 Apr 2012, 03:13 PM   #358305 / #78
justme
babble rouser
 
justme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
You are unique even if you're the most brainwashed droid out there. Humans aren't carbon copies of each other.
It's true that no two people are alike, but are we talking about personalities or are we talking about a vision of a goal. Ideologies and religions both have a common goal to gain as much of a following as possible for their own agendas.

The pull of being apart of something, to be excepted, sometimes is far too strong for many people. Those weak enough can easily loose all they are for that group. They can live, breath and even kill for the goals of that group.
justme is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 24 Apr 2012, 03:52 PM   #358313 / #79
Marquez
On Vacation
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marquez View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
I don't think it's possible to adopt someone else's reasons for existence.
Not only is it possible to adopt someone else's reasons for existence, it is, unfortunately, the norm. Look, for example, at the large numbers of people who adopt their parents' religious values.
A framework for thoughts and feelings does not create thoughts and feelings. Even I'm not dumb enough to state that all religious people have the same motivations and desired outcomes in life simply because they were brought up in the same belief system. You are only correct in the most general sense, but the argument collapses when the individuality of each person comes into play.
Nah. Plenty of sociological and psychological evidence indicates that values are transmitted heavily through culture. It's nearly a truism.
Marquez is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 24 Apr 2012, 03:54 PM   #358314 / #80
Marquez
On Vacation
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valheru View Post
You are unique even if you're the most brainwashed droid out there. Humans aren't carbon copies of each other.
False dichotomy. It's not that either A) we are exact carbon copies or B) our values are completely independent and distinct. Clearly the truth falls between these two extremes you're drawing. Most people take values from parents, peers and culture, and most people also have some values that are unique.
Marquez is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 24 Apr 2012, 09:58 PM   #358461 / #81
rog
*
 
rog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 12,712
Default

Mod Hat: Please keep it civil in here guys.
The latter parts of the disagreement were moved here http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=19252
rog is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 28 Apr 2012, 10:53 AM   #359564 / #82
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
That is just meaningless woo, and actually offensive. Are you saying that someone who is infertile and can't have children is somehow inferior?
Such a person should adopt one (or more) children. Hinduism gives the same rights to an adopted child as to a biological one.
__________________
'Sarve khalu idam Brahma'
All things here are Brahman (physical energy).
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 29 Apr 2012, 12:56 AM   #359715 / #83
Ozymandias
________________
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,881
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
That is just meaningless woo, and actually offensive. Are you saying that someone who is infertile and can't have children is somehow inferior?
Such a person should adopt one (or more) children. Hinduism gives the same rights to an adopted child as to a biological one.
There is no way I am letting someone else's brat live in my home.
Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 29 Apr 2012, 06:49 AM   #359756 / #84
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

Your choice. It was a social solution to a problem in India.



This is a 1928 photo of the male members of the Roy Family of Behala, south of Calcutta, along with the children. Adult women would have been behind an effective “purdah”. The bearded patriarch is Surendra Nath Roy, in 1916, Deputy President of Bengal Legislative Assembly.

Last edited by Aupmanyav; 29 Apr 2012 at 08:20 AM.
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 29 Apr 2012, 01:21 PM   #359823 / #85
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
That is just meaningless woo, and actually offensive. Are you saying that someone who is infertile and can't have children is somehow inferior?
Such a person should adopt one (or more) children. Hinduism gives the same rights to an adopted child as to a biological one.

What utter crap.

And, as you've repeatedly shown here, what Indian society does (or at least your take on it) is often totally morally wrong and utterly nauseating. And, quite frankly, I don't care what hinduism does or doesn't do...there's more to the world than your religion.
__________________
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 10:45 AM   #360053 / #86
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

What is morally wrong in adopting a child and giving him/her rights equal to those of a biological child?
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 12:56 PM   #360075 / #87
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
What is morally wrong in adopting a child and giving him/her rights equal to those of a biological child?
There's nothing morally wrong with that....and you know as well as I do that you just evaded the real question. What you said is that infertile couples should adopt orphans. I say they should have the choice.

Also, my observation about immorality was part of the larger topic of Indian society in general, and the horrible picture of it you paint with every post.
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 06:51 PM   #360158 / #88
Pandora
Chronically Skeptical
 
Pandora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Posts: 4,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
There is no way I am letting someone else's brat live in my home.
Do you even let your own brats live in your home? I'm kind of under the impression that you dislike all humans . You might be the single most misanthropic person I've ever met .
Pandora is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 06:53 PM   #360159 / #89
Pandora
Chronically Skeptical
 
Pandora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Posts: 4,778
Default

This is pretty off topic, so feel free to move it if you wish...

phands, do you think there is a single morality for the whole globe?
Pandora is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 07:13 PM   #360175 / #90
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora View Post
This is pretty off topic, so feel free to move it if you wish...

phands, do you think there is a single morality for the whole globe?
Good question, Pandora.

I think there could, and should be. A universally accepted statement of human rights would be a good start.

Of course, where we are right now isn't even close.
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 30 Apr 2012, 07:28 PM   #360179 / #91
Ozymandias
________________
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,881
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora View Post
Do you even let your own brats live in your home?
I don't.
Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 03:02 AM   #360313 / #92
WufKar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 10
Default Morals

It is not possible to have a unified set of morals globally due to the geographic dispersal and the various cultural mores already in existence.

How do you say which one is right and which is wrong?

Morals are defined by a precursory belief structure inherent to the culture.
WufKar is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 03:26 AM   #360322 / #93
Jerome
Banned
Parachute Panic Champion
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Pleasant Living
Posts: 7,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
What is the point in being?

I ask again. What's the point?
Why does it matter?
Jerome is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 05:05 AM   #360340 / #94
Volcanoman
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 45
Default the secret of life is that there is no secret of life!

nm
Volcanoman is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 07:05 AM   #360348 / #95
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phands View Post
There's nothing morally wrong with that .. and you know as well as I do that you just evaded the real question. What you said is that infertile couples should adopt orphans. I say they should have the choice.
Yes, they should and have the choice. I erred and would have corrected but for internet connectivity. In Indian society, a son carries on the family name and lights the funeral pyre. If the person does not have a son, then a nephew or the son of the daughter (hopefully one has them) can do the job.
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 09:59 AM   #360370 / #96
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by phands View Post
There's nothing morally wrong with that .. and you know as well as I do that you just evaded the real question. What you said is that infertile couples should adopt orphans. I say they should have the choice.
Yes, they should and have the choice. I erred and would have corrected but for internet connectivity. In Indian society, a son carries on the family name and lights the funeral pyre. If the person does not have a son, then a nephew or the son of the daughter (hopefully one has them) can do the job.
If it was an error, then OK.

As for the rest about succession and funeral pyres, you just pointed out an anti-woman bigotry.
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 01:20 PM   #360408 / #97
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

Well, I mentioned the son of my daughter (she does not have one, has a daughter). Women in our caste do not go to the funeral ground, only a few paces from the home.
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 02:21 PM   #360428 / #98
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Well, I mentioned the son of my daughter (she does not have one, has a daughter). Women in our caste do not go to the funeral ground, only a few paces from the home.

Why not?
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 02:42 PM   #360436 / #99
Aupmanyav
Atheist, advaitist, Hindu
 
Aupmanyav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 6,534
Default

Basically to save them from a harsh spectacle.
Aupmanyav is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 01 May 2012, 03:41 PM   #360452 / #100
phands
Long term atheist
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Manhattan New York
Posts: 10,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Basically to save them from a harsh spectacle.
Oh,,,,,puhleeeze....

More implicit bias....I bet no one asked the women if they'd like to be included.
phands is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Secular Café > Intellectual Debate and Discussion Forums > Philosophy & Morality

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
 
Ocean Zero by vBSkins.com | Customised by Antechinus