Are we responsible for our own actions?

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:10 PM
link   
The whole concept of "we are all one" is just, in my never-humble opinion, a rationalization for irresponsibility and failure.

The original poster asks us to show why we're not all connnected, when it is his he with his rather novel approach, who should provide evidence for it.

Evidence like:

We understand each other;

We agree with each other;

We're all working for the same goal(s)

We're all traveling in the same direction(s).

Unfortunately, none of that evidence exists, because we do not understand each other; we do not agree; we do not work the same goal, and we do not travel in the same direction.

I believe we are all bound together be certain external forces some of which we understand, but none of them are evidence that "we are all one".

And thank God for that!




posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
The original poster asks us to show why we're not all connnected

Nope. I never asked anyone to show why we are not connected.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Evidence like:
We understand each other;
We agree with each other;
We're all working for the same goal(s)
We're all traveling in the same direction(s).

This is not evidence. These are assumptions. Assumptions that I never made let alone try to provide them as 'evidence'.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
I believe we are all bound together be certain external forces some of which we understand, but none of them are evidence that "we are all one".
And thank God for that!

Does unity bother you?



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vertu
You are WRONG!! Every single living creature knows what is right or wrong

What is right in one persons eyes may not be right in another. Iraqis beheading captured civilians deem their actions as 'Right', however many think it is 'Wrong'. Right and wrong are perceptions that vary depending on certain political/economic/religious...etc factors. As for animals knowing the difference between right and wrong, do you think fawns pay attention to 'Stop' signs when crossing the road at night. I mean, we all know that if we don’t come to a complete stop that it is wrong, but do you think a fawn knows? My point is that 'Right' and 'Wrong' are completely human conceived concepts that are based on those above factors that I mentioned earlier in this reply. Human perceived 'right' and 'wrong' as applied to animals can merely be broken down to a survival/reproduction relationship.


Originally posted by Vertu
this is one basis of evolution!!

A distinction between Good and Evil? You are going to have to convince a lot of people on this thread in that.


Originally posted by Vertu
There are simple laws in the Universe

The universe doesn’t operate by human defined laws. Think about it.


Originally posted by Vertu
that's the right thing, because there is no "wrong". Only one direction.

Im not sure if I follow you on this. Maybe you can explain it in a different way.


Originally posted by Vertu
Even the very first microscopic creatures knew what is right/wrong, they evolved on an exact path to create advanced manlike thinking creatures.

I really find it hard to believe that bacteria knows what is 'right' and 'wrong'.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by pfcret
No matter how you try to rationalize it, you are responsible for your own actions.


Just exactly why?



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
isn't 'the man' keeping us down? Aren't we just products of our environment? The universal concious wants me to be this way so isn't it 'our' fault? The trauma our parents gave us is surely responsible...and oh! The school system is really terrible, they can't be blameless.



In some bizarre way I partially agree with you.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Simulacra says:

quote: Originally posted by Off_The_Street
The original poster asks us to show why we're not all connnected
Nope. I never asked anyone to show why we are not connected.


Read the third post of this thread. Your asking someone to explain why he doesn't feel we're connected soulds like you're asking for rationalization that we're not -- at least, it does to me.

"This is not evidence. These are assumptions. Assumptions that I never made let alone try to provide them as 'evidence'."

Exactly my point! You might have used them if they were evidence, but they are not evidence at all. As a matter of fact, there is no evidence for your assertion, else you might've tried to show some.

"Does unity bother you? "

Not at all. I think there are some endeavors that benefit tremendously from unity, but that does not mean that we're "all one".

Does being your own man and being responsible for yourself as a person bother you?




[edit on 19-12-2004 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by instar
Similacra, can you explain in a different way how we might "not" be responsible for our own actions?

Anyone you like, its quite thought provoking.


There are a couple ways to negate personal responsibility in a humans life. First off, the concept of a ‘Supreme Being’. If our lives are pre-determined from a creator at our conception then how can we possibly be responsible for our actions? The actions aren’t our own, we are just forced to undergo them. For example, take the concept of fate. We can't escape it, so how can we ultimately be responsible for the actions? This also eliminates the notion of 'Free Will'.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:50 PM
link   
simulacra says:

"There are a couple ways to negate personal responsibility in a humans life. First off, the concept of a ‘Supreme Being’. If our lives are pre-determined from a creator at our conception then how can we possibly be responsible for our actions? The actions aren’t our own, we are just forced to undergo them. For example, take the concept of fate. We can't escape it, so how can we ultimately be responsible for the actions? This also eliminates the notion of 'Free Will'."

Your argument, it seems, is postulated on several "ifs" -- if our lives are predetermined, if we can't excape fate, and so on.

I'm not a theologian by any means, but I believe most deists -- at least Western ones -- do not accept those "ifs" as much as perhaps some Eastern faiths do.

But even so, what does the question of free will have to do with "unity"? We could all be programmed by (pick your mechanism) and still be separate and unique entities.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by quango
an example:
I am walking down the street, and am approached by a homeless man who asks me for change.
There are countless paths leading off of this encounter.



Originally posted by quango
I can give the man the change from my pocket....

Maybe you've seen something on television somewhere in your life that has influenced you to give your change to this homeless guy.


Originally posted by quango
I can dig into my wallet and give him a $5...

Your job gave you a holiday bonus which has made you happy. You exert your happiness in the form of giving a homeless man a $5.


Originally posted by quango
I can tell him to F*** Off....

Your car broke down earlier due to some condensation in the motor block. You are late for work, your only source of income. You realize that this is going to affect your financial situation in the long term. These factors make you pissed off.

Originally posted by quango
I can tell him sorry, but No...

You came from a very positive religious background and you understand that the person is in need but your religion teaches you that 'God only helps those that helps themselves'.


Originally posted by quango
I can ask him his name and sit and spend five minutes having a conversation with him....

You come from a very social culture. It's seems almost mandatory to have an extensive conversation with anyone you meet. You are a social butterfly
.

..etc...

Do you see what im trying to get at Quango? These perceived 'decisions' are just actions merely based on the environmental/cultural/religious/political/economical/societal influences.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Read the third post of this thread.


I'll do better than that, I'll actually re-post it.



quote: Originally posted by Azeari of the Radiant Eye
IMHO, we're not connected (except to the extent that we choose to be connected), therefore we are responsible for our own actions.



Then maybe you can explain why you believe we are all not connected?


''IMHO=In my humble opinion, we're not connected, therefore we are responsible for our own actions''

I want to know that opinion. If the opinion makes the person to believe that we are not connected than it is defintely worth hearing. What is wrong with that?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Your asking someone to explain why he doesn't feel we're connected soulds like you're asking for rationalization that we're not -- at least, it does to me.

Completely taken out of context. Read above.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
As a matter of fact, there is no evidence for your assertion, else you might've tried to show some.

What I stated is not an assertion, it's a theory.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Your argument, it seems, is postulated on several "ifs" -- if our lives are predetermined, if we can't excape fate, and so on.

Philosophical theories are based on 'ifs'. Look at Nietzsche or Kierkegaard for example.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
I'm not a theologian by any means, but I believe most deists -- at least Western ones -- do not accept those "ifs" as much as perhaps some Eastern faiths do.

Our perceived world is based on 'ifs'. These 'ifs' help us understand our lives provide explanations regarding our world. What facts are there in religion and philosophy besides historical and statistical?



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Off_The_Street:
The way in which one perceives the universe is ultimately bias. It's bias because we are in the universe. It's impossible to somehow jump out of the universe and observe it. Therefore we can only go by our humanly created 'Laws of Physics'. But do you really believe that the universe operates by our definitions? In other words, the notion that the universe precisily operates based on our observations from within seems unworkable. Therefore humans have to base our perception of the universe on ifs.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simulacra

Originally posted by instar
Similacra, can you explain in a different way how we might "not" be responsible for our own actions?

Anyone you like, its quite thought provoking.


There are a couple ways to negate personal responsibility in a humans life. First off, the concept of a ‘Supreme Being’. If our lives are pre-determined from a creator at our conception then how can we possibly be responsible for our actions? The actions aren’t our own, we are just forced to undergo them. For example, take the concept of fate. We can't escape it, so how can we ultimately be responsible for the actions? This also eliminates the notion of 'Free Will'.


Ahh, now its clearer. under that idea, No, i dont beleive that, I can choose to gun down a child in the school playground or choose not to. "fate" is a cop out, as it pertains to the individual. I think id have a hard time convincing any court that fate determined i would blow away a child, it wasnt my choice. We are not puppets, we make our choices alone, even under duress we have choice.
"fate" as it pertains to the masses, may be thought of as circumstantially sealed, for example, its not my personal choice if Australia becomes a republic, my single vote is not the decider.
Even the soldier I beleive is ultimatly responsible for his/her own actions.
Orders are a cop out too. A soldier ordered to shoot and kill a child in iraq has a choice to obey or not, consequences may influence but not control
choice.
He/She cannot be forced to shoot, if He/she is physically manipulated into that action against choice then the action is the responsibility of the forcer.
The answer is YES, outside of :
(a) the person is a child lacking the maturaty to make a moral choice
(b) the person is intellectually disabled and unaware of consequences of their actions.
We are responsible for our own actions and choices. Even a person "brainwashed" by a cult, still makes their own choices and acts according to those choices, regardless of beleif.


Do you see what im trying to get at Quango? These perceived 'decisions' are just actions merely based on the environmental/cultural/religious/political/economical/societal influences.



Ahh, more insight. Thats saying our every action is based on social conditioning, not concious thought and consideration of consequences?
I dont buy it, even a child knows he/she can choose act spontaneously,
even outside of parental conditioning.
A child pulls free of his mothers hand in the street and approaches a homeless man and gives him a nickle because the child reasons the man looks sad.
The child has been conditioned by his mother not to talk to strangers, yet he chose freely to act with compassion, despite his mothers rules.
"why did you do that, i told you never talk to strangers"
"but mom, he looked sad"
The boy is responsible for his own action, he has considered the consequences ~his mother will be angry, but he chose to do it anyway.
How is he not responsible for disobeying his mother?

[edit on 013131p://46121 by instar]



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Ace_of_street...while reading your posts on a couple of threads here and on a recent one I've posted,I noticed the ak47 in your avatar,and I went looking for some more info;I know they are very reliable weapons..anyways to keep it somehow connected to this thread and give you an idea of what most people who'd prefer to remain 'Detached' from the harmonic fluids of our cosmic consciousness I came across this post,from another forum..It is just a thought but a sad one a that....

It asked;Is it true that we can now buy machine guns like ak47's and uzi's?

This was the first reply:.......wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo............................ bush is like on crack man? he's really really #ed up to do this #.. TRUE The terriost HAVE these weapons already and don't have to buy it legally or from bootleg..
BUT man it's a great #ing thing to shoot one of these #ers.. you can feel the power kicking off as you trigger these bitches.. pop pop pop pop.. it's fun man... BUT dangerous.. yeah but if you own a gun and want' to do bad #.. it still can be damagaing even without the automatic weapons...
I just hope all the nigs and spics kill each other and other 'n-word' bystanders with it..........

Obviously there's No Global conscience...



[edit on 19-12-2004 by Horus_Re]



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by instar
How is he not responsible for disobeying his mother?

Ok lets entertain the impossible. If it were possible to push a button and a five year old kid appeared in front of you with no prior knowledge of the universe (no history). The first thing the kid sees in his existance is a homeless person on the side of the road.

What is the kid going to do? Help out the homeless guy? Of course not, it's alien to him.

Why? Because the kid has no previous bias on the universe. No influences. No history. Give this kid a nickel and he is going to look at you like you are crazy. What's a nickel? He wouldnt know what to do with it.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 02:26 PM
link   
LMAO, how many 5 yr olds know anything of history?

How about a soldier or marine Simulacra? Is he/she responsible for following an order to shoot dead an iraqi child that has wandered into a no go zone?



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by instar
LMAO, how many 5 yr olds know anything of history?

Yea It's a pretty bizarre example.
. But not history in the sense of what they teach you in class. History in the sense of 'knowing the value of a nickel in society and the relation it has to a homeless person.


Originally posted by instar
How about a soldier or marine Simulacra? Is he/she responsible for following an order to shoot dead an iraqi child that has wandered into a no go zone?

Well you probably already know my response to this question. The soldier isn’t responsible neither is the person that handed down the order. We are all responsible for this action since we all are part of the Cosmic Consciousness



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 02:42 PM
link   

quote: Originally posted by instar
How about a soldier or marine Simulacra? Is he/she responsible for following an order to shoot dead an iraqi child that has wandered into a no go zone?
Well you probably already know my response to this question. The soldier isn’t responsible neither is the person that handed down the order. We are all responsible for this action since we all are part of the Cosmic Consciousness


NO way buddy. Define this cosmic conciousness outside of "new age" crapspeak please. There is no such thing. If i come along and trash your new car with a baseball bat, its your responsibilty too?
That doesent make any sense whatsoever. AS a society, you could argue that we are collectivly responsible for the behaviour of our people, i.e
if we dont teach better we can expect the consequences. cause and effect.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by instar
NO way buddy. Define this cosmic conciousness outside of "new age" crapspeak please.

Trust me, 'New Age' disgust me also. Ok here is an example:

Imagine that we are all on a team. We share the same playbook. We practice the same plays. Now if one person does something, then we are all responsible for their actions. Remember, there is no 'I' in 'Team'.



posted on Dec, 19 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Ok , ill accept that example. Your speaking of global responsibility though. How does the question "are we responsible for our actions?" pretain to the individual? Are you applying the same concept (team) to the actions of the individual? Thats a cop out.
You tell me, are you responsible for your actions?





top topics
 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join