evil/sin

To be honest gentlemen semantics' is really not in keeping with the intent of the forum.

So while Angels and there existence is worthy of discussion, how many can actually fit onto a pin makes for dull conversations.

And while evil and sin is in fact a topic which is relatable, interesting and fun. To use it as a reason to discuss Kohlberg and Ubermunche remind me of why it was so important to have a cup of coffee just before classes during my Junior year (sometimes even two).

MA I take exception with your application of the term "Dummies" clearly this seems a new trend in your method of interaction with the membership of this Forum. So while I am happy that you and Jagd are bonding I would certainly appreciate more decorum in your future responses.

Toltec

I disagree with you entirely.

"Kohlberg for Dummies" was clearly an allusion to the well known series of yellow-covered introductory publications on all manner of subject matter, nothing at all to do with the assessment of anyone's intellect here.

Pull your head in.

MA given our past conversations I would say that consideration should be given to what has always
been your effort for candid and sincere responses.

Therefore in all sincerity I retract my prior statment.

Bugger.

Toltec, I was rude to you (in spite of the candour of my explanation of the 'Dummies' reference) and I wanted you to react expressively.

No attempt to shift you from the moderate path you are on, to say something loudly, has worked.

You are indeed a very considerate individual, which is to be commended, sincerely.

alright jag - I've had time to read the long post you made a couple days ago and i have a few points:

reminding everyone: L-nation is a nation where women are liberated. C-nation is a nation where they are oppressed.


Alright option 3 - If 'slavery is wrong', is an absolute moral, then why don't the people of C-nation see this? The people of L-nation have no trouble seeing it.. the theist and the atheist, both. Are the people (all the people, the entire culture) of C-Nation Evil?

Or maybe the people of L-Nation are all Evil. Somebody must be because they disagree on a moral absolute. Therefore, one group is morally wrong.

You assume it is C-Nation, because after all, they're the ones who are oppressing women, but you are biased because you are in the L-nation camp. Of course you think the country oppressing women is wrong, because YOU think it is. But how do you know you're not on the wrong side? How do you know oppressing women isn't an absolute moral good? You think you know, because you're "Source" tells you so, but they're "source" tells them the opposite. So who's right?

That's the point. It's not that everybody's right - although I would say it that way - it's that NO ONE KNOWS WHO IS RIGHT. But lots of people think they do.

When I look at this situation, this is what I see: Over hundreds of years, these two nations grew - for whatever vast societal reasons, they diverged in their thinking on a certain moral stand: Women's Rights.
Both nations think they way they do it is natural and right - however - they approach the situation two different ways.

C-nation, is different from it's neighbor, but it hasn't tried to force its way of life onto L-nation or claimed L-nation was morally corrupt.
Meanwhile, the people in L-Nation, sensing (what they perceive to be) a moral outrage, can't seem to stop talking about C-Nation.
In fact, the Absolutists are so outraged, they propose economic sanctions - even threatening war, if necessary, simply because they disagree w/ the way c-nation developed and are absolutely sure they're right..

But has C-Nation, this entire time so much as lifted a finger or even looked in L-nation's direction? Have they cried out, L-nation must become like us!? No.

So who is morally unsound?
C-nation, and its peaceful society which developed over hundreds of years, in a way that another society may not agree with?
OR,
L-nation, who believes They are Always Right; who believes that every society should be like their's; who are willing to threaten and attack other nations who don't agree with them...?


[Edited on 20-8-2003 by quango]

I remember when we talking the other day at another forum you mentioned Yin and Yang, if you review my blog you will find amongst other issues a description of Wu Wei. This being the principle which is descriptive of the way Yin and Yang are represented as one.

For the record a substantial amount of my upbringing was spent in Chicago, Illinois but I am well traveled, as a result I did not just learn about Wu Wei from a book.

Beyond that MA I really am a descendant of Toltec Indians and as a result was raised in the traditional ways.

My life has actually been quite interesting so if you really want to tick me off. The least you can do is find out where I live, take the air out of my cars tires and spray paint the car with "MA was here".

Toltec

Where I have lived of late they are called tyres, sorry about your uneducated spelling.

Now, where would that tyre-slashing form of terrorism fit on the moral continuum?

Worse than a prank, causing physical property damage, irreparable harm, and time, money and inconvenience.

Worthy of a 'wet bus ticket' in some countries.

Worthy of execution in other countries.

If I harbored a vendetta against any American Indian descendant, I would prefer to be dined and entertained, experiencing some shamanistic rituals and education, before a council meeting to determine how grievances might be resolved. Is that possible?

Originally posted by Toltec

And while evil and sin is in fact a topic which is relatable, interesting and fun. To use it as a reason to discuss Kohlberg and Ubermunche remind me of why it was so important to have a cup of coffee just before classes during my Junior year (sometimes even two).

Who is Kohlberg and why am I being discussed in junior class alongside him, with or without coffee?

Kohlberg was a developmental psychologist who proposed a stage theory of moral development in people.

I summarized it on the previous page.

I actually think it is reasonably accurate, but I add another stage to it in line with my view of the human potential.

By far I am presenting what to date is a translation (American Indians).

The Taino in the early 1820s were down to 7 families, do the research and you will find that something in common exist with the Toltec.

A) Puerto Rico is the only island on this planet with Ballcourts and B) exactly like the Toltec's the term Taino transcended geography, in respect to south and Central America as well as the Caribbean.

Perhaps from a perspective MA which is related to a fantasy (in respect to reality) your education into our culture lacks a conclusion which does not include "fear
at all cost scenario".

If I were in fact from another culture I would probably understand why you feel the way you do, after all what is known of the Toltec could be defined in a context which makes others feel uncomfortable (what our warrior could do).

As much as the Vatican Empire (Assembly) desired we be viewed as equal to the gypsies the real failure was in respect to linage (My family is related to who????).

Might I suggest that with only 7 families alive to discuss what really happened (El Morro) an advantage exist (especially when taking into consideration that no oddities were ever recorded as having exited in the lands in question (do not go there).

MA in the late 1400s something was discovered, to be honest what Cristobar Colon (accent on the last O) recorded (in his logs) was but the cherry on top of the cake.

Do not confuse me with someone who misunderstands why.

Any thoughts?

PS: Bottom line " we do not need your stinking badges"

[Edited on 20-8-2003 by Toltec]

Toltec

I'm not sure you understand how I feel, and I have no fear of any cultures at all, in fact I prefer many to my own...

I am very interested in the history you presented.

But if I restated my question thusly:

If someone had a grievance or a vendetta (which I don't) with a native American for some legitimate reason, is it at all possible to work that out, on the native American's own turf, on amicable grounds, including some of what I have suggested? Or is it not possible?

I have an interest in shamanism as well. It was posted in my introduction post, which I have since deleted.

quango
Well war with C-Nation was the last resort. There exists in all of us a certain concept of what is right or wrong. This can be called the God Consciousness, the Krishna Consciousness, etc. Now I have seen atheists who have the God Consciousness, but they would bite their tongue off in their mouths before ever admitting that there can be such a thing as a God Consciousness. Indeed the contention is that we all have an "inner man" who tells us what is morally right. Thus you have statements such as "In your heart you know that you are right (or wrong)". Many people tend to want legalistic definitions of what is morally correct, they want it written in black and white (Step 5 of Kohlberg?). We must go beyond that - we must develope the innate concept of morality - the God Consciousness, the Krishna Consciousness, etc. In short the leaders of C-Nation know deep in their hearts that their treatment of women is wrong. What man would want his mother to be treated that way? What man would want his sister treated that way? What sort of a man is he? You say, "L-nation, who believes They are Always Right; who believes that every society should be like their's; who are willing to threaten and attack other nations who don't agree with them...?" This is a typical subjectivist/relativistic argument; that the Absolute Moralists "believe that every society should be like theirs". No, that is incorrect. Basically the subjectivist/relativistic moralists seem unable to see the difference between important issues and issues of no concern. I thought I made the point that we are dealing with what can be called "Core Values" not issues that could be called "customs". The moral theory should be called Absolutism/Relativism (There are those moral values which are Absolute, then there are those moral codes which are determined on a society customs basis, individual basis, etc.)

We should be able to define several levels on how we should view other peoples moral systems:
1. Those things that are merely customs, (the people of H-Nation practice national holidays which has parades, celebrations, etc. Everyone is expected to participate.)
2. Those things which are merely foibles, (The people of M-Nation have marriage customs and marriage laws which the people of L-Nation consider absolutely bizarre but beyond that the people of L-Nation has no problem with the strangeness of M-Nation's marriage laws.)
3. Those things which you consider immoral but are really relative, (The people on N-Nation practice social and public nudity. The people of L-Nation think that social and public nudity is improper and immoral. However their attitude to the people of N-Nation is that as long as they do it in N-Nation it is all right; however, when the people of N-Nation appear on the beaches of L-Nation they better be dressed.)
4. Those things which you consider immoral but not on the level where you feel the need to intervene, (The people of D-Nation permits the use of drugs and in D-Nation there is a large drug culture. The people of L-Nation sees the behavoir of the people of D-Nation as the actions of a bunch of hedonistic slobs. Other than making it plain and clear to the people of D-Nation that the people of L-Nation think that everyone in D-Nation is bound for Hell, L-Nation does not more than that. However L-Nation also makes it clear to the people of D-Nation that if "they want to clean up their act", then the people of L-Nation will be there to help.
5. Those things which are immoral and REALLY IMPORTANT and are considered intolerable (innocents are dying), The people of C-Nation are practicing what amounts to slavery. Slavery is a moral outrage. While the people of L-Nation considers the drug culture of D-Nation morally reprehensible, they see that no one in D-Nation is compelled to use drugs. However, the women in C-Nation have no choice but to be treated as property. The people of L-Nation feel that they must act on the behalf of the women of C-Nation.

MA the best organization to approach first would the Bureau of Indian Affairs then go from there.

I will check it out, Toltec, and I understand your reticence.

As I side issue, how do I find your Blog now?

I can only see ones come up that have recent additions, there is no Blog Listing any more.

A general query. The first couple of entries you made were very enlightening.

Got your U2U in respects could not respond though??

Anyway, see at my SIG you will note I have added a link to my blog. Also, the blogs are displayed its on the far right of the main screen under the advertisements.

Here is a link to the BIA site...

www.doiu.nbc.gov...


[Edited on 21-8-2003 by Toltec]

Now the fact is that sin is totally in our heads it doesn't exist. To feel sorry for ones acts is conscience, and to allow this to eat you alive is totally agaist what god created you for. Unfortunately we are a society that believes that the pope is holy when he merely a man such as you or me. Now the problem is not the acts that men commit merely the hypocrisy that others preach i.e. saying that it was wrong of hitler ot do what he did yet we did the same to the indians and the english to the scots so nothing is better or worse ya know?

Zero

I agree with your analogies, except any example of genocide is the most grievous form of evil and sin. The 'collective consciousness' morality ought to take care of that, but as individuals we are too busy concerning ourselves with material possessions and trinkets. We are unevolved.

I followed Toltec's suggestion on educating myself through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, as I am not into denial.

This is what I found:


This Website is Temporarily Unavailable

The BIA website as well as the BIA mail servers have been made temporarily unavailable due to the Cobell Litigation. Please continue to check from time to time. We have no estimate on when authorization will be given to reactivate these sites.

Here are some alternate ways to get BIA-related information:

For general BIA information: 202 208-3710

For BIA Enrollment Information/Requirements (Tribal): 202 208-5513

For Tribal Leaders Directory: 202 208-3711


I haven't followed the Cobell Litigation at all.

TheZeroOne, I take exception to the statement that "we are a society that believes that the pope is holy". Being a Protestant Christian, I and most likely most of my fellow Protestant Christians do not claim any particulat holiness for the Pope. When will non-Christians get it straight in their head, that the Pope does not speak for all Christians. Also there is indeed such a thing as sin.

MaskedAvatar, do a google search on "Cobell v Norton".

Yes MA like what the Spanish and Vatican Empire did to more than half of this Hemisphere (compared to Hitler tame). Just thinking about that makes me wonder as to the motivations of those who spend so much time crying peace.

Will say one thing for the Vatican of today MA it sure is different.

[Edited on 21-8-2003 by Toltec]