We have moved to new forum software and posting here is closed!

PLEASE BOOKMARK THE NEW FORUMS

	Subtopic	Started By	Posts
	Archive through Dec 21, 2004 Last Post: Dec 22, 2004, 09:38 am		20

Posted By: Caegaraneva Dec 21, 2004 - 05:54 pm

exactly...if they had, then they would be by definition seeing things from ANOTHER perspective, if only the nameless "outside". What Magus is saying that we see EVERYTHING fundamentally through the lens of ourselves. You are taking this way too semantically. Can you just agree that we look at things basically from our perspective, and think of ourselves above anything else in most cases?

Posted By: Aldan Dec 21, 2004 - 07:02 pm

So, then, Spidey, are you saying that dogs, for example, have no freedom? That the way children are molded by their parents removes their freedom of choice? *BTW, I'm currently listening to Devo's Freedom of Choice, ironically enough*
*Aldan shakes his head*
Do laws remove our ability to choose? Do rules? I don't think so, because we may choose to obey them to the fullest, when convenient, or never. As for "judgement day," if it ever comes, well, I think we'll be judged according to the choices we made and the reasons we made those choices.
*shrugs* Those are my thoughts on the subject. If you think that anarchy gives you freedom, then so be it. If you are strong, it may be true, but if you're not, then you become enslaved or killed in an anarchistic society (if you wish to call it a society). Oh, and there will always be someone smarter/stronger/faster than you are, so you'll never be safe, and that means that you have no feeling of safety you can depend on, and doesn't that create chains? Oh, and don't tell me you're not an anarchist, either. If you hate rules and strive not to live by any, then what are you??

Posted By: Spiderkeg Dec 22, 2004 - 07:32 am

Naw, not claiming that we have no freedom. All this stuff is purely relative anyways. If you believe in a higher power, like you probably also accept that God knows all, sees all, and plays a part in your destiny (if not controlling it).

I full believe we are who we are, we do what we want, and our only limitations are the chains that we create for ourselves. I really hate being arachnaphobic.

I have no insight on the lives of dogs, seeing as how I am not one and can't communicate with them. Wondering about the fate of animals, outside of humans, is along the same lines of wondering if there is a dog heaven. I have no idea. Do dogs have souls? Do humans?

We are all innately good and evil, though those are merely words that have been labeled. To Satan, being evil is good. So what is good? As for the laws of man. They're only in place to help keep order to a rather disorganized world. I think we would all go buck wild if it wasn't for the law and fear of it.

Anarchy is a facade. It's an idea, but one that is impossible to exist with humans. By nature, we organize and categorize. This is how we process and deal with reality. If you had a group of people who were in love with chaos, the moment one of them became the leader then anarchy would stop existing. Someone always wants to be the leader, in charge, and people naturally need it. We flounder without some kind of hierarchy to our civilization.

I never claimed to be an anarchist, nor an athiest, nor someone who lives outside the law. I was merely stating some interesting notions. Laws do not limit us, we limit us. We choose to obey to our moralistic views and emotions.

Posted By: Magus Dec 22, 2004 - 09:13 am

Caegaraneva, you got what I meant. that's exactly what I was trying to get across.

I remember hearing in my English class that there's a theory saying that there is no freedom of choice. That, given the set of circumstances wof our lives, we will play the same roles in the exact same way. So, if we start again with the exact same conditions, life will start again and advance in exactly the same way. I don't know if I believe this, but it is an interesting theory.

Posted By: Spiderkeg Dec 22, 2004 - 09:38 am

That is an interesting theory. I agree with that, under certain circumstances. Does this theory pertain to all things in life, or just the life of the person?

Such as, if a ball rolls across the floor to stop at a particular point... was it destined to stop there? If it was, then the events should happen exactly as before when repeated. This however stabs into the theory that without an outside force, nothing will change. If I were to go back in time and relive those events, of course they would repeat as before. If I however decided to interject, the events would be different obviously.

I don't mean to read things so semantically, it is my failing. My bad.

Posted By: Magus Dec 22, 2004 - 02:47 pm

I think it was aimed towards people but, honestly, I do not know for sure.

But the Chaos theory should give it a run for it's money, don't you think?