Suicidal Moron World.

[iconoclast]

Bn,

A couple of quich corrections if I may. I didn't raise or defend your right to exist. I agree you have no such right, (see post #9) but the right to life now that you do exist I think should be defended in simple preference to someone elses right to kill you, and/or by implication, me!

The other thing is that I'm not of the Eastern school, whatever that means. Buddhist? No, I'm firmly, some would say rabidly athiestic - I even find the term athiest offensive because it's defined as the neagtive of belief in God, where I posistively believe in a scientific conception of reality and an evolutionary conception of man and see little reason to consider the idea.

My questions are directed toward revealing natural obligations to the continued existence of the species - where, given the title of this post, i'm the average man stuck on a world, and youre arguing the case of the suicidal moron who feels no obligation to act to perpetuate his kind.

I do understand your distinction between actual obligation and feelings of obligation which you may or may not act upon, so in that case, do you feel obliged to act to secure the continued existence of the species, or would you claim the individual right to use resources ruinously and fcuk future generations?

iconoclast.

[BrightNoon]

...do you feel obliged to act to secure the continued existence of the species, or would you claim the individual right to use resources ruinously and fcuk future generations?

I will thoroughly waste any and all resources whose wasting gives me pleasure; I'm a hedonist through and through and, though you don't know it, so are you!

However, in all seriousness, I will never, on my most solemn oath, ever claim a right to anything. That would smack of cowardice, lack of confidence; why should I need to justify my acts with a 'right'?

[Theaetetus]

Originally Posted by BrightNoon

...do you feel obliged to act to secure the continued existence of the species, or would you claim the individual right to use resources ruinously and fcuk future generations?

I will thoroughly waste any and all resources whose wasting gives me pleasure; I'm a hedonist through and through and, though you don't know it, so are you!

However, in all seriousness, I will never, on my most solemn oath, ever claim a right to anything. That would smack of cowardice, lack of confidence; why should I need to justify my acts with a 'right'?

Do yourself a favor and look up the definition of "right" in the dictionary--especially the Oxford English Dictionary. Then maybe you would quit going on about what you think you know but do not understand.

[iconoclast]

Brightnoon,

I'm not a hedonist, nor an ascetic - I take pleasure in life, but reject the extreme in all its forms: the ideal, superlative, the absolute, and instead embrace the moderate. I take pleasure in the little things in life most people take for granted, such as the fact of my existence and the ability to think, feel and know. I live modestly, but well. I like to cook, read and write. These are not hedonistic pursuits.

If by oblliged you mean, feel an obligation, then there are times when I feel or suspect I would feel obligations.

The distinction you make here is semantic - and contradicts your claim to be a hedonist. The hedonist believes in and acts on the idea that hedonism is the ultimate conception of the good. They do not feel obliged to do anything but persue pleasure because the pursuit of pleasure is considered the ultimate good. On principle, obligation is rejected as unhedonistic - a potential obstacle to the pursuit of pleasure.

As you have intially rejected the concept of obligation and then come to acknowleddge that you may feel obliged under certain circumstances, I suspect that under similar questioning you would come to accept that you have rights and would respect the rights of others. This too is unhedonistic.

Given your general failure comprehend the meaning of these relatively basic philosophical terms, that you throw out and/or dismiss with such insoussiance, given the title of this post, it's ironic that you argue the case of the suicidal moron, for that's exactly how you come across.

regards,

iconoclast.

[Zetherin]

Originally Posted by Theaetetus

You had the right to exist, so why shouldn't those who come after you? Actually it is better to live wisely rather than briefly and spectacularly. The spectacular comes into play when one follows wisdom, not to mention, so does longevity and perseverance.

A 'right' to exist? You, nor I, know the reason we're here, so please don't begin applying any moralistic or idealistic values to our existence. His actions could mean absolutely nothing, regardless how he lives. Also, 'wiser' is relative. It could be wiser in his eyes for him to live one way, and wiser in your eyes for him to live another - why? because you have different goals, different reasons (purpose?). Neither notion is inherently better, so don't make that mistake. Our existence could end whenever, so what? Maybe this species means nothing, and maybe we have souls (in which case this flesh would mean little to our existence) , or maybe some of the newer theories on consciousness are correct (in which case, we really aren't anything 'special', and are no different than decaying matter).

Consider taking humans off the pedestal is all I'm saying. And don't be fooled - I'm not being sarcastic, I actually mean CONSIDER, not in a derogatory or pushy, imperative manner.

Iconoclast,

I'd have enjoyed this writing more if I shared your sentiments regarding our existence. It was very nicely done, though (I've put myself in the shoes of one that does value this existence and the existence of future generations, and it really did strike me). Nice work.