Originally posted by Lucius
I apologise for not reading your entire post/essay, that was rather rude of me. Next time, I will surely read everything or not reply at all. Sorry * *
Regarding your comments:
My definition of 'fun' does not include rape and murder, thank you. I again stress that what I mean by having fun is doing things that make you happy but not involve hurting others, or yourself. I know you spoke critically before about the idea of 'it doesn't hurt anybody, so what's wrong with it?' but this is what I stick to * I see no logical reason, both rational, emotional and spiritual for things that don't hurt anybody, to be wrong. There is nothing wrong with making yourself and/or others happy (and not bothering anybody in the process), this seems logical and sensible. *
Now there might be some 'higher factors' included, but however, I would consider these factors unknown because we cannot claim to know the absolute truth. Therefor I stick to the logical reason I mentioned before. We must have fun, before we can get to the serious stuff, we're all children before we become adults It's a natural process. And even adults still sometimes remain children inside, of course * *
And yes, I still believe morals, good and evil are relative and not absolute. But even so, that is no reason to not be true to your own perception of them. Murder is wrong to me, even though I know some people consider it otherwise (cultures, individuals).
Actually, one cannot often read 'everything'... the mistake is in telling authors that you haven't read it. Often you can read enough to get by. In good essay writing, and auther will present his peroration, that , what he wants to tell you, then come all the details and explanations, and then he should sum up with a conclusion regarding the ramifications of what he told you. So if you read the start, and glance through the middle (to check for obvious silliness) and then read the end, you should be equipped well enough to reply without being caught too terribly short.
Now, about 'fun' and your whole aesthetic way of looking at things. yes, indeed, nothing is wrong with harmless fun, if it doesn't hurt anybody. But that would take an awful lot of cyrstal ball gazing to determine whether our apparently innocent actions are hurting anybody. For instance, in the early 80's almost all of the Car Manufacturors found that they could make more money selling hi priced luxury models -- it would not hurt the rich people to pay more for cars with harmless bells and whistles. However, less attention went into development in the lesser cars, forcing people in that market to either pay more for safe vehicles or buy less safe vehicles. You 'fun' market inflated the price of what was minimally safe automobiles. Thousands of People were Killed. Sound like harmless fun to you?
Besides, that was not my point. I was talking about Attacking the Subconscious Mind with an invidious use of Over-Control while you were defending some hippy sense of nihilistic amorality that was not spoken about by anybody but yourself. Perhaps if you had mentioned how you thought it was connected -- that it harms nobody else when you take a flamethrower to your own Subconscious Mind; however, I would have answered that you cannot really delineate where your own personal Subconscious Mind ends and Everybody else's Collective Consciousness begins. When you plunge a knife into your own Subconscious Mind perhaps everybody feels the pain.
|
|
Bookmarks