An immoral relationship?

[sapphi_snake]

@DélioPT:

No, history shows that we embraced that part of us or that we didn`t (world wars, dark ages)

History shows that there were times when those werec onsidered  values, and times when they weren't.

Relativism is a bad way of looking at things and, honestly, that`s what you are going for. In your words, if something is achieved by consensus they might aswell be good as the next bet thing or even, anything goes, as it`s through consensus.

Anything goes, but not really. Not anyone can create moral rules, and moral rules change slowly over time. There's also a certain logic (faulty or not) when creating morals. So you can't just take anything and turn it into a moral rule.

Actually, if there wasn`t something universal within us, how could we even begin to understand others before and after societies?

I assume it's because we're all part of the same animal species. That may have something to do with it.

Christ never said anything? Are you sure? Because i am pretty sure the Bible has a good amount of things He said to the disciples.

Or so they claim.

And God doesn´t exist? I never tried to prove His existence. All i did was fundament a logical reasoning from a religious point of view. Why the need to express yourself once more?

If you start off of faulty premises (like those based on religion) then the result is something illogical.

There`s a sense of determinism in your words.
But how can someone see beyond culture if "Everything one knows about anything comes from culture"?

Because people can actually think you know, but most don't have the capacity for such analysis (or never strive to reach their full potential).

So how can i be responsible for my actions if all we are is a product of culture? And the rest are lies? How can you prove something not`s even physical or testable? Not even philosophers like Kant did that.

Of course you're responsable for what you do. Culture only determines what you think and what you believe, not what your actions will be.

That`s a contradiction.
So we exist prior to societies yet they are our definition? We became a product of our product and that`s reasonable to you?

It's not a contradiction at all. I don't think that you or I have existed prior to culture or society. The humans who invented culture are the only ones who can say that they predated culture. We are a product of a product, that's true.

When i spoke about revelation i was talking about the funadamentation of a given religion.
And why are you so eager to call people fools? Do you really believe that those who have faith or just fools? And fool people to what purpose? Those who use religion to fool gain nothing by doing it.
"Sadly"? Are you showing me empathy towards my religious condition? I`m i a fool aswell?

The problem with the type of faith that religious people have is that it's blind faith, the worst type of faith. I do beleive that religious people are first of all fooling themselves. As long as they don't hurt anyone with their charade I have no problem with it though (I won't pretend to not find it ridiculous though).

Interpreted to say whatever? Since when "love one another like I loved you (all)" isn`t pretty clear in it`s meaning?
Religion is used for control and opression and that`s true. Does that mean religion is that? I think that when people use it that way they are ruining it.

I think religion was precisely invented for that prupose. Christianity would've never become a big religion had it not had this potential (manipulation and oppression). And there is more in the New Testament then just that.

You are talking about the truth that changes when cultures change? Or the one that changes when scientifical paradigms change? Cause i don`t really see a solid truth based on that only.

Science actually influences culture, and the changes that take place within it. What I was talking about is thwt what is true can only be discovered through rational observation, and nothing else.

So, when religions can`t explain everything related to God, yet trying to look at Him and trying to give the best explanation possible, you assume that those are lies? There are answers that no one can give an answer too, therefore lies? I fail to see a logical reasoning there.

I've yet to see any reson why I should think that a being such as "God" exists in the first place, so trying to exaplin thigns related to this being is jumping ahead of oneself. Also, I said that religion offers made-up answers (lies) to existential questions that people have not been able to answer (yet).

I never seen Him aswell, but in religion "seeing is believing" has no place.

And people ask me why I'm not religious, LOL.

What sort of reasons do you think people find to believe?

Most peopel believe because that's how they were brought up and indoctrinated to do.

In this world there are people who believe and there are people who don`t. I for one don`t think it`s a human invention, but that`s me. And God is, to those like me, the creator of all. That`s the basis of religious "essence-existence" view on the world, by they way - as you can recognize in my view.

Well, all religions are human inventions. Good luck with your opium.