jlozier, I assume you have committed the latest version of your evolving worldview to writing in some form or fashion. If it is not a problem to share it, I'd like to read it. I'd especially like to read it if you have taken the time to annotate the thinkers who have influenced you.

quote: Originally posted by FoamDome jlozier, I assume you have committed the latest version of your evolving worldview to writing in some form or fashion. If it is not a problem to share it, I'd like to read it. I'd especially like to read it if you have taken the time to annotate the thinkers who have influenced you.

No, I haven't committed it to print (it changes too frequently!). Just as EF said in an earlier post, I'm just "thinking out loud." "Spitballing" is what my principal calls it. If I had such a manifesto, I would share it since you asked. There is more of my worldview written in this thread than there is anywhere else.

quote: Originally posted by jlozier quote: quote: Originally posted by FoamDome jlozier, I assume you have committed the latest version of your evolving worldview to writing in some form or fashion. If it is not a problem to share it, I'd like to read it. I'd especially like to read it if you have taken the time to annotate the thinkers who have influenced you. No, I haven't committed it to print (it changes too frequently!). Just as EF said in an earlier post, I'm just "thinking out loud." "Spitballing" is what my principal calls it. If I had such a manifesto, I would share it since you asked. There is more of my worldview written in this thread than there is anywhere else.

For years I maintained a "Professional Notebook" filled with tidbits, quotes, collected witticisms, lists of books read and those yet to read, ideas for projects, and the like. When I look at it now, years later, I am both embarrassed and fascinated by what caught and held my attention in days gone by. Write it down. Change it every day. Cite your sources and note the reasons for each update. Save every version. Use LiveBinders or Evernote or similar to make accessing, editing, saving, and sharing easier. When you are old and grey, you'll be glad you took the time to record the evolution of your personal Weltanschauung. The Professional Notebook I described above is evolving into a personal manifesto. Working title: The Tao of Deve. I think it's awesome that EF's cartoon has led to the most complete expression of jlozier's unique worldview to-date.

quote: Originally posted by FoamDome I think it's awesome that EF's cartoon has led to the most complete expression of jlozier's unique worldview to-date.

No manifesto here, but the beerpal stream of consciousness flows. I don't need a manifesto. I can just save all of the urls. This site will never die!

Very good stuff, jloz.... I always appreciate a thought out position and respect it as that. The exchange of those ideas without apology but with openness is a good thing. Maybe it's the German in me? I work with Germans a lot. They are so good at separating an open and blunt and sometimes tense discussion on religion or politics from the personal and reltional side of things. No, let me state that differently, their relationships THRIVE off of being able to engage and wrestle with ideas, even if from polar opposition positions. It is more "honest" to them and respectable, it enables a relationship to continue or grow. I find it much the same. A few responding thoughts: The Abraham or soldier/murder examples.... I would never claim that theism SIMPLIFIES things morally. Not at all. My only argument is that murder is wrong by definition, because a theistic / creationism approach puts that out there. By definition, since God exists and he created all things, life is precious, murder is wrong. It doesn't matter what any one individual thinks. That's all. You can't get there from existentialistic thinking. Seeing yourself as the victim/hero of morality is subjective, it is self-centered basis for "morality," and to me that removes any base from morality, especially when the collective assessment of all the individuals in the world does not leave room for coherence. My introducing forced non-consentual sex on someone is an even better example of wrong by definition. What makes that so when the rest of the animal kingdom behaviors would indicate nothing is wrong with it. Who decides is a huge question in an existential worldview. For me, it is a moot point. An absolute exists regardless of what we all think or argue for/against. There is hope for one day that being made clear to all. Forced sex is wrong, it is rape. By definition, because theistically it is wrong. (Although, as you point out, there are situational details that may make the application of this difficult.... as a matter of practicality, though, I don't build my worldview off of the exceptional. I let them be part of the struggle of full understanding while still affirming what is "obvious." Additionally, I don't have a worldview where being perfect is a requirement. - This almost pushes me into further definining my Christian perspective but I think it can stand at that.) In fact, your assertation that you are not "comfortable" with your life being brought to an abrupt end, if not an individualist statement viewed from absurdium (and objectively worthless beyond you then?)..... is an affirmation of an appreciation for life, an absolute affirmation of something that is universally true regardless of what any percentage of living beings think. That's the only way I can make sense of it to me. It holds the most consistency. Furthermore, your tacking on Existentialism leading to Humanism is perfect. I think existentialism needs humanism to save it and put together a sound overall worldview. However, this side of the holocost, two world wars, and now individualistic mass killings happening monthly?, etc.... There is no hope in humanism for me. Mankind won't save his own cause. We agree on at least one critical assumption/matter of faith: Life is important. Your statement of that rang true for me. We all need faith or absolute to launch our worldviews from even if we supplement it with existential or any other thinking. My only question is where does THAT abosolute come from? What is the basis for it if we don't start with theism? I'm there by faith. To some extent, I can't make a subsequent reasonable and rationale assumption (including that life is precious) without assuming that God exists (this is starting to sound like Descartes in many ways, as God's existence gives us confidence in logical reasoning - or assumptions in this case - from that point on)..... A dunkel and then a bock today. Yum! Good stuffs....

I've been doing this since OCS and have quite a collection of thoughts (good, bad, ugly, otherwise), quotes, etc. - some more "professional" than others... occassionally when I'm looking for something or moving stuff around, I'll open on my my footlockers and take a peek at past years.

quote: Originally posted by FoamDome quote: quote: Originally posted by jlozier quote: quote: quote: Originally posted by FoamDome jlozier, I assume you have committed the latest version of your evolving worldview to writing in some form or fashion. If it is not a problem to share it, I'd like to read it. I'd especially like to read it if you have taken the time to annotate the thinkers who have influenced you. No, I haven't committed it to print (it changes too frequently!). Just as EF said in an earlier post, I'm just "thinking out loud." "Spitballing" is what my principal calls it. If I had such a manifesto, I would share it since you asked. There is more of my worldview written in this thread than there is anywhere else. For years I maintained a "Professional Notebook" filled with tidbits, quotes, collected witticisms, lists of books read and those yet to read, ideas for projects, and the like. When I look at it now, years later, I am both embarrassed and fascinated by what caught and held my attention in days gone by. Write it down. Change it every day. Cite your sources and note the reasons for each update. Save every version. Use LiveBinders or Evernote or similar to make accessing, editing, saving, and sharing easier. When you are old and grey, you'll be glad you took the time to record the evolution of your personal Weltanschauung. The Professional Notebook I described above is evolving into a personal manifesto. Working title: The Tao of Deve. I think it's awesome that EF's cartoon has led to the most complete expression of jlozier's unique worldview to-date.

If mankind won't save his own cause, then mankind does not deserve to survive. Evolution will take care of that. There is always extinction to contend with...just ask those giant reptiles that used to own this planet.If mankind can not look out for its own best interests as a species, then extinction is inevitable, giant comets notwithstanding. I think I am beginning to understand why you see absolutes as moral necessities. Morality functions like a law. Everyone has to abide by the moral law, as it were, in order to avoid total chaos. So unless a moral perspective is universal, then the species can not function in a socially harmonious manner. Ok, I get that. I don't agree with it because... Our lives are not made up of universal circumstances; our lives are made up of context-dependent specifics. Universal laws make great black and white dichotomies, but life is made up of so many subtle differentiations in grey-scale that you can not even perceive the gradations. The specifics are of utmost importance because that is what we deal with every day. That is why I posed those questions in relation to murder. As I see it, the specifics nullify the universal plan. Your example of the immorality of rape might be the only universal claim I can grasp so far. By the by, I am enjoying this conversation immensely. I too appreciated thought-out responses and direct address of claims made in an argument. I just wish a few more BPs would chime in their pair o' Lincolns. ...I wasn't avoiding or abandoning the conversation; my brother was visiting, so I had to take a few days off from private internet time.

my error.[V][xx(][:(]

quote: quote: quote: Originally posted by jlozier If mankind won't save his own cause, then mankind does not deserve to survive. Evolution will take care of that. There is always extinction to contend with...just ask those giant reptiles that used to own this planet.If mankind can not look out for its own best interests as a species, then extinction is inevitable, giant comets notwithstanding.

This is precisely my point w/o theism. We are no different than those extinct dinosaurs. Yet another species to come and go at the "top." Top for what reason? Nothing in particular. And, so, there is no existential motivation to do a darned thing about my or my species' position in the world. Save what? Let random purposelessness continue to reign, cuz that's what evolution has appeared to be outside of theism. I can't believe that. I can't live within that framework. And, I believe that it is universally written across our species that we are different than the rest of the animal kingdom, there is a greater calling, one that starts beyond us - whether that be some ethereal force, something in the stars, or a monotheistic traditional God of Western and Middle Eastern cultures, etc....

quote: quote: quote: I think I am beginning to understand why you see absolutes as moral necessities. Morality functions like a law. Everyone has to abide by the moral law, as it were, in order to avoid total chaos. So unless a moral perspective is universal, then the species can not function in a socially harmonious manner. Ok, I get that. I don't agree with it because...

I don't think you need absolutes for practical morality of some sorts that is short of chaos. My argument for theism is not a practical argument, one argued in itself for convenience. Instead, I do think for me to have any desire to follow a "conveniently" defined morality, I need purpose. Absolutes regarding purpose are a driver for me, motivation (if they are "true" - pointless to define an absolute without any confidence in their being true, as that doesn't solve the problem). Per the above, randomly determined purpose gets me not even motivated for a few seconds. Right and wrong is arbitrary when all is said and done then. I'm not inclined to follow such things. Yes, there is no basis either, as in the rape example, but I don't think that necessarily leads to a complete crumbling of practical legal systems, although they may vary even more greatly across the world than they do today. Why is rape almost universally recognized across the globe as wrong for humans while it is part of life for the rest of species in the animal kingdom? Yes, that question raises the very question around absolutes and theism, how can either not fundamentally exist. Yes, it could be a "proof" (or rather evidence) of God, it is part of what leads me to theism. I don't think we would have broadly recognized wrongs such as murder or rape if there wasn't a God.

quote: quote: quote: Our lives are not made up of universal circumstances; our lives are made up of context-dependent specifics. Universal laws make great black and white dichotomies, but life is made up of so many subtle differentiations in grey-scale that you can not even perceive the gradations. The specifics are of utmost importance because that is what we deal with every day. That is why I posed those questions in relation to murder. As I see it, the specifics nullify the universal plan. Your example of the immorality of rape might be the only universal claim I can grasp so far.

I absolutely recognize that even after getting to a starting point of absolutes and theism, it doesn't practically solve all of the particulars. Indeed, it resolves rape for me. It resolves murder. But the details of "morality" and "ethics" cascade from there into far less obvious rights and wrongs. And, the rest of the picture comes together for me with further elements of my faith and belief system. But, even those, as in the Sermon on the Mount in my system, all work from the broad and general absolutes to the particulars. We are "absurd" in a sense, too, so even if we had more particulars, we'd mess it all up. I find biblical theism to be an even more complete and consistent framework for the world, but that's not something I intend to convince anyone about over an online forum. It only serves to frame the limits of where the above discussion can take us and where, I believe, that further faith is required to complete your worldview. But, regardless, I can't start with existentialism at the base at all.

quote: quote: By the by, I am enjoying this conversation immensely. I too appreciated thought-out responses and direct address of claims made in an argument. I just wish a few more BPs would chime in their pair o' Lincolns. ...I wasn't avoiding or abandoning the conversation; my brother was visiting, so I had to take a few days off from private internet time.

Yes, I waited a few days due to my return from being overseas, and to see if anyone else would chime in. No other reason than that. An enjoyable dialogue. It's caused me to wonder about a few different things in life, reframe some of my own perspectives. Life is a learning process.

Different, but related to some of the parts of this thread: http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/09/us/new-york-chimps-personhood/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 May the courts continue to see the difference between people and all animals, even the randomly evolved most advanced ones ;). - This sort of gets back to the silliness that I think one ends up with if we are just randomly and purposely here, statistical anomalies in the cosmos. A failure results in justifying ethics, as I've mentioned. But as this articles shows (it seems to me), it also is quite difficult to see our difference in person-hood, humans succinctly different than all other animals and called to something more meaningful (and ethical basics like rape being affirmed). I'd ask the court to dismiss this case and stop wasting time until the monkey in all his personhood is able to file his own suit with his own logic. ...Sigh... (and this post is made, while fully allowing for animals to have reasonable living conditions, minimum requirements that should be met with any creature, monkey or not - so no animal rights/activist complaints, I'm not taking a broad position for captive animals!)