Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The Kings Philosophy

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Kings Philosophy

    THE KINGS PHILOSOPHY

    ..."is the acquisition and exploitation of knowledge...from fire, religion, to splitting the atom, and witch craft, but I don't believe in witchcraft. Weaponized knowledge...".

    What is the aim of a kingto rule unrivaled. This philosophy, once employed by royalty, is now utilized by nations. The aim of each is to increase their influence until they govern without rivalry, but by default they most often act as a check and balance system against other competitors exerting equal but opposite expansionary force. History is littered with the rise, fall, and balance of nations and the current world stage is no different.

    Nazi Germany was the last nation to make a push towards unrivaled rule. Though their motives were immoral and sinister, other nations employ the kings philosophy (in an amoral fashion) out of necessityif they dont, someone else will - feeling it would be better to rule than to be ruled. The question that lingers is if a nation can achieve global unrivaled rule even through good intentions, will their absolute power eventually corrupt absolutely? This question has heavy implications for the present and for future generationsour children.

    It takes time to condition yourself to see the world from this perspective (The Lion in Winter), but I am not an advocate for and do not participate in the exploitation of others. New practitioners enter a deadly competition and start at the bottom where they will most likely stay. Most individuals wont even have a chance to ascend unless they are born into an active clan. It is high stakes cutthroat. Instead, acquire and utilize knowledge to help others - ministry or helping those in need.

    (acquisition + utilization)..."how" it is utilized is most important. You have to understand this method of thinking to avoid complex snares. Become aware, and do not accept or join anything if you do not know what it is.

    Organize your mind; organize your schedule; organize your life. Master various trades and branches of knowledge. Educate! Make good choices. Stay INDEPENDENT. Avoid vices. Then educate others. Continuous incremental improvements add up over time.

  • #2
    Re: The Kings Philosophy

    This knowledge, accumulated over man's history is man. Stored in billions of minds, a commonality of man. The superficial knowledge can vary from culture to culture, nation to nation, but the deeper, common knowledge, that has made man what he is, violent, chaotic, angry, lustful, envious, pursuing pleasure incessantly, from physical to psychological and spiritual, this is shared by all of mankind. This inward being, this nature, is a great part of society. The society is a mirror of our inner selves, the inner reality. We are at conflict inwardly and outwardly. And it has been this way since the beginning of self consciousness. This inner man and what he is, is not a concept, an invention because if one observes himself, to know oneself attentively, this can be observed very clearly. It is the reality. It is not an idea from a philosopher, another creation of the mind. This can actually be observed by every human being.

    As long as man accepts this state of being, with its wars, its conflict, its hatred, its greed, your kids will have something to worry about. Man has not evolved mentally since self awareness. And unless man's inner being changes, the things you speak of will continue unless we finally go extinct at some point in the future. This is the reality of the matter, the utter and simple reality.

    The organized religious people are waiting for their various saviors to come back and save mankind from himself. That is a delusion. It is a construction of thought, no different from any other fairy tale. And it keeps some men from changing themselves, as they wait on an outside authority to do the changing for them. That too is a delusion. No outside authority is gonna change anyone, because that authority is not outside. It's inside. Each man must be a light unto himself, because only man can change himself, into something other than he has been for perhaps a million years. And unless a mutation in the brain occurs, few people will ever change themselves. Yet I can envision that mutation possibly occurring as the brain has to evolve to save man from destroying mankind. As the body evolves to meet changes, to survive biologically, it is possible that the brain does as well, but it takes imminent extinction to cause the mutation. But this is speculation.

    The salvation of mankind lies in discarding knowledge, not accumulating more. Knowledge has given us the state we are in, and have always been in. Knowledge has a place in life, but in some areas it has no place at all, knowledge being the accumulation of memory from which thought springs. True intelligence automatically sees the difference in types of knowledge, and dies unto that knowledge that is causing the destruction, the chaos, the hate, the division, the pain, the suffering, the fear.

    If humans in leadership positions, understand deeply what man is, understand the reality of all men inwardly, they can act to construct a nation, by its rules, it laws, its policy to temper this destructiveness of man, as he is driven by hate, greed, self interest, lust, envy, selfish self centeredness and all the rest. This would be true intelligence acting, yet we see that nowhere in the world. We have never had such a gov't, and we probably never will. Such a gov't would not cure mankind's ills, as the destruction would go on and on, yet the nation that intelligently addresses the curse of mankind, will prosper, be relatively healthy and strong, which will get that nation to the possible mutation that will cure the ills of man and finally bring peace to the earth.

    But perhaps if one nation did intelligently address the inward nature of man, by law, rules, policy, etc, that nation could be copied by other nations, making the world a safer place, and minimizing the fears that you mentioned. Yet it would not change man, so you are simply reducing the carnage, but its the only viable option.

    Until the mutation, if it ever happens, each one of us can change ourselves. But that requires learning by inward looking to discover exactly what the "I" in reality is. And no authority, no guru, preacher, expert can do it for you. This is a road that the individual mind has to travel. The individual "I" is the root of the problem. It is this I, that wreaks havoc in the world. We need to totally and completely understand this I, and change it. Only that will allow mankind to have a Golden Age.

    ?


    • #3
      Re: The Kings Philosophy

      We shall not enter into any of the abstruse definitions of war used by publicists. We shall keep to the element of the thing itself, to a duel. War is nothing but a duel on an extensive scale. If we would conceive as a unit the countless number of duels which make up a war, we shall do so best by supposing to ourselves two wrestlers. Each strives by physical force to compel the other to submit to his will: his first object is to throw his adversary, and thus to render him incapable of further resistance.

      War therefore is an act of violence to compel our opponent to fulfil our will.

      Violence arms itself with the inventions of Art and Science in order to contend against violence. Self-imposed restrictions, almost imperceptible and hardly worth mentioning, termed usages of International Law, accompany it without essentially impairing its power. Violence, that is to say physical force (for there is no moral force without the conception of states and law), is therefore the means; the compulsory submission of the enemy to our will is the ultimate object. In order to attain this object fully, the enemy must be disarmed; and this is, correctly speaking, the real aim of hostilities in theory. It takes the place of the final object, and puts it aside in a manner as something not properly belonging to war.
      On War, - Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz

      Clausewitz, ON WAR

      ?


      • #4
        Re: The Kings Philosophy

        Well, you're making good use of the various internet forums out there, I'll grant you that.

        ?


        • #5
          Re: The Kings Philosophy

          The Torah limits the King's personal accumulation of wealth, wives and military might.
          The unlimited powers and might of a King are not based upon Judeo-Christian Scripture.

          Jews, by the way, are not waiting for a Messiah, even though the word is mistranslated as "Savior", it actually means "Annoited", as in somone who is worthth to be annointed as a King or annoited as part of the ceremoney for performing the services in the Holy Temple.
          We are waiting for someone who is worthy of that stature but he keeps going to work on Wall Street or joining a political party.

          ?


          • #6
            Re: The Kings Philosophy

            Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
            The Torah limits the King's personal accumulation of wealth, wives and military might.
            The unlimited powers and might of a King are not based upon Judeo-Christian Scripture.

            Jews, by the way, are not waiting for a Messiah, even though the word is mistranslated as "Savior", it actually means "Annoited", as in somone who is worthth to be annointed as a King or annoited as part of the ceremoney for performing the services in the Holy Temple.
            We are waiting for someone who is worthy of that stature but he keeps going to work on Wall Street or joining a political party.
            Yes, the Jews are not waiting for the savior, the savior of the christian belief system. Neither are buddhists, as they seek enlightenment. Not sure about the Hindus, since the "Tat Vsam Asi" belief permeates hinduism. Or, translated, Thou art That. That being Brahman. And that is about the extent of my knowledge on those religions.

            Yet religion has had thousands of years to change mankind, yet we are no different than our early ancestors, psychologically. So if there is to be a revolutionary change in man, it has to come from himself, as it is obvious these outside agencies are a proven failure, with history being its proof. The question is to me, why have we not changed? And there are various reasons for that. I think the biggest is that we have just accepted this violent manner of living, that nothing can change man, which would change society. I do not believe that is true. I think man can change himself, because there is no other way it can be done. Or, as I entertained, perhaps the brain will mutate, from pressure from something, in order that we do not destroy life on earth, including mankind. But as I said, this is pure speculation. So we need to change ourselves. To find out what is involved, by inward looking, observation of the totality of consciousness. If this is not possible, we are doomed to be such as we are, with its psychological suffering, the violence, the hate, the greed, the lust, the cruelty, the apathy, which is also society. We in a sense are society, and any real change in society has to start with each individual. Once we get our house in order, in large enough numbers, society is in order. That is real change.

            Until that happens, all that we can do is to see clearly what man is, and how his consciousnes which is composed of memory, and thought, can do nothing but breed disorder, and work to construct a nation, a society that uses this inner knowledge of man to formulate the rules, the policies that the nation or society conforms to. There will still be disorder, and all the rest, yet we will have some what of a handle on it, minimizing the destructive acts of human nature upon others. I think it is the only sane route to take.
            Which by the way is practically 180 degrees from what the world knows today. We have moved there, at times, in increments, only to have those gains lost. The selfish nature of man seems to always overpower and change any gains that do not appeal to this selfishness, this self centeredness, that is at the root of disorder.

            What we know as knowledge will not change man, change society, change the world from the utter hell that it is. The great accumulation of knowledge has not made us less violent, less greedy, less hateful, and so on. It has made it so we can be very efficient in our killing. It has given us new escapes from the reality that we have to live in. And yes, it has also given us greater creature comforts, treatments for disease, etc. So, some of knowledge is useful but much of it is utterly destructive. Yet the greatest destruction comes from man not knowing what he is, inwardly, deeply, and then changing that madness, to negate that, so that the new can arise.

            ?


            • #7
              Re: The Kings Philosophy

              Might makes right. There is no such thing as morality, and it is only the fact that we ALL feel this way that saves us all from each other. This applies to people on one level but to countries on two, and so countries call it "sovereignity" and write leaned discourses, volumes, whole libraries justfiying nothing more than the neandethal nostrum:

              STAY OUT OF OUR VILLAGE. If your sheep eat our grass we will kill you, if we want your grass we will kill you and take it. Anyone who tries to convince us to change our ways is a witch and we wll kill them, stay out of our village
              Last edited by John Drake; 05-21-2012, 01:38 AM.

              ?


              • #8
                Re: The Kings Philosophy

                Originally posted by John Drake View Post
                Might makes right. There is no such thing as morality, and it is only the fact that we ALL feel this way that saves us all from each other. This applies to people on one level but to countries on two, and so countries call it "sovereignity" and write leaned discourses, volumes, whole libraries justfiying nothing more than the neandethal nostrum:
                I agree, there is no morality. We should have codes of conduct, taught in public schools. With reasons given, logical reasons given for conducting oneself in a moral manner. You never have to mention the word religion in doing this. Especially so, since religion has failed to make us a more civilized animal..

                ?


                • #9
                  Re: The Kings Philosophy

                  Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                  I agree, there is no morality. We should have codes of conduct, taught in public schools. With reasons given, logical reasons given for conducting oneself in a moral manner. You never have to mention the word religion in doing this. Especially so, since religion has failed to make us a more civilized animal..
                  Throw the baby out with the bathwater much?

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Re: The Kings Philosophy

                    Originally posted by soot View Post
                    Throw the baby out with the bathwater much?
                    Only when the baby is dead, and I am burying it, the way we should bury religion. It has not changed man. Instead, man has used religion to justify killing and other evil deeds that very religion teaches against.

                    Religion has not changed man at all, we are still the same psychologically as we have always been. Religion only serves as an insurance policy for the self, the ego. Religion is used to try to lessen the fear of death. Religion is born of fear.

                    Religion has failed to change man, therefore it is useless, false, a grand lie.

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Re: The Kings Philosophy

                      Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                      Only when the baby is dead, and I am burying it, the way we should bury religion. It has not changed man. Instead, man has used religion to justify killing and other evil deeds that very religion teaches against.

                      Religion has not changed man at all, we are still the same psychologically as we have always been.
                      I completly disagree.

                      Throughout history and still to this day religion has served as a great moderating force on individual behavior.

                      For every life that has been made worse by religion countless more have been improved.

                      You're just focusing on what you precieve to be the negatives and ignoring (or perhaps have never heard of or experienced) the positives.

                      You constantly demonstrate a pattern of picking the position you're going to support and then eliminating, out of hand, any information that opposes your position or supports an alternate position. You do it with finance, you do it with politics, and now you're doing it with religion.

                      Believe me when I tell you that I'm not a huge fan of religion and I'm not religious myself. I'm harldy arguing that religion is the greatest thing that ever was or ever will be and that it's infallible.

                      Religion, just like tribalism, socialism, democracy, sociology, science, psycology, and any/every other construct of the human mind, has been used as a foil to justify a lot of bad shit.

                      But it's also done a lot of good.

                      A lot of people, all over the world, are not going to go to bed hungry tonight because other people, religious people, believe that it's their duty to feed the hungry. That's just one tiny example.

                      Religion only serves as an insurance policy for the self, the ego. Religion is used to try to lessen the fear of death. Religion is born of fear.
                      And that's a bad thing how?

                      People are fearful. It is what it is.

                      I don't have a huge problem with people trying to mitigate their fear. I don't go in for it myself, but I don't see how I'm in any position to deprive others of their mitigation strategies.

                      Think about what you're saying here:

                      Religion has failed to change man, therefore it is useless, false, a grand lie.
                      Has mathematics changed man? Has medicine changed man? Has science changed man? Has politics changed man?

                      I'd argue, no.

                      Fundamentally man is the same today as he was the day he climbed down out of a tree.

                      So do we do away with math, medicine, science, and government because, fundamentally, they've had no real impact on changing man's nature?

                      Again, my argument would be, no.
                      Last edited by soot; 05-23-2012, 09:09 AM.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Re: The Kings Philosophy

                        Originally posted by soot View Post
                        I completly disagree.

                        Throughout history and still to this day religion has served as a great moderating force on individual behavior.

                        For every life that has been made worse by religion countless more have been improved.

                        You're just focusing on what you precieve to be the negatives and ignoring (or perhaps have never heard of or experienced) the positives.

                        You constantly demonstrate a pattern of picking the position you're going to support and then eliminating, out of hand, any information that opposes your position or supports an alternate position. You do it with finance, you do it with politics, and now you're doing it with religion.

                        Believe me when I tell you that I'm not a huge fan of religion and I'm not religious myself. I'm harldy arguing that religion is the greatest thing that ever was or ever will be and that it's infallible.

                        Religion, just like tribalism, socialism, democracy, sociology, science, psycology, and any/every other construct of the human mind, has been used as a foil to justify a lot of bad shit.

                        Think about what you're saying here:



                        Has mathematics changed man? Has medicine changed man? Has science changed man? Has politics changed man?

                        I'd argue, no.

                        Fundamentally man is the same today as he was the day he climbed down out of a tree.

                        So do we do away with math, medicine, science, and government because, fundamentally, they've had no real impact on changing man's nature?

                        Again, my argument would be, no.
                        It is not the role of math to change man. Nor of medicine, science, or gov't. It is the role of religion to change man, to make him less self centered, to bring peace and harmony between men. To bring morality into the world. Yet it has failed. Man today, inwardly is no different than he was from the beginning. Therefore religion has failed.

                        I am not denying that some good has come from religion. Yet I am not sure if you subtracted the bad from the good that they would have a net good showing up.

                        All I am saying is if one looks to organized religion to make man better, it has been an abject failure, and the world is just as chaotic, murderous, selfish, or evil if you will, as we were at the beginning. In fact religion has served to commit its own evil by dividing people even more. You would think religion, the various flavors would unite, but instead they have tended to kill one another.

                        So religion from the standpoint of changing man for the better has failed. Which means, if we cannot change ourselves, we are doomed to be this blight upon earth. Yet no one will even try to change themselves as long as there is religion, which seeks a change outside of oneself. And that has not worked. I think organized religion has kept man from making those essential changes.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Re: The Kings Philosophy

                          BD,
                          How do you define organized religion?
                          Certainly not Christianity, Judaism or Islam
                          There are nuts who pervert the thirst for religion but they'll pervert any underlying principal to satisfy their lusts.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Re: The Kings Philosophy

                            Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
                            Julius Caesar, Gallic War, III:18.
                            __________________________

                            Pope Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia 1431 - 1501) once said that men are so simple they will believe anything. The Borgia Pope, while the spiritual leader of the Church, was, if anything, a homme du monde; and, for all his faults, a keen observer of human nature, noting that it is a defect in the human character that we would rather listen to lies than believe the truth we can see with our own eyes. Even when forced to confront the facts, we deny them and make up excuses.

                            In The Prince (modeled after Pope Alexanders son, Cesare Borgia), Niccolo Machiavelli wrote about the state and its rule as it is rather than as it should be, for which, after five centuries of experience, he continues to be roundly condemned. It is a social preference for what we choose to believe, though false, over what is in fact true. Great Caesar was right when he wrote: "Men willingly believe what they wish to be true."

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Re: The Kings Philosophy

                              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                              It is not the role of math to change man. Nor of medicine, science, or gov't. It is the role of religion to change man, to make him less self centered, to bring peace and harmony between men. To bring morality into the world. Yet it has failed. Man today, inwardly is no different than he was from the beginning. Therefore religion has failed.

                              I am not denying that some good has come from religion. Yet I am not sure if you subtracted the bad from the good that they would have a net good showing up.

                              All I am saying is if one looks to organized religion to make man better, it has been an abject failure, and the world is just as chaotic, murderous, selfish, or evil if you will, as we were at the beginning. In fact religion has served to commit its own evil by dividing people even more. You would think religion, the various flavors would unite, but instead they have tended to kill one another.

                              So religion from the standpoint of changing man for the better has failed. Which means, if we cannot change ourselves, we are doomed to be this blight upon earth. Yet no one will even try to change themselves as long as there is religion, which seeks a change outside of oneself. And that has not worked. I think organized religion has kept man from making those essential changes.
                              I'm hearing both Confucius and Nietzsche in what you say.

                              I don't think it has been the role of religion to change the fundamental nature of man, but rather to moderate his behavior.

                              I don't believe it would be a good idea to change the fundamental nature of man. All of those characteristics that enabled us to get from the caves to here are valuable assets when we need them. All we need to do is control our behavior to allow for "civilization", which we have done to quite a high degree. Perhaps we need to refine our behavior much more, but to lose our fundamental instincts could be a fatal mistake.

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X