Quote:
Originally Posted by NancyV
My dear Martian,
You are entirely too emotional in your responses. Because you want things to be a certain way does not make it so. Perhaps you could point out to me any time throughout history when man has not perpetrated injustices upon other men? My reasoning supports no one group and no one person, it supports the truth. I am relatively unattached to needing things to be different than they are, so unlike you, I have a very minor agenda of "shoulds".
Your "foundational assumption" that all men are created equal is just that, an assumption. It's a lovely sounding assumption, but not based in reality. Of course all souls are equal, ultimately, but all bodies are not equal and the minds that control the bodies are also not equal. Perhaps another look into the actual meaning of the word "equal" would be advisable. As far as "human rights", that's a creation of man. We have the "rights" that we are able to envision, take for ourselves and retain, either by intelligence or enforcement. The last time I looked, man was still enmeshed in the survival of the fittest scenario here on the earthplane.
Nowhere in what I said in my previous post was there even a hint that I thought "injustices were right", in fact, for you to come to that conclusion shows me that your vested interest in having your theories upheld contributes to your inability to see reality. In addition, saying that my statements "support every fascist dictatorship" is patently absurd in the extreme. I don't "support" anything in my statements or outlook, I observe reality and state it as it is.
Emotionality and attachment blind one to truth, and personal attacks on another because you feel threatened are a great weakness. It appears to me that you are probably relatively young and inexperienced, but do not despair, you have lots of time, in fact you have eternity.
Nancy
|
my dear nancy,
you are entirely correct about my emotions and the negative affect they played in my communications with you and murnut. one of these days i will learn that lesson. i do apologize to you both for my tone and language.
from one perspective your views on "shoulds" is appealing and admirable. not an easy perspective to live from, especially in this world. but from another perspective "shoulds" or "intentions" are the means toward creating a new realty, and a necessary aspect of our free will. if i am not satisfied with my/our reality, then i am inherently required to attempt a change. "should", then becomes the responsibility of those who seek change.
the fact that man has consistently perpetrated injustices, should not lead to the conclusion that those injustices are inevitable. we live in a reality that is constantly changing, and we have the ability to participate in that process of change. therefor, "should" is a necessary aspect of our reality. "should" is the impetus of creation.
the assumption that all humans are created equal is a necessary assumption in the process of defining human rights. if we do not start with that fundamental assumption, then it is possible for any group or individual to claim superiority over another. the fact that some humans already claim superiority over others does not negate the necessity of this assumption. if all souls are created equal and all human body's maintain a soul, then all human body's are created equal. this is true despite our actions to the contrary.
if that premise holds and you agree to the 2nd premise (sequestering of information leads to inequity of knowlege leading to inequity of power), then a conclusion of an inherent right to pursue existential information seems to naturally follow.
if interested in continuing debate, i promise to remain unattached and void of childish insults.
i do apologize. thank you for calling me out, martian