addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

"New York Philosophy" Message Board › Immortality

Immortality

A former member
Post #: 310
Are you asking why we cannot live forever physically? (quote)

Yes.

It is a bizarre question to say the least to add "physically". Exactly in what other sense can one exist? Living means one thing - living as an individual, breathing, eating and so on.....

This is a philosophical board not a religious one.

Some people say that the mind exists separately from the body.

Whether you chose to believe it is within your right. But also remember this some people also choose to consider all the maybes which is in their right as well.
A former member
Post #: 1
We are all immortal, in an ATOM sense.
To be immortal, is to be remembered, to be remembered is to be loved or hated to the extreme.
A former member
Post #: 163
Are you asking why we cannot live forever physically? (quote)

Yes.

It is a bizarre question to say the least to add "physically". Exactly in what other sense can one exist? Living means one thing - living as an individual, breathing, eating and so on.....

This is a philosophical board not a religious one.

Some people say that the mind exists separately from the body.

DJ:
They require a therapist specializing in neurosis.

Whether you chose to believe it is within your right. But also remember this some people also choose to consider all the maybes which is in their right as well.

DJ:
Choosing to believe anything when there is not a shred of logical inference is nuts. Placing emotions [belief] over what your mind tells you [reality] is evil.

But of course people may choose to believe whatever they want as long as they do not try in any way to force it on others.
A former member
Post #: 164
We are all immortal, in an ATOM sense.
To be immortal, is to be remembered, to be remembered is to be loved or hated to the extreme.

The question was why we cannot live forever. Living, would you agree is on earth, as an individual.
A former member
Post #: 311
DJ:
Choosing to believe anything when there is not a shred of logical inference is nuts. Placing emotions [belief] over what your mind tells you [reality] is evil.

But of course people may choose to believe whatever they want as long as they do not try in any way to force it on others.
Do not try to force your opinion on someone else or censor anyone's answer.

And you have nerve to say that someone's trying to force religion on you??

Can you point it out where?

Where in my post am I trying to force religion?
And Christopher's question about the physical part was directed towards me.

I'm going to say your own words to you "Placing emotions (belief) over what your mind tells you (reality) is evil. Truly TRULY THINK about that.

I'm done talking to you.
A former member
Post #: 165
I'm done talking to you.
Whatever.
A former member
Post #: 20
The standard of the good is a Man's life. That which is the good is rational and the bad is irrational and creates suffering. The logical conclusion of the latter is death - evil ultimately perishes.

Adolf Eichmann was extremely rational in his role in the 'final solution', yet I doubt that many persons would hold him to be the 'standard of the good'.

What is rational about murder? What is rational about acting in a way that ultimately ends in one's self-destructon? Nothing.

Eichmann was not all rational. He was a mystic and embraced the irrational, evil ethic of self-sacrifice. Philosophically he was openly a Kantian - and there is no more irrational philosopher than that, an individual who linked reason to religion, undermining reason in way that has never allowed it to recover.

You are wrong besides being offensive.

Ultimately we all end in 'destruction'. The complexity of the Eichmann case was that he did not directly commit murder but was simply 'doing his job', which he did in an extremely strict, rational manner. He scheduled the trains that moved Jews to the camps. Hannah Arendt's 'Eichmann in Jerusalem' is a classic and emphasizes the banality of evil involved in the Holocaust.

My point was this: you said that the good is rational, and I pointed out that rationality does not always result in the good. You also said that the 'standard of the good is Man's life'. I gave a counter-example in which one man's life (Adolf Eichmann) would certainly not be the standard of the good.

I think that part of the problem is that your language is not philosophically refined and exact enough to take into account the complexities of ethical claims and situations. In other words, you are using Objectivist platitudes that really do not mean very much. For example, your line on Kant, as I have previously demonstrated and requested argumentation, is non-sensical, i.e. if one has any familiarity with Kant's work.

CMZ
A former member
Post #: 166
You do not comprehend the concept of rational with regards a person's life and their actions.

It is irrational to act in a manner that leads to one's destruction. Eichmann did that.

Secondly, I am very well acquainted with whom Eichmann is and what he was responsible for - I do not require direction from the likes of you.
A former member
Post #: 1
How could Eichmann have known that his actions were leading to his own distruction? At least, before, say, 1944. And, had he resigned his position at that point, it would certainly have lead to his own destruction, at the hands of the SS. More basically, why is the rational to be equated with the good and the irrational with evil. It's like calling all evil dictators "madmen" because who else but a madman would cause so much harm. But was Stalin a madman? Was Mao? No, these were just men acting rationally but possessing a completely different set of moral values than we like to think of ourselves as possessing. To further attack the rational/good, irrational/bad argument, I submit the doctrine of "emotivism," in which our moral "intuitions" preceed our rational justifications of them. Ethical, altruistic, and empathetic behavior could be a universal adapted by man for it's survival value - or, rather, the survival value of those particular genes (selfish gene). Of course, things can go terribly awry when other, less benign, instincts get the better of the ethical ones - like xenophobia - as happened in Nazi Germany, and probably continues to happen among small tribal groups in New Guinea and South America. And let's not forget the United States. As to why we don't live forever, there's just no reason that we should past the brief fertility period and period of raising our young. Any longer won't do our (selfish) genes any good at all. Of course, you could talk to an exproprians/transhumanists and get some pretty farfetched (though maybe not so) predictions about our future and immortality. See "Nick Bostrom" for this kind of stuff. - david b
A former member
Post #: 21
You do not comprehend the concept of rational with regards a person's life and their actions.

It is irrational to act in a manner that leads to one's destruction. Eichmann did that.

Secondly, I am very well acquainted with whom Eichmann is and what he was responsible for - I do not require direction from the likes of you.

Perhaps you could explain your concept of rationality since I seem to be having difficulties understanding this concept.

In terms of rationality and one's destruction, would Eichmann then be 'rational' had Germany somehow won WWII thus avoiding its destruction?
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy