Without evil there'd be no good ...

[LaMont Cranston]

Surendra, OK, let's go back to boxing stories...

Yes, I followed the who era of Thomas "The Hit Man" Hearns, Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Sugar Ray Leonard and others. I have a friend in Honolulu was is the nephew of former champ Bobo Olsen (I hope I spelled his name right) who fought in the era of Sugar Ray Robinson, Gene Fullmer, Carmen Basillio, etc. and has all of his late uncle's press clippings.

When we were going to that gym in Oakland, there was an old fighter named LeRoy, a giant of a man, who claimed, among other things, that he'd been a sparring partner of Joe Louis. He had many stories to tell about boxing, the mob, criminal activity and a lot of other things. I believed, and I still do, most of his stories.

That thing about arm length is a bit misleading, because they measure from fingertip to fingertip, and the measurement includes the fighter's back. If the person being measured has a huge upper body, it could be that he has many inches across his back and, say, medium length arms. Another fighter, like Ali, who was relatively tall and lean, might measure out to have the same wingspan, but, he could have much longer arms than a shorter fighter with a huge torso.

To the best of my knowledge, tailbacks, and a lot of other football players, have gotten bigger and faster, but I haven't heard about anybody, regardless of size, who plays football and has run a 4.1 in the 40. The fastest times I know of are about 4.27.

Your sense of humor has been coming through for me for a long time, and I enjoy it. You have been underestimating me on several forums, but I also enjoy that. I think that when people underestimate you, it can give you a huge advantage, especially when you're playing poker...

[LaMont Cranston]

Surendra, Yes, it's sort of a tautology. I've got to go out into the world and do some things, but I hope to get back to you in a few hours...
Aloha!

[Surendra Darathy]

That thing about arm length is a bit misleading, because they measure from fingertip to fingertip, and the measurement includes the fighter's back. If the person being measured has a huge upper body, it could be that he has many inches across his back and, say, medium length arms. Another fighter, like Ali, who was relatively tall and lean, might measure out to have the same wingspan, but, he could have much longer arms than a shorter fighter with a huge torso.

It's nice to know that. Kind of like bust size for women, which is meaningless unless you also get the A,B,C's of cup size.

To the best of my knowledge, tailbacks, and a lot of other football players, have gotten bigger and faster, but I haven't heard about anybody, regardless of size, who plays football and has run a 4.1 in the 40. The fastest times I know of are about 4.27.

So, I was pretty close, considering I was talking out of my hat. You get the idea.

[piscator]

if "Good" and "Evil" are social constructs that we use to refer to others, than what does that say about the use of the terms in holy books? what does that imply about the LPOE?




John Mayall's Bluesbreakers doing a Mose Allison song about right and wrong and the Mississippi State Penitentiary...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vKGluBbhro&feature=fvw[/youtube]

[Surendra Darathy]

Parchman Farm! A classic from beyond the Classical Era!

"Gonna be here for the rest o' my life, and all I did was shoot my wife!"

[Coito ergo sum]

Coito ergo Sum,

It is against the rules here to post the contents of any private correspondence without permission of both the sender and receiver.

No disclosure of any private details relating to other members (including all forms of correspondence, physical meetings, details of relationships, photographs, anonymised recounts or stories, etc.) without the permission of the other party/ies involved.

Consider this a warning that any further breach like this will result in a suspension.



Edit: fix dodgy link.

Fair enough. If that's the rule, that's the rule.

[LaMont Cranston]

Surendra, OK, I'm back from my travels, but I'm tired as shit. I'll address all that stuff about "good," "evil," "success," "failure," "popular," "'unpopular" and solve the rest of the problems of the world over my morning coffee. In the meantime, I might listen to Mose doing "Parchman Farm." In my opinion, that album is the greatest he ever did, although I don't think he ever sang a bad song. He will always be the height of cool.

While we're on the subject of music, let me put in a good word for the likes of Blind Willie McTell and Mississippi John Hurt. I'm going to guess that there's a pretty good chance you're familiar with them, but if you're not, you'll enjoy them. Right now, a friend on mine is playing Boz Scaggs version of that Jimmie Rodgers classic "Waiting For A Train," another truly great song that has been covered by quite a few other great singers.

OK, stay out of trouble, and I'll see you in the morning...

[jamest]

Lamont, I was just wondering what sort of theist/philosopher you were that attracted so much bullshit? Just curious... being in a similar boat. Perhaps you could direct me to a post/thread that might answer my enquiry. Cheers.

[LaMont Cranston]

jamest, Your question is so general that I really don't know where to begin. Basically, I am enthusiastically interested in such things as history, religion, spirituality, the nature of consciousness, philosophy, science, love and a lot of other things. When I joined this forum, I made it clear that I'm a theist, a serious writing (although most of the stuff I write on these forums is far from serious), a seeker of information and I had been permanently banned from rationalskepticism.org after making it for over 2000 posts on RDF.

When you say you're in a similar boat, what does that mean? If you have more specific questions, I'll do the best I can to answer them on this thread or another one. Cheers to you!

[jamest]

jamest, Your question is so general that I really don't know where to begin. Basically, I am enthusiastically interested in such things as history, religion, spirituality, the nature of consciousness, philosophy, science, love and a lot of other things. When I joined this forum, I made it clear that I'm a theist, a serious writing (although most of the stuff I write on these forums is far from serious), a seeker of information and I had been permanently banned from rationalskepticism.org after making it for over 2000 posts on RDF.

When you say you're in a similar boat, what does that mean? If you have more specific questions, I'll do the best I can to answer them on this thread or another one. Cheers to you!

The highlighted bit is what I'm interested in. I'd like to know the specific beliefs/thoughts that you harbour with regards to those interests.

When I say that "I'm in a similar boat", I meant that I frequently experience the same sort of nonsense that you yourself apparently experience. We could, of course, have differing views about the same theme... I just don't know. Hence the request for you to clarify. You might not want to clarify for personal reasons - I dunno - but the least I can do is to ask you to do so.

[LaMont Cranston]

Surendra, I feel revived, and I just myself a fresh cup of coffee, so let's get back to good, evil and all those other things...

Without question, indoctrination has a lot to do with how we perceive good, evil, beauty and a lot of other things. However, as large-brained beings who make value judgements and are capable of rational thought, we have the capacity to make those decisions that will most benefit ourselves and others. Those decisions, the ones that enhance lives, we tend to think of as good. Those decisions, the ones that fuck things up, we tend to think of as bad.

What's also true is that we have the capacity to alter course, see the error of our ways and do a host of other things after we've made a decision. Life is like that. When we reconsider choices, compensate, etc., do those things always work out for the better? Of course not, but there are other tools in our lives that are available, including apologizing, forgiving and so on.

I've suggested quite a few times that we look at certain actions (i.e. vengeance, anger, forgiveness, turning the other cheek) without all the religious window dressing to consider what those acts are about from a rational and scientific point of view. So far, nobody seems to want to do that. That's OK, but I intend to keep bringing it up on this and other threads, even with my short attention span.

Yes, concepts such as "good" and "evil" can be used to confuse people. They can also be used to free people, to have them live better lives from their point of view. I'm also aware of all those things the sages say about failure, a little learning and all those other things. When I was just out of college, I was working in San Francisco for a major corporation, I had a pretty blond girlfriend, I was getting lots of ass, I had a new convertible, etc., but I knew I was faking it. If my goal was to be the CEO of IBM, I failed, but, thankfully, I didn't succeed at that path in life.

Goals, success, failure, etc. are relative things. So are many parts of life. We can know that you must have had certain goals, including acquiring knowledge in specific subject areas, including math, science, music and so on. What you don't want to directly reveal about yourself are your goals in more personal areas, and that's fine, but, as you already know, you come across as very sarcastic and negative. It could be that it's all an act on your part, but it also could be that's an accurate reflection of how things have worked out for you in your relationships with your fellow human beings. (After looking into your heart and mind, that's all the free psychoanalysis The Shadow is going to do for now.)

You say "Asking why things are the way they are is a recipe for trouble." Gee, is that true all the time? I'd say "Kowing that things are the way they are is an opportunity to live a better life for yourself and others." Of course, if somebody is locked into a rigid way of thinking, they are going to have a lot of trouble getting next to that idea.

I've got to tell you, Surendra, as painful as it might be for both of us to admit it, I believe we have developed a begrudging respect for each other. More than that, I've gotten into your head, kind of the way Ali did with Liston. The Shadow knows...

[LaMont Cranston]

piscator, I am not the one who said that "Good" and "Evil" are social constructs that we use to refer to others. In fact, I think we use them in reference to ourselves and others. What does that say about the use of the terms in holy books? It says that those things exist as concepts for most of humanity, and they've been around for a very long time. Even atheists have to deal with them. What is LPOE?

[LaMont Cranston]

jamest, Let me give you a little background...

I grew up in a not very religious Jewish family. If you had asked me if I believed God existed, I would have said "yes," but, in truth, I'd never really thought about it. A number of years ago I became much more interested in finding out what love was about, and I started looking into those subjects I mentioned and other things, including the teachings of Buddha and Jesus. Much to my suprise, I was totally blown away, and I still am. What you refer to as "nonsense" are things that I find fascinating, exciting, interesting, powerful and wonderful. Maybe if you thought of it as something other than nonsense you would realize there is so much more to it.

For the record, I think that Jesus was extremely cool, and he's taken a bad rap for what many assholes, scumbags and hypocrites have done in his name. I have no doubt that he had a great sense of humor, and he was talking about some very heavy duty stuff. I'm not much of a fan of organized religions, and, without question, they have done some really horrible things. The fact that assholes do things and claim they are doing it in the name of God, Jesus, country or whatever does not make it so.

I also find that I find a lot to like in the so-called "new atheism." Let's say that I'm both a fan and a critic. I also find it rather ironic that many non-believers spend much more time talking and thinking about God, studying the Bible, etc. than the true believers. After considering everything I can find, I can make a "beyond a reasonable doubt" scenario that works for me that God probably exists. I'm not interested in proselytizing or changing anybody's mind about anything. It's way too much work, and it doesn't work very well. I think religions have screwed-up badly by using "believe it or else" tactics, but I also see many atheists employing tactics that have failed with religions.

All things considered, I'm still a theist and quite happy about it. If I was an atheist, I'd find a way to be happy about that. I hope that clears things up some, but if you have more questions, I'll do the best I can to answer them. Take care...

[piscator]

piscator, I am not the one who said that "Good" and "Evil" are social constructs that we use to refer to others. In fact, I think we use them in reference to ourselves and others. What does that say about the use of the terms in holy books? It says that those things exist as concepts for most of humanity, and they've been around for a very long time. Even atheists have to deal with them. What is LPOE?

i'm a bit suprised you don't seem to know what LPOE might stand for in the context of this thread

care to take a guess?

[LaMont Cranston]

piscator, It's been a long day, and I've got plans for a great dinner with friends. No, I don't feel like taking a guess...