If you ask people what equality means, they know. If you ask people what justice means, they know. If you ask people what love means, they k… morenow.
I know the meaning and you too, but I'm sure your meaning of justice, love and equality is different from mine.
I don't even understand where you're coming from with equality: people are more equal now than they've been ever before in civilised humanity.
Obviously we're more equal now then, let's say, the 700's or the late 1930's in Germany. But do you mean "equality" in security? In voting rights? In freedom of expression opinions and sexual orientation? Yes, but no. We're equal (legally, but maybe not morally) in all of what I asked previously. And I say we as in (some) First World countries. But, "equality" can be also for the same amount of wealth, happiness, respect and equal treatment in justice for all people (and we're not all equal in those things).
How has love l… [view original content]
Good post Fau.
Always nice to see logical and well written stuff here.
For justice, I like to point out one thing - It can be split into for revenge and for rehabilitation.
Like, believing people can change, and not just punishing them.
Note: I'm not good at examples, but you should get the main point, you're a smart guy. Another thing: these do not necessarily reflect my personal beliefs, so no one grill me about it. (Not referring to you Fau, you're cool)
Let's say there are two people on trial for.....I don't know, murder. The family of the dead are outraged, the court agrees, and 'justice', is given, in the form of death.
And there's another two people, and another family. Same charges, but this family openly forgives the people, and the court does as well, and they aren't give death.
It's just believing people should have a second chance, you know?
Thank you. I also agree that it's always nice to see well wirtten stuff in this forums.
But, for the justice part, what do you mean with "rehabilitation"?
I know the meaning and you too, but I'm sure your meaning of justice, love and equality is different from mine.
But that's the same for literally every human in existence with abstract nouns, it is their nature.
Obviously we're more equal now then, let's say, the 700's or the late 1930's in Germany. But do you mean "equality" in security? In voting rights? In freedom of expression opinions and sexual orientation? Yes, but no. We're equal (legally, but maybe not morally) in all of what I asked previously. And I say we as in (some) First World countries. But, "equality" can be also for the same amount of wealth, happiness, respect and equal treatment in justice for all people (and we're not all equal in those things).
In security? What does that mean?
Your point is true: equality means different things to different people. That does not mean we have lost the 'point' of them, or forget their true meaning: their true meaning evolves. That's the nature of linguistics.
Do you know the phrase "the more laws you have, the freer you are"? If you do not know what that means, I'm going to give you an exemple: In "The Purge" the movie, there are no laws and no authority for a time. Everybody is free... by making others living without freedome. The law of the wild. Now that I've cleared that out, do you think that your partner will not leave you for someone else because of love? Your partner is able to do it freely. Who's the blame? Nobody, because that's love. Of course, I'm not saying that we shall turn towards religious traditions with "Till Death Do Us Part" like fanatics. I'm just saying that "that" love has faded to "partnership".
Love was partnership in Ancient Greek demes, so no, the meaning of 'love' there hasn't been lost, if anything it's been 'reclaimed'. Or, truly, it has 'evolved' which is the entire point of language.
The defenition of "true" love, in my opinion, is the same love that parents have to their child/children. The parents feel the need to take care of the child/children as much as possible and as long as possible. Another exemple is when you fall in love with someone. You try to improve yourself to be the best person in the eyes of the one you love. But, of course, that's my opinion. May you feel free to explain the flaws of my opinion.
Right, but that's an extremely different view of love to what the ROmans viewed it as. And extremely similar to other historical cultures. So no meaning has been lost.
There aren't flaws in your opinion as it is a harmless opinion. It's just you're stating that the meaning of love has been lost, which makes no sense, because there was never one uniform meaning of love to lose in the first place.
Inform youself before you speak. Enough said.
Inform myself of what? What JSTOR studies can you link me to? I coudl easily say the same to you: that you should educate yourself on linguistics. But I won't, because that implies you're stupid and you're not.
The facts are: there has never been one single definition of, for example, love, and as a result of that it is impossible for it's 'true' meaning to be lost, as there is no one 'true' meaning.
If you ask people what equality means, they know. If you ask people what justice means, they know. If you ask people what love means, they k… morenow.
I know the meaning and you too, but I'm sure your meaning of justice, love and equality is different from mine.
I don't even understand where you're coming from with equality: people are more equal now than they've been ever before in civilised humanity.
Obviously we're more equal now then, let's say, the 700's or the late 1930's in Germany. But do you mean "equality" in security? In voting rights? In freedom of expression opinions and sexual orientation? Yes, but no. We're equal (legally, but maybe not morally) in all of what I asked previously. And I say we as in (some) First World countries. But, "equality" can be also for the same amount of wealth, happiness, respect and equal treatment in justice for all people (and we're not all equal in those things).
How has love l… [view original content]
Good post Fau.
Always nice to see logical and well written stuff here.
For justice, I like to point out one thing - It can be split into for revenge and for rehabilitation.
Lots of things can be taken as rude at face value. People might get offended by some words that the author wasn't aware she or he could offend with.
That doesn't make the words innately so. I've told him I'm not laughing at his opinions, I'm laughing at some conclusions I'm making and writing my thoughts.
Lots of things can be taken as rude at face value. People might get offended by some words that the author wasn't aware she or he could offe… morend with.
That doesn't make the words innately so. I've told him I'm not laughing at his opinions, I'm laughing at some conclusions I'm making and writing my thoughts.
I'm sorry you were offended. Did I trigger you?
I don't think we're only allowed to laugh at things that are meant to be a joke. That seems like a pretty totalitarian form of humour limitation.
Flog...It was rude, how is someone suppose to take it, it looked like you were laughing at his compliment to someone you're arguing against which can be majorly insulting to both parties.
Um, all words are literary devices.
I read his comment, my brain thought, I laughed, I wrote down how I'd react in real life, which is one way of approaching forum interaction.
It wasn't intended to be rude.
I never said you intended for what you said to be funny? I just said whether one intends a sentence to be funny or not shouldn't prevent people from laughing.
I didn't ignore it because I write my thoughts and how I'd react in real life on here. Sorry, but for you that was laughter.
I would explain how I arrived at laughter but that could trigger you more, so I won't. I left out the reason why because I didn't want to upset you, and thought that reply was vague enough to be both honest and more tactful than saying what I thought.
Flog...It was rude, how is someone suppose to take it, it looked like you were laughing at his compliment to someone you're arguing against which can be majorly insulting to both parties.
I was going to, but stopped myself as if I did explain why that'd definitely be even more rude. So I left it vague while still showing my honest reaction.
I was going to, but stopped myself as if I did explain why that'd definitely be even more rude. So I left it vague while still showing my honest reaction.
Well because I didn't find the act of laughter rude, and because I wanted to give my honest reaction rather than just hiding.
I've apolog… moreised if I triggered him through the use of laughter, but I can't really do more than apologise if someone takes something the wrong way.
I'm being upfront about my reaction: it was laughter. The causes for that are far more likely to hurt people.
Um, you've completely misunderstood my first point. You said no-one needs to see the word hahaha. I said no one is required to see anything.
Writing is about expressing oneself, and that is what I was doing.
I could just as easily ask you why you don't understand that what I did was not rude and disrespectful. It's opinions and perspective. I respect your opinion that it was rude, please respect mine that it wasn't.
No-one 'needs to see' anything anywhere.
And yet you posted "Hahaha" for what reason then?
But I didn't know it. I viewed it a… mores just laughter, and the motivation for it rude, which i removed.
The entire thing is rude, why do you not understand that what you did was rude and disrespectful?
Oh my...FLOG, writing "Hahhaa" at someone's positive post towards someone's argument is rude if you mean it or not. It doesn't matter if you didn't think it was rude, it's rude nonetheless. It makes it seem even more rude when you decide to post it towards someone's positive post towards someone's argument who you're arguing against. It makes your side seem childish enough to not respect someone else.
Um, you've completely misunderstood my first point. You said no-one needs to see the word hahaha. I said no one is required to see anything.… more
Writing is about expressing oneself, and that is what I was doing.
I could just as easily ask you why you don't understand that what I did was not rude and disrespectful. It's opinions and perspective. I respect your opinion that it was rude, please respect mine that it wasn't.
He felt it was rude while I didn't think it was, and I still apologised.
That's not childish.
I wouldn't have written it if I felt the post was wholly positive. I didn't feel that. I wasn't arguing against him either, I was just stating I found it humorous, and apologise when that triggered him.
Oh my...FLOG, writing "Hahhaa" at someone's positive post towards someone's argument is rude if you mean it or not. It doesn't matter if you… more didn't think it was rude, it's rude nonetheless. It makes it seem even more rude when you decide to post it towards someone's positive post towards someone's argument who you're arguing against. It makes your side seem childish enough to not respect someone else.
He felt it was rude while I didn't think it was, and I still apologised.
That's not childish.
I wouldn't have written it if I felt the… more post was wholly positive. I didn't feel that. I wasn't arguing against him either, I was just stating I found it humorous, and apologise when that triggered him.
The Bible has had a greater influence on people.
Men have put themselves in danger for it.
Men have died for it!
Examples of that are: John Calvin, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, Jan Hus, Michael Servetus, and others.
And I respectfully disagree, with the thought that Greek philosophy was written before the Bible.
For example, Genesis; the first book of the Bible, written by Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, was completed in the year 1513 B.C. E.
The book of Job, also written by Moses, was completed in 1473 B.C.E.
Secular history concerning Greece does not actually begin until about the 8th century B.C.E, ( the first Olympiad being celebrated in 776 B.C.E.)
The earliest knowledge of Greek religion, which fostered Greek philosophy, comes through the epic poetry of Homer. Two epic poems, the iliad and the Oddysey, are presumed to have been written by him.
The oldest papyrus portion of these are believed to date sometime before 150 B.C.E.
The Bible is not where values like integrity come from.
I study ancient greek poetry which preceeds the Bible by 1000 years, and integrit… morey is extremely important, as is chastity, bravery, etc.
The Bible did not give us these ideals; they have been part of our society for far longer than that book's inception.
Huge numbers of men and women have died for greek religion as well. Examples of that are: Hektor, Achilles, Ajax, Dido, Astyanax, Phaedra, Sarpedon and Glaukos.
And Moses did write then, but the book wasn't in production, nor was christianity remotely regarded as a valid religion by the vast majority of people, certainly not in Greece.
So there you have a population who believe in 12 main gods, didn't have access to the book of Genesis, and still held values of chastity incredibly high.
But, regardless, in Ancient Egypt chastity was an important trait, and the egyptian civilisation (obviously) predates Moses.
I'm sorry, I too enjoy thinking 'this came from this an this came from this', it's a nice and more simplified view of the world, but the unfortunate truth is that the world is complicated, and virtues of chastity, integrity etc. are held up as good outside of christianity, considering they predate any christian writing.
The Bible has had a greater influence on people.
Men have put themselves in danger for it.
Men have died for it!
Examples of that are: Jo… morehn Calvin, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, Jan Hus, Michael Servetus, and others.
And I respectfully disagree, with the thought that Greek philosophy was written before the Bible.
For example, Genesis; the first book of the Bible, written by Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, was completed in the year 1513 B.C. E.
The book of Job, also written by Moses, was completed in 1473 B.C.E.
Secular history concerning Greece does not actually begin until about the 8th century B.C.E, ( the first Olympiad being celebrated in 776 B.C.E.)
The earliest knowledge of Greek religion, which fostered Greek philosophy, comes through the epic poetry of Homer. Two epic poems, the iliad and the Oddysey, are presumed to have been written by him.
The oldest papyrus portion of these are believed to date sometime before 150 B.C.E.
Comments
Good post Fau.
Always nice to see logical and well written stuff here.
For justice, I like to point out one thing - It can be split into for revenge and for rehabilitation.
Thank you. I also agree that it's always nice to see well wirtten stuff in this forums.
But, for the justice part, what do you mean with "rehabilitation"?
Like, believing people can change, and not just punishing them.
Note: I'm not good at examples, but you should get the main point, you're a smart guy. Another thing: these do not necessarily reflect my personal beliefs, so no one grill me about it. (Not referring to you Fau, you're cool)
Let's say there are two people on trial for.....I don't know, murder. The family of the dead are outraged, the court agrees, and 'justice', is given, in the form of death.
And there's another two people, and another family. Same charges, but this family openly forgives the people, and the court does as well, and they aren't give death.
It's just believing people should have a second chance, you know?
But that's the same for literally every human in existence with abstract nouns, it is their nature.
In security? What does that mean?
Your point is true: equality means different things to different people. That does not mean we have lost the 'point' of them, or forget their true meaning: their true meaning evolves. That's the nature of linguistics.
Love was partnership in Ancient Greek demes, so no, the meaning of 'love' there hasn't been lost, if anything it's been 'reclaimed'. Or, truly, it has 'evolved' which is the entire point of language.
Right, but that's an extremely different view of love to what the ROmans viewed it as. And extremely similar to other historical cultures. So no meaning has been lost.
There aren't flaws in your opinion as it is a harmless opinion. It's just you're stating that the meaning of love has been lost, which makes no sense, because there was never one uniform meaning of love to lose in the first place.
Inform myself of what? What JSTOR studies can you link me to? I coudl easily say the same to you: that you should educate yourself on linguistics. But I won't, because that implies you're stupid and you're not.
The facts are: there has never been one single definition of, for example, love, and as a result of that it is impossible for it's 'true' meaning to be lost, as there is no one 'true' meaning.
[removed]
Something funny? Or are you just insulting me?
How...How is that funny?
How was I insulting you? I'm not trying to imply your opinion is laughable.
I just see what you're doing, but it's fine.
Don't worry.
But I am, that was rude.
Well, laughing at something that wasn't intended to be funny can be insulting, and this is the Internet so I can't see your face.
How so?
I wasn't laughing at his opinion, I was just laughing to myself about some speculations in my head.
We can't tell that, you wrote "Hahaha" which could mean anything and taken at face value, rude.
Lots of things can be taken as rude at face value. People might get offended by some words that the author wasn't aware she or he could offend with.
That doesn't make the words innately so. I've told him I'm not laughing at his opinions, I'm laughing at some conclusions I'm making and writing my thoughts.
I'm sorry you were offended. Did I trigger you?
I don't think we're only allowed to laugh at things that are meant to be a joke. That seems like a pretty totalitarian form of humour limitation.
Flog...You responded at him with "Hahaha"...Don't act like it's some literacy device, it was rude.
There was no joke about what I said.
If it's something that is actually funny, you could easily explain why.
If not, you could have easily ignored it.
Um, all words are literary devices.
I read his comment, my brain thought, I laughed, I wrote down how I'd react in real life, which is one way of approaching forum interaction.
It wasn't intended to be rude.
Flog...It was rude, how is someone suppose to take it, it looked like you were laughing at his compliment to someone you're arguing against which can be majorly insulting to both parties.
I never said you intended for what you said to be funny? I just said whether one intends a sentence to be funny or not shouldn't prevent people from laughing.
I didn't ignore it because I write my thoughts and how I'd react in real life on here. Sorry, but for you that was laughter.
I would explain how I arrived at laughter but that could trigger you more, so I won't. I left out the reason why because I didn't want to upset you, and thought that reply was vague enough to be both honest and more tactful than saying what I thought.
Right, but I've told him i wasn't laughing at his opinion.
It is still rude as you didn't explain what you were laughing at.
I was going to, but stopped myself as if I did explain why that'd definitely be even more rude. So I left it vague while still showing my honest reaction.
So if both of the things you did and could've done were rude then why comment in the first place?
Well because I didn't find the act of laughter rude, and because I wanted to give my honest reaction rather than just hiding.
I've apologised if I triggered him through the use of laughter, but I can't really do more than apologise if someone takes something the wrong way.
I'm being upfront about my reaction: it was laughter. The causes for that are far more likely to hurt people.
You're on the internet, people don't need to see your reaction to everything.
You shouldn't have posted if it was going to be rude and you knew it.
No-one 'needs to see' anything anywhere.
But I didn't know it. I viewed it as just laughter, and the motivation for it rude, which i removed.
And yet you posted "Hahaha" for what reason then?
The entire thing is rude, why do you not understand that what you did was rude and disrespectful?
Um, you've completely misunderstood my first point. You said no-one needs to see the word hahaha. I said no one is required to see anything.
Writing is about expressing oneself, and that is what I was doing.
I could just as easily ask you why you don't understand that what I did was not rude and disrespectful. It's opinions and perspective. I respect your opinion that it was rude, please respect mine that it wasn't.
Oh my...FLOG, writing "Hahhaa" at someone's positive post towards someone's argument is rude if you mean it or not. It doesn't matter if you didn't think it was rude, it's rude nonetheless. It makes it seem even more rude when you decide to post it towards someone's positive post towards someone's argument who you're arguing against. It makes your side seem childish enough to not respect someone else.
He felt it was rude while I didn't think it was, and I still apologised.
That's not childish.
I wouldn't have written it if I felt the post was wholly positive. I didn't feel that. I wasn't arguing against him either, I was just stating I found it humorous, and apologise when that triggered him.
"Triggered"...I'm dying. XD
Flog, are you being serious?
The Bible has had a greater influence on people.
Men have put themselves in danger for it.
Men have died for it!
Examples of that are: John Calvin, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, Jan Hus, Michael Servetus, and others.
And I respectfully disagree, with the thought that Greek philosophy was written before the Bible.
For example, Genesis; the first book of the Bible, written by Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, was completed in the year 1513 B.C. E.
The book of Job, also written by Moses, was completed in 1473 B.C.E.
Secular history concerning Greece does not actually begin until about the 8th century B.C.E, ( the first Olympiad being celebrated in 776 B.C.E.)
The earliest knowledge of Greek religion, which fostered Greek philosophy, comes through the epic poetry of Homer. Two epic poems, the iliad and the Oddysey, are presumed to have been written by him.
The oldest papyrus portion of these are believed to date sometime before 150 B.C.E.
Huge numbers of men and women have died for greek religion as well. Examples of that are: Hektor, Achilles, Ajax, Dido, Astyanax, Phaedra, Sarpedon and Glaukos.
And Moses did write then, but the book wasn't in production, nor was christianity remotely regarded as a valid religion by the vast majority of people, certainly not in Greece.
So there you have a population who believe in 12 main gods, didn't have access to the book of Genesis, and still held values of chastity incredibly high.
But, regardless, in Ancient Egypt chastity was an important trait, and the egyptian civilisation (obviously) predates Moses.
I'm sorry, I too enjoy thinking 'this came from this an this came from this', it's a nice and more simplified view of the world, but the unfortunate truth is that the world is complicated, and virtues of chastity, integrity etc. are held up as good outside of christianity, considering they predate any christian writing.
My use of the word triggered was a joke, poking fun at the people who like to get offended at everything.
Ironic.
'That's rude'
Exactly, trying to prove a point here.
However, I'm done debating with you, believe you're in the right although you're not.
My quotation marks were because I don't actually think it's rude.
Dude, it's all opinions. No-one is right or wrong.
That's a poor excuse.