Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 05:14:15 -0700 From: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> To: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <200209041214.g84CEK183039@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Neal E Westfall <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> writes:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Dave Hayes wrote:
>> Terry Lambert wrote:
>> >> "Desperate" perhaps. "Misunderstood" definately. "Naughty" I refrain
>> >> from using, it has too many sexual contexts that are inappropriate. ;)
>> >
>> > Rodney King was a fleeing felon in voilation of parole.
>>
>> I don't care what he was. There was zero excuse for that display
>> of police brutality. There's zero excuse for any of it actually,
>> and it's a prime reason I despise authority and rebel against any
>> sort of organized policing. Who watches the watchers?
>
> Hmmm...On what basis does anyone say that there is "zero excuse" for
> such and such action? Moral condemnations flow forth, but on what
> basis?
Personal history.
When I was 15, my best friend was shot in cold blood by LAPD for
"resembling" some guy who had offed a 7-11. The guy was one of the
smartest people I've ever known, and most definately not a
criminal. The LAPD has a very long history of using excessive force
when dealing with anyone (criminal or otherwise), especially for those
of us that grew up here.
Granted, I was kind of traumatized and this may not be a basis
everyone can accept. But I do, and at the moment that's all that counts.
> You and Terry really are more alike than you may know.
Believe me I know. ;)
> However, given your rejection of authority, who are you to condemn
> police brutality?
Someone who's lost a friend to it.
> All you are doing is confirming that "there is none righteous, not
> even one, there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for
> God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless, there
> is none who does good, not even one..." (Romans 3:10-12) You really
> should read the entire passage, it gets even more to the point, such
> that, "every mouth may be closed and all the world may become
> accountable to God".
Well, two things before I respond.
First, when any biblical prose comes into debate, unless the people
are very focused on Truth, it will disintegrate into exact semantic
meanings of words written over a couple thousand years ago. This is
not a place to learn truth, but it is a place to steep in
righteousness. ;)
Secondly, the bible has many layers of meaning. Some of the layers
are unavailable to people without the proper experiential data to
interpret them. (This means, if you are a Christan, you read the Bible
and then ask God what it means, not your pastor or some bible geek).
Ok, now responding to this. I'm familiar enough with the passage. The
entire chapter has a theme which is consistently misinterpreted to
mean that "all are sinners". It is a negativity pointed to by many
other religions as "why Christianity is self-destructive". After all,
if you can never be a non-sinner, then what's the use in not sinning?
In fact, there's another meaning here, and that has to do with what
"righteousness" is and why it's useless to be in that state (I do it
above). It's not saying "you are a sinner" per se. It's explaining
the uselessness of righteous behavior. This behavior has to be
overcome as a stepping stone on the path to being one with the
universe.
Zen masters merely try to shut off your brain for you, if you can do
that then righteous behavior will shut off at the same time.
> Who watches the watchers indeed!
Speaking, of course, without reference or support of any authority,
higher power or otherwise. ;)
> I really think you are deceiving yourself if you think you are
> not also deeply entrenched in assumptions.
I don't think that I am not deeply entrenched in assumptions, how
else could I be communicating here? ;) But, alas, even that is an
assumption.
> Everybody has them, and they are very important. The trick is in
> adopting the *right* assumptions.
Are you being righteous? ;) How do you know which assumptions are the
right ones? "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God".
> The question to be asked is what presuppositions are
> transcendentally necessary for experience to be meaningful at all.
> The reason that both of you are so difficult to argue with is that
> neither of you seem to think anything is meaningful.
I'll admit, to me this is all a dream. Controlled folly this all is.
Getting Terry to admit that would be...difficult. ;)
------
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200209041214.g84CEK183039>