MMAC@vax.oxford.ac.uk (The_Edible_Dormouse) (07/12/90)
Jesse Asher raised the point that: >I have an interesting problem that maybe some can help me with. >I believe that people need some sort of foundation for their morals to stand >on. It is helpful to have some sort of guiding light when faced with difficult >decisions and problems. I have come to the conclusion that I lack this >foundation. I am an atheist and do not believe in any kind of overall >intelligent being guiding the universe through its paces. And I definitely >don't believe in a Christian type of god. ok, i think what you are saying is that people feel the need rather than that they do need. this is certainly my viewpoint and I think it is possibly a large part society programming that makes you feel the need. Look at how difficult it can be to go against years of subtle brainwashing and declare yourself bisexual, polygamous or a dropout (yes, I am speaking from experience in at least one of the above cases). I too am an atheist, although it took me a few years to admit it to myself and called myself agnostic for a long while, although I knew deep down I wouldn't accept the existence of gods. >I'm not quite sure, but I think I may be looking more for a philosophy than >a religion. I don't really care for mysticism or such things as that. >I also tend to lean more towards an eastern way of thinking. I believe that OK, I think we are very similar here. What I belive is partly logic, partly through internal examination and is 'what I am' so far as I know. Incidentally, I think I know myself pretty well and this is the opinion of most people who know me. I too have always had a leaning towards eastern religions, martial arts, artwork etc. I have a number of basic principals which I hold to be self evident (to me) and true (for me). These include libertarianism---maximising personal liberty of everyone. Naturally this leads into ethical problems---how do you do this? Clearly the right to swing my fist ends at your nose, but if deliberately stand in front of me when I am exercising then you are limiting me unnecessarily. Hence true lib. requires co-operation. This is not a problem with the fundamental moral, just means you have to think harder about application in an ethical sense. Other things---I don't respect authority or laws for their own sake. I follow what laws seem right to me (because I flatter myself that I am intelligent enough to know) or would seriously inconvenience me in being caught breaking them (weighed against likelihood of being caught). As what I do won't affect others I see no problem here :-). I respect others right to authority over me if I see them as 'better' in some sense --- better experienced, advised etc. Similarly for laws where I can't or don't know more, I'll obey them. Common sense. Then the tricky bits. I am a scientist---I have a 3500 essay I wrote for myself on what I need to believe (without proof) to be a scientist---occam's razor etc and will mail this to people on bitnet/internet if they like (can't post to uucp, sorry). This deals with the problems of mysticism and scince quite neatly I think. Eastern thinking? Depersonalisation as a scientist is vital. However, I have said I know things about myself. This comes from internal meditation, discussion with friends etc but mostly by being totally open with people. this allows me to be totally open with myself and crushes the ego beautifully. my main flaw is that i ma egotistical. i am breaking that down now as i develop. Sorry, this has got a bit long, and should be continued by email---it is very close to me at the moment and I have thought greatly about it. >everything is cyclical and balance should be maintained. I believe that there >will always be "good" and "evil", or "good" and "bad". But a balance must >be maintained between them. To me, life is all about the struggle to maintain >the balance. It is very rarely in balance, but ceaselessly strives to >reach equilibrium. hmm, here's where we split. i beleive humans are complex machines and when we die we die. there is no point ot life as it is not pre-ordained or post-examined. hence we live and we enjoy. if we take pleasure from other people's enjoyment we look to improve their situation to. I lean towards taoist philosophy but find no need for the mystical side except as metaphor. the tao te ching talks of god occasionally, the stories of cranes etc abound but it is a poetic philosophy. More on taoism later if people want... >describe my way of thinking about life and existance by just saying "I'm a >such and such." Saying that you are an atheist only describes one small My answer? Why assume I'm me. (there is a taoist story behind it which i'll post one day) edi =============================================================================== MMAC@UK.AC.OX.VAX (Janet) = The opinions expressed above are MMAC%VAX.OX.AC.UK@UKACRL.BITNET (Bitnet) = not necessarily those of any person MMAC%VAX.OXFORD.AC.UK@NSS.CS.UCL.AC.UK = living, dead, undead or the subject (Internet) = of a Schrodinger's cat experiment. "Trust me I'm a Physicist !" = They may or may not be my own. ===============================================================================