morality

Erm- yes and lets process a thousand years and then figure out Newton again. That would be charming.

Lev - maybe you can convince your professor or whoever you write this BULLSHIT for, but since you already apologized for your lies (or the rumors you read in the Daily Mirror) about a certain writer, I can see you’re not quite lost, but are just a little attention whore.

Ill put you on ignore, so I wont be responding to your future attempts to get noticed. You may want to find another audience for your study in prancing.

Is there one man or woman who has not lied, at one time or another, to benefit themselves.

Not to assume, james, but you do realize that when I said “Man” I meant the human species, not just men.

Perhaps because women are by their natures more intuitive than are men - at least perhaps.
Anyway, I think it is more or less an INDIVIDUAL thing, not a man vs. woman thing.

As in the case of YOUR laughing at Magnus Anderson’s gross remark in one of his posts. I can’t for the world of me understand why you would laugh at that - think it was funny or encourage that kind of language (except for maybe the adage of "Birds of a feather… but then I’m a woman and can’t hold onto any kind of reasoning #-o - but I’m still holding onto that one.

If you want to see how amoral human beings truly are you only need to observe how human beings treat other human beings via economic and social inequality.

How can human beings be a moral species the way it acts and behaves amongst it own?

Doesn’t make any sense no matter what the bullshit moralists say.

And the ones banging on about morality are the worst offenders in this matter, claiming that extreme wealth and extreme poverty are “fair”.

Precisely!

A world of hypocrites, liars, and damnable fools, right?

In such a world anger is more useful than despair.

Get even I say.

Yet assumed.

Assumed again.

No telling what you assumed about that one.

Go ahead. What have you in mind?

Not much I can say online. Laughs

Many claim that the practice of contemplation, will make man moral, gentle, humble and compassionate. Where is the difference in Buddhism and Catholicism, they both uphold male celibacy, as the ultimate form of spirituality, the particular purpose of life, is to be rendered as lacking in purpose, meaningless, that which is essential as sexual love and parenthood. Given the behavior of man and of many so called gurus, one can conclude that mystical knowledge can lead mainly to narcissism rather than selflessness or morality.

It’s all bullshit.

Great comeback, James. You’re slipping.
I assumed NOTHING.

. The future has always been more real than the past. The past is derived from the present, the future is what drives the present, as we all full well know. Yet we allow science to tell us that existence must have a historical cause;; i.e. ‘the beginning of time’ as ‘everything that came out of nothing’.

Past as historical narrative is unreal. Present contains all that is worthy of being ‘remembered’ – all components, genes, tendencies --[/

I disagree.
It is the present that is derived from the past, not the other way around.
The past is history that drives us in the present that must be faced and overcome in order live freely in the present.
louise

You apparently have assumed that you were not assuming.
Can a worse assumption be made?

The simple fact that I stated that you assumed should be sufficient evidence to not assume that you hadn’t. :sunglasses:

A) you assumed that I didn’t already know that you meant “Man” and not “men”.
B) you have apparently assumed that it isn’t a male vs female distinction.
C) Although I don’t know of your third reference, I can tell that you assumed something negative about it that very probably wasn’t there.

And in no case, did you ask. :wink:

James S Saint

Hahahahahahahahha. Does that tell you how I feel about that statement?
Are you taking on the role of god again, James? :stuck_out_tongue:
In a court of law, your so-called “fact” and so-called "evidence would be thrown out of court. The judge would probably say to you - "shame on you, James. Now, the latter sentence there is an assumption but it’s based on empirical knowledge. lol

I didn’t assume anything there either - I was just asking for clarification. IF I had assumed, I wouldn’t have asked.

No, wrong again. Words DO make a difference, James. No assumption there either. That was merely my thought, my intuition. It isn’t an assumption which is more or less made in stone.

Wrong again, by my perception it was negative. For whatever reason, you at least appeared to think it was funny when MA said that gross thing…gross by my perception and I kind of INTUIT, not assume, also by the perceptions of men in here, men who might also be turned off by particular sexually gross comments such as that was and men who would even dream of putting something like that in here. You responded with a laughing smilie - whatever your intention may have been - it didn’t seem either logical or reasonable to me. Such as it was, it might only be encouraging to him. If a child said something gross to you, would you shrug it off by laughing?

[/quote]
Fine. I’m asking now. Why would you laugh at something so gross, off the wall, and which clearly to any reasonable person, has no place in here. Of course, that is only my perception, but as far as being logical or having any aesthetic value at all, it was meant for the gutter.

This is the post:

Take food out of its cold environment and it goes bad.
Same with humans.

“The weak do what they can and the strong do what they need to do.”

Past , future and present are not derivative.
There is a continual present. The past is a dream of things no more. History is our understanding of the past in light of the present, and the future is yet to be - but always shall be.

Morality is real I tell you!

It’s a world of brotherly love!

[Fucking assinine bullshit as usual.]