do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

politics, religion, science, art, barack obama, belgium, etc.
Post Reply

do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Poll ended at Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:31 pm

simple
11
23%
complex
36
77%
 
Total votes: 47
User avatar
A Ninja
Professional Fun Killer
<i>Professional Fun Killer</i>
Posts: 3846
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:36 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by A Ninja » Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:21 pm

KoD wrote:I voted complex, and i'm a social liberal.

Simple people usually have black & white thinking, and are generally boring IMO. (However I've spent most of my life in Texas and Alabama, so the chances of me running into "complex" people is low. I have met a few, though, and I am more attached to them.)

I try to be as dynamic and complex as possible so I seem like a mystery.
See I'm from Orange County. Sometimes I get sick of complex people, being around simple people allows me to relax much moreso than I can with other people.
Neelpos wrote:but he's A Ninja, he's one of the best fucking snipers on the server, if your evidence doesn't line up prepare to be ridiculed by your inability to differentiate hackers from really fucking good players.
Little Weapon
Posts: 2391
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:56 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Little Weapon » Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:29 am

being from LA

i sometimes want a simpler life
CaptainTripps wrote:Chicken, how does it work?
User avatar
Gr|m
Posts: 9383
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:39 pm

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Gr|m » Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:16 pm

joe wrote:it's highly offensive to me that in 2011 people still believe in a monotheistic religion invented 5000 years ago.
Isn't it weird how some people still believe in the same exact God after 4000 years, despite technology and incredible breakthroughs in science?

Science doesn't or at least shouldn't conflict with religion. If God exists, then he gave us the ability to use our brains and our deduction skills.

Love and morality can be seen as absolutely pivotal to my belief in God. You don't necessarily have to be a theist to have extreme convictions to act in love, but they definitely go hand in hand. The amount of joy and fulfillment attainable, even during life, is greater than any alternative possibilities (to me at least). Money, cars, women, etc etc etc... none of that stuff will satisfy, once someone attains it, they will continue looking for more, more, more. It's an unquenchable thirst. We want happiness and fulfillment in life, I'm sure every single person here agrees with that, but I believe that if you search for that through possessions, sex, or whatever other thing of this world you choose, you'll still feel like your missing something. But, my purpose of that isn't to try to say "you're unhappy!"- I am not you and can't actually know that. But, That is what I believe, despite your lack of care.

And to elab on subject, People should be complex but developing simple strategies that work as well as complex ones are better in my opinion.
User avatar
joe
The Big Cheese
Posts: 32538
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2002 2:40 am
Location: northern california
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by joe » Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:52 pm

morality has to be separate from religion. god isn't moral, it's just the ultimate authority figure with rules created by man.

to be moral you have to follow rules that aren't defined by any authority but by empathy. many religious people have no problem rationalizing objectivism and war and genocide and the death penalty and so on. religious belief is anodyne to immorality actually, more often than not. either "god allows it" or "god will forgive me" allows people to get away with shit they would never do if they were atheist.
"To perceive is to suffer" - Aristotle
mbaxter appreciates the beef
User avatar
Charlie
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:20 pm
Location: Silicone Valley
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Charlie » Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:42 pm

There's a lot of messed up people in the world. They can be found in every walk of life.

If your sister has a benign tumor that needs to be removed, and some incompetant doc butchers her and kills her during a relatively simple procedure... do you rail against the entire profession of medicine? Do you completely swear off going to doctors? Most likely not... 'cuz, well... that would be stupid.

It's like Bill Maher's movie Religulous... the dude went out of his way to interview every religious nut job he could find. He didn't face off against a rational apologist of any denomination. I found him as foolish as those imbeciles he was trying to have some type of deep discourse with (only that was just completely impossible to achieve -- total fail before you even start). An error in the beginning is an error indeed.

Man's version of morality? Hmmm... personally... I find that man made morality benefits the maker. It's the difference between a divine King and kings of this world (who lord it over people).

From my religious perspective... what I read and what the Magisterium perpetuates... 1) War is fundamentally bad -- there are times when there are good reasons to go to war (WW II for example) but nonetheless it does not make that war or any war good (i.e., "war is hell"). 2) When a society has the ability to segregate a populace harmful to its own good (i.e., pathological serial killers for example) then there is no reason for the death penalty. 3) God allows bad things to happen for the greater good (this topic would best be suited to a discussion and not a one liner in a single post). 3) "God will forgive me..." no matter what I do -- that's a fundamentally flawed interpretation. God does forgive past wrongs but repentance requires a change of heart. If your heart is truly changed then the outward sign of this would be through your actions. That would not be someone acting like a dog who returns to his own vomit and laps it up time after time.

To think all religious are stupid... frankly is not rational. It is a small, close-minded, fanatical statement at best.

...and finally. Intolerance. That is what I find highly offensive. That and pride... rude, self-important, arrogant pride.

End rant.
"Ignorance is Bliss" -- Thomas Gray
User avatar
scobywhru
Posts: 4773
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 9:12 pm
Xfire: scobywhru
Location: Fresno, CA
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by scobywhru » Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:56 pm

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.

-Thomas Jefferson
Image
Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy wrote:He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
User avatar
Charlie
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:20 pm
Location: Silicone Valley
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Charlie » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:14 pm

There are certain laws which govern the entire universe, and just as Thomas Jefferson said in the Declaration of Independence, there are laws which govern in affairs of men which are "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

A free people cannot survive under a republican constitution unless they remain virtuous and morally strong. "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."--Benjamin Franklin

The most promising method of securing a virtuous people is to elect virtuous leaders. "Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He therefore is the truest friend to liberty of his country who tries to promote its virtue, and who.....will not suffer a man chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man."--Samuel Adams

Without religion the government of a free people cannot be maintained. "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion."--George Washington

All things created by God, therefore upon him all mankind are equally dependent, and to him they are equally responsible. The American Founding Fathers considered the existence of the Creator as the most fundamental premise underlying all self-evident truth. They felt a person who boasted he or she was an atheist had just simply failed to apply his or her divine capacity for reason and observation.

Mankind are endowed by God with certain unalienable rights. "Those rights, then, which God and nature have established, and are therefore called natural rights, such as are life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man that they are; neither do the receive any additional strength when declared by municipal or state laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, no human legislation has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner of the right shall himself commit some act that amounts to forfeiture."--William Blackstone

To protect human rights, God has revealed a code of divine law. "The doctrines delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the Holy Scriptures. These precepts, when revealed, are found by comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man's felicity."--William Blackstone

The God-given right to the govern is vested in the sovereign authority of the whole people. "The fabric of the American Empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legislative authority."--Alexander Hamilton

A Constitution should protect the people from the frailties of their rulers. "If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.....But lacking these you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."--James Madison

These are 9 of 28 of principles this country was founded on... once upon a time.
"Ignorance is Bliss" -- Thomas Gray
User avatar
joe
The Big Cheese
Posts: 32538
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2002 2:40 am
Location: northern california
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by joe » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:22 pm

Charlie wrote:If your sister has a benign tumor that needs to be removed, and some incompetant doc butchers her and kills her during a relatively simple procedure... do you rail against the entire profession of medicine? Do you completely swear off going to doctors? Most likely not... 'cuz, well... that would be stupid.
the difference is the he broke the rules of medicine. nobody felt like they were going against their religion during the crusades, etc. ad nauseum.
scobywhru wrote:But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson
the problem is in 2011, people don't just say it. they vote that way and elect politicians who start illegal wars because of their religious doctrine. not to mention the 1000 other problems they cause. so it's quite a bad thing.
"To perceive is to suffer" - Aristotle
mbaxter appreciates the beef
User avatar
Charlie
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:20 pm
Location: Silicone Valley
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Charlie » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:40 pm

joe wrote:...nobody felt like they were going against their religion during the crusades, etc. ad nauseum...
Really?! ...not a one? Hmmm...

St. Francis of Assisi joined the crusades, not as a warrior but as a practitioner of Gospel nonviolence. In 1219, he began a year-long, unarmed walk right through a war zone from Italy to northern Africa, where he managed to meet the Sultan, Melek-el-Kamel, the leading Muslim of the time. Before the meeting, Francis begged the Christian warrior commander, Cardinal Pelagius, to stop the killings and the wars.
"Ignorance is Bliss" -- Thomas Gray
User avatar
CaptainTripps
Posts: 4875
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:00 am
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by CaptainTripps » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:42 pm

Yea that's a pretty ignorant thing to say Joe, they're have always been dissent when the Church resorted to violence. It just usually killed the ones speaking out, like people abusing their power are wont to do.
Image
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams, Wandering by lone sea-breakers, And sitting by desolate streams;—World-losers and world-forsakers, On whom the pale moon gleams: Yet we are the movers and shakers Of the world for ever, it seems.
User avatar
Charlie
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:20 pm
Location: Silicone Valley
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Charlie » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:46 pm

CaptainTripps wrote:...they're have always been dissent when the Church resorted to violence. It just usually killed the ones speaking out, like people abusing their power are wont to do.
Yes.
"Ignorance is Bliss" -- Thomas Gray
User avatar
A Ninja
Professional Fun Killer
<i>Professional Fun Killer</i>
Posts: 3846
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:36 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by A Ninja » Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:51 pm

GJ derailing your own thread joe.
Neelpos wrote:but he's A Ninja, he's one of the best fucking snipers on the server, if your evidence doesn't line up prepare to be ridiculed by your inability to differentiate hackers from really fucking good players.
User avatar
joe
The Big Cheese
Posts: 32538
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2002 2:40 am
Location: northern california
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by joe » Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:04 pm

Charlie wrote:[St. Francis of Assisi joined the crusades, not as a warrior but as a practitioner of Gospel nonviolence. In 1219, he began a year-long, unarmed walk right through a war zone from Italy to northern Africa, where he managed to meet the Sultan, Melek-el-Kamel, the leading Muslim of the time. Before the meeting, Francis begged the Christian warrior commander, Cardinal Pelagius, to stop the killings and the wars.
so he wasn't a part of it, was he?

you misunderstood what i said. nobody taking part in the crusades felt like it was against their religion - their religion was the reason people participated in the first place.
"To perceive is to suffer" - Aristotle
mbaxter appreciates the beef
User avatar
Gr|m
Posts: 9383
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:39 pm

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Gr|m » Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:39 pm

joe wrote:
Charlie wrote:[St. Francis of Assisi joined the crusades, not as a warrior but as a practitioner of Gospel nonviolence. In 1219, he began a year-long, unarmed walk right through a war zone from Italy to northern Africa, where he managed to meet the Sultan, Melek-el-Kamel, the leading Muslim of the time. Before the meeting, Francis begged the Christian warrior commander, Cardinal Pelagius, to stop the killings and the wars.
so he wasn't a part of it, was he?

you misunderstood what i said. nobody taking part in the crusades felt like it was against their religion - their religion was the reason people participated in the first place.
I may still fail to understand, but I think that may have to do with your definition of "against their religion." Francis realized that the crusades were being raged by Christians but he disagreed with the war in itself and the reasons behind it.


Also, I completely agree that blind followers who take no time to study the scriptures for themselves put themselves in very dangerous places. If the leaders of the church are able to lead without accountability, then things like the Crusades and people "buying their salvation" happen.


On the topic of our forefathers, it is interesting to note that while John Locke was not a believer in God, his views paralleled his believing contemporaries. The whole concept of unalienable rights seems like an objective fact.
joe wrote:to be moral you have to follow rules that aren't defined by any authority but by empathy. many religious people have no problem rationalizing objectivism and war and genocide and the death penalty and so on
And that's the problem. People think of themselves as "moral" because they follow what "seems right" to them. Without an objective morality to strive for, I'd argue that you get to moral relativism. I am not following rules to be moral, I am living my concepts that have been revealed to me, with the broader hope of somehow helping people to discover the same hope that I have. I am not doing this out of legalism though.. It's as if people were starving and I discovered some food source that those starving people had access too- of course I would go out of my way to try and share the information with them. And that is probably not the best analogy.

Either way, I don't like "ganging up" on people in disagreements, and I respect you and your opinions nonetheless, Joe
User avatar
Charlie
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:20 pm
Location: Silicone Valley
Contact:

Re: do you prefer people in your life to be simple or complex?

Post by Charlie » Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:07 pm

joe wrote:so he wasn't a part of it, was he?

you misunderstood what i said. nobody taking part in the crusades felt like it was against their religion - their religion was the reason people participated in the first place.
You would belittle St. Francis's participation in the crusades?

I should think that the fundamental reasons Muslims and Christians participated in the crusades in the first place - was because they ignored the reasoning and teaching of their respective religions and instead blindly followed fanatical passions that focused on their differing views - theological xenophobia if you will.

Muslims occupied the Holy Land and began to do things like destroy the Church of the Holy Sepulchre which incited Christian attitudes to look on them none too favorably. In light of tensions between the Muslims and Christians because of these types of occurrences (intentional desecration)... the Catholic Church (specifically Pope Urban II) was quick to come to the aid of the Byzantine emperor, Alexio I's request for help repelling Muslim advances. This was the start of the 1st crusade and the whole train wreck of malice that followed.

I think one of the few Christians (and Muslims for that matter) participating in this "holy war" who actually applied and followed the teaching of their religion was St. Francis of Assisi.

The crusades are more a case of men behaving badly, than any act of men following a specific religious doctrine that would call out for wholesale bloodshed (I for one am completely unaware of any Catholic doctrine that would support the crusades).
Last edited by Charlie on Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Ignorance is Bliss" -- Thomas Gray
Post Reply