winsor 236
RonD1120 62
Tagging on at the end.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/25/gay-marriage-legalised-in-new-york
America takes another step....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/25/gay-marriage-legalised-in-new-york
QuoteGay marriage is legalised in New York
New York state senate passes marriage equality bill in a move celebrated as a turning point by gay activists across the US
America takes another step....
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
david3 0
QuoteTagging on at the end.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/25/gay-marriage-legalised-in-new-yorkQuoteGay marriage is legalised in New York
New York state senate passes marriage equality bill in a move celebrated as a turning point by gay activists across the US
America takes another step....
And thank goodness.
devildog 0
It's called an analogy, frequently used. And again, you're suggesting that permanence in our perfect playdoh sphere is a requirement, but it's not. Perfection for a sphere just means that all points along it's surface are equal distant from the center, for that is the definition of a sphere. Perfect does not require also being indestructible, or immutable, or immortal, or omnipotent, etc. though a perfect agent could have those traits as well. It just means it fulfills the all requirements of whatever it's attached to.QuoteQuoteWe could also imagine taking that perfect sphere and mashing it with a hammer.
Is the external force mashing your perfect playdoh sphere also perfect or has an imperfect external force been applied?
Is something that is perfect really perfect if it can be rendered imperfect by an external imperfect force?
Can a perfect external hammer exert enough perfect force to render a perfect playdoh sphere imperfect when the play-doh sphere is perfect to begin with?
Seriously. The premise that your argument started with was that a perfect being might only be truly perfect if they were able to be imperfect of their own free will.
Now you're saying that smashing playdoh balls with hammers explains your point.
So what is the definition of a perfect moral person (or any being)? Is it one that does morally good and cannot do evil and thus has no free will; it never really makes a choice? Or is a perfect moral agent something that has the ability to do evil, yet chooses to do good? Like I said, many would argue the latter. It would be the difference between say, a stepford wife and a real one. The step ford wife can and does all the things a real wife would be, but it doesn't actually love her husband. It's just going through its program without any choice involved. The real wife chooses to do things on her own, and that choice is an integral part of saying she loves her spouse.
Moving on to more speculation than anything else, what if the perfect agent that was created (by an omnipotent, wholly good divine) could only be created as perfect as could be and not necessarily a representation of the final product? What I mean by that is, perhaps it is not logically possible to instantly create a morally perfect being (a being that has done no evil) that also chooses to always do good (because choice is based on experience and learning, and if it hasn't experienced or learned anything, it would be expected to make a bad choice eventually). If that's the case, and there are lines of thought that pursue it, our perfect being in the beginning is not the same as a perfect being in the end -- a perfect being that has the experience to say, "I know what evil is, and I will never choose it." This is a bit of a side, and not really my main point, obviously. We could also look at how eastern philosophies and religions handle evil, which is considerably different than how the western world views it. Of course, that would just further derail the thread,I think :)
You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.
jakee 1,489
QuotePerfect, when applied to a person, in this sense would be one that acts wholly upon his own freewill.
Excellent. People still have freewill, therefore people are still perfect. Every one of us.
I'll warn you now though, you'll have quite an argument with Jaybird over that one.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
tkhayes 348
QuoteAmerica takes another step....
yes we are.... - towards the will of the people without infringing on the Constitution
and good for them
If you don't like gay marriage - then stay away from gay weddings. If you don't gay sex, then stop watching gay porn.
but most of all, stop infringing your belief structures on others when it has fuck-all effect on your life or on theirs for that matter.
I don't like cats, but I do not try to interfere with the lives of cat owners.\
And the 'bible told me so..." does not cut it for most people.....
jaybird18c 24
QuoteQuoteQuoteA perfect being, in most people's mind at least, can make his/her own choices.
How could a "perfect" person make "imperfect" choices to sin or do evil?
I thought he just explained that quite well.
Thinking is not your long suit.
How do you keep from getting banned in here with such blatant personal attacks?
RonD1120 62
They have the moderator's respect. Us, not so much.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
winsor 236
QuoteQuoteA perfect being, in most people's mind at least, can make his/her own choices.
How could a "perfect" person make "imperfect" choices to sin or do evil?
I thought he just explained that quite well.
Thinking is not your long suit.
How do you keep from getting banned in here with such blatant personal attacks?
I am not accusing you of anything, just pointing out that the cognitive and correlative skills you exhibit in these forums are somewhat below average.
There are people who are, in fact, brilliant, who affect a screen persona that is anything but. You may well be such a ringer, though I doubt it.
Do not take offense at being identified as outside the intellectual elite - intelligence is overrated. People who got straight As work for people who got Cs.
In any event, you could do well with an introductory course in logic. Whether you are right or wrong is not likely to change, but your capacity to substantiate your case may improve.
BSBD,
Winsor
I thought he just explained that quite well.
Thinking is not your long suit.