In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
> > "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very survival
> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and rejected
> >> ones
> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are what I
> >> will
> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own moral
> >> standing.
> >
> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral standing"
> > are you referring to above?
>
> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.

What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote
>> > "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>> >> [..]
>>
>> >> Truth is an extension of the word true, meaning verifiable and
>> >> factual, I
>> >> didn't make up the way I use it, the search for truth has been a
>> >> philisophical goal for centuries.
>> >
>> > If it wasn't your construction then, whose was it?
>>
>> I don't know, there's a reference to The Search for Truth here from 2500
>> BC
>> http://www.gurdjieff-internet.com/search.php
>
> Are you saying that you merely repeated what was there, or you found
> something that reflects what you said initially, or something else?
>
> You defined "truth". Was that your definition or someone else's
> definition? I didn't realize it was such a complicated question.

The definition I am presenting now is my own interpretation, a distillation
of all I have read and heard. I find consistent with but more understandable
than most definitions, such as the one I copied in earlier, which doesn't
describe it very well. I used to read philosophy writers like Sarte, Camus,
Gurdjieff and Eastern Mystics. I have discussed it with different groups of
friends over the years. I have thought about it a fair bit.

"Ron" > wrote
> "Dutch" > wrote:

>> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very
>> >> survival
>> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and rejected
>> >> ones
>> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are what I
>> >> will
>> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own
>> >> moral
>> >> standing.
>> >
>> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral standing"
>> > are you referring to above?
>>
>> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.
>
> What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.

I don't believe you. That's just another pose.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote
> > "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very
> >> >> survival
> >> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and rejected
> >> >> ones
> >> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are what I
> >> >> will
> >> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own
> >> >> moral
> >> >> standing.
> >> >
> >> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral standing"
> >> > are you referring to above?
> >>
> >> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.
> >
> > What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.
>
> I don't believe you. That's just another pose.

To each his own. I find morality one of those odd things in life. Most
people swear it by and it few people live it. I just happen to be a bit
more honest about it than most.

Observance of moral codes is quite similar to your assessment of the
vegan to which I partially agree. The are feel good propositions that
allow any individual a means to feel good about themselves. Do X and I
am a good person. Do Y and I am a bad person. If A does X then they are
a good person. If A does Y then they are a bad person.

Of course, who wants to acknowledge that they are a "bad person".

This is more of the dichotomy that we discussed. Of course, the flaw in
logic is that I cannot be a good person and a bad person at the same
time. A means to separate the good people from the bad people. By social
accounts, I did something bad yesterday. By social accounts, I did
something good the day before. I am still me, I still did both things
and therefore I can be bad and good at the same time.

Of course, the larger issue is the need for anyone to be deemed by the
self or others as a "good person".

Unfortunately, moral codes create the logical fallacy of the false
dilemma where only two choices are presented -- the good person, or the
bad person. The third options is, I am a person.

Consider it posing all you like.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote
>> > "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very
>> >> >> survival
>> >> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and
>> >> >> rejected
>> >> >> ones
>> >> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are
>> >> >> what I
>> >> >> will
>> >> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own
>> >> >> moral
>> >> >> standing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral
>> >> > standing"
>> >> > are you referring to above?
>> >>
>> >> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.
>> >
>> > What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.
>>
>> I don't believe you. That's just another pose.
>
> To each his own. I find morality one of those odd things in life. Most
> people swear it by and it few people live it. I just happen to be a bit
> more honest about it than most.
>
> Observance of moral codes is quite similar to your assessment of the
> vegan to which I partially agree. The are feel good propositions that
> allow any individual a means to feel good about themselves. Do X and I
> am a good person. Do Y and I am a bad person. If A does X then they are
> a good person. If A does Y then they are a bad person.
>
> Of course, who wants to acknowledge that they are a "bad person".
>
> This is more of the dichotomy that we discussed. Of course, the flaw in
> logic is that I cannot be a good person and a bad person at the same
> time. A means to separate the good people from the bad people. By social
> accounts, I did something bad yesterday. By social accounts, I did
> something good the day before. I am still me, I still did both things
> and therefore I can be bad and good at the same time.
>
> Of course, the larger issue is the need for anyone to be deemed by the
> self or others as a "good person".
>
> Unfortunately, moral codes create the logical fallacy of the false
> dilemma where only two choices are presented -- the good person, or the
> bad person. The third options is, I am a person.
>
> Consider it posing all you like.

What you just wrote are not the words of a morally bankrupt person.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> > "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very
> >> >> >> survival
> >> >> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and
> >> >> >> rejected
> >> >> >> ones
> >> >> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are
> >> >> >> what I
> >> >> >> will
> >> >> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own
> >> >> >> moral
> >> >> >> standing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral
> >> >> > standing"
> >> >> > are you referring to above?
> >> >>
> >> >> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.
> >> >
> >> > What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.
> >>
> >> I don't believe you. That's just another pose.
> >
> > To each his own. I find morality one of those odd things in life. Most
> > people swear it by and it few people live it. I just happen to be a bit
> > more honest about it than most.
> >
> > Observance of moral codes is quite similar to your assessment of the
> > vegan to which I partially agree. The are feel good propositions that
> > allow any individual a means to feel good about themselves. Do X and I
> > am a good person. Do Y and I am a bad person. If A does X then they are
> > a good person. If A does Y then they are a bad person.
> >
> > Of course, who wants to acknowledge that they are a "bad person".
> >
> > This is more of the dichotomy that we discussed. Of course, the flaw in
> > logic is that I cannot be a good person and a bad person at the same
> > time. A means to separate the good people from the bad people. By social
> > accounts, I did something bad yesterday. By social accounts, I did
> > something good the day before. I am still me, I still did both things
> > and therefore I can be bad and good at the same time.
> >
> > Of course, the larger issue is the need for anyone to be deemed by the
> > self or others as a "good person".
> >
> > Unfortunately, moral codes create the logical fallacy of the false
> > dilemma where only two choices are presented -- the good person, or the
> > bad person. The third options is, I am a person.
> >
> > Consider it posing all you like.
>
> What you just wrote are not the words of a morally bankrupt person.

A nice declaration, but you haven't offered any explanation for the
presence of what morality. I consider myself (at least by social
accounts that I encounter) 50% good and 50% evil. It's anyone's guess
what they'll get at any given moment.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> > "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >> Yes you keep telling me that, as if it is essential to your very
> >> >> >> survival
> >> >> >> that I know that you have reviewed all the cultural mores and
> >> >> >> rejected
> >> >> >> ones
> >> >> >> you don't want. I am not impressed, your ideas as expressed are
> >> >> >> what I
> >> >> >> will
> >> >> >> find interesting or enlightening, not your myopic view of your own
> >> >> >> moral
> >> >> >> standing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt. What "moral
> >> >> > standing"
> >> >> > are you referring to above?
> >> >>
> >> >> Voluntary guy, he who makes up his own morality to please himself.
> >> >
> >> > What morality? I've already declared myself as morally bankrupt.
> >>
> >> I don't believe you. That's just another pose.
> >
> > To each his own. I find morality one of those odd things in life. Most
> > people swear it by and it few people live it. I just happen to be a bit
> > more honest about it than most.
> >
> > Observance of moral codes is quite similar to your assessment of the
> > vegan to which I partially agree. The are feel good propositions that
> > allow any individual a means to feel good about themselves. Do X and I
> > am a good person. Do Y and I am a bad person. If A does X then they are
> > a good person. If A does Y then they are a bad person.
> >
> > Of course, who wants to acknowledge that they are a "bad person".
> >
> > This is more of the dichotomy that we discussed. Of course, the flaw in
> > logic is that I cannot be a good person and a bad person at the same
> > time. A means to separate the good people from the bad people. By social
> > accounts, I did something bad yesterday. By social accounts, I did
> > something good the day before. I am still me, I still did both things
> > and therefore I can be bad and good at the same time.
> >
> > Of course, the larger issue is the need for anyone to be deemed by the
> > self or others as a "good person".
> >
> > Unfortunately, moral codes create the logical fallacy of the false
> > dilemma where only two choices are presented -- the good person, or the
> > bad person. The third options is, I am a person.
> >
> > Consider it posing all you like.
>
> What you just wrote are not the words of a morally bankrupt person.

A nice declaration, but you haven't offered any explanation for the
presence of what morality. I consider myself (at least by social
accounts that I encounter) 50% good and 50% evil. It's anyone's guess
what they'll get at any given moment.