Athena

High folks, this is from someone using this forum to con people out of money. Just what you to be on guard. Hello Dearest, Firstly I thank you for your response to my email. How are you today hope fine. Dear inline with the message I sent to you, Do not be surprise or get offended for receiving this message from me please, Its just that I have been obliged to lay a mere trust on you due to my situation here as a refugee and I will require the best of your honesty after your knowing about me, I will really like us to have a friendship in spite of anything because I have this feeling that you are not going to betray me at the end. I contact you because of the urgency of my situation here in the refugee camp, I am the only daughter of my father back there in Rwanda my country, I had my college certificate and I was admitted into the University there I did my one year subject in business management before the political crisis in my country began,My father was killed during the war,they accused my father of coup attempt, and so many of my family members our house was burnt down. I am presently seeking asylum under the Private charity organization for the UN Refugees here in Dakar Republic of Senegal. My late father of blessed memory deposited the sum of (US$3,500,000.00) (Three Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) in one of the leading Banks in UK with my name as the next of kin. However, I shall forward you the contact information of the bank in London and some documents for your confirmation in your acceptance to assist me for the transfer and investment of the fund. As you will help me in an investment, and i will like to complete my studies under you, as i was in my 1st year in the university, when the crisis started. After the transaction you will arrange for my trip to join you over there in your country for us to share this feelings face to face.We will invest the fund, or if you don't intend staying with me then It will be my pleasure to compensate you out of the total money for your services and the balance shall be my investment capital. This is the reason why I decided to contact you. Please all communications should be through this email address only, for confidential purposes. As soon as I receive your positive response showing your interest I will put things into action immediately. In the light of the above, I shall appreciate an urgent message indicating your ability and willingness to handle this transaction sincerely. Awaiting your urgent and positive response. Please do keep this only to your self please I beg you not to disclose it to anyone until i come over once the fund has been transferred. Meanwhile the name of the Reverend father that i am using his computer to send this messages to you is Rev Patrick Abay, his Telephone number is (NUMBER REMOVED) or (NUMBER REMOVED)you can call him or write him to know more about me through his Email (EMAIL REMOVED) today and tell him to call me so that you can talk to me please because i want to hear your voice but don't tell him anything about the money,for security reasons. Just tell him that you want to speak with Blessing Abraham from Rwanda because there are so many other Nationalities who has one problem or the other in the camp here. Awaiting to hear from you soonest! God bless you. Yours in lovely one Blessing.

Why do we think everyone is up to no good? Is this about capitalism? Is it about how we organize ourselves? Is it about human nature? Isn't human nature an expression of culture and what influences culture more than education? It seems to me people enjoy talking about politics and religion, more than culture, but it is our culture that defines for us what we should be, how we should act, and our politics. The US is no longer the democracy it defended in two world wars. The citizens rarely have an understanding of civic and family duty. Our problems begin education and are resolved with education, and we need to return to liberal education, because education for a technological society with unknown values is destroying US. A moral capitalism can not be tolerated. A divided and excessively competitive nation, can not be tolerated. Democracy is a dream of our human potential and education for technology is destroying it, because it has brought out the worst in us. http://circeinstitute.org/2011/05/are-the-seven-liberal-arts-a-classical-education/

The following was written in 1830 by a French man who visited the US. His book begins by explaining our democracy in glowing terms, and ends by explaining what will happen to Christian democracies. On another page his explanation of what this has to do with our relationship with military forces, is worth our attention. Just want to remind everyone, we have had education for a technological society with unknown values since 1958. The liberal education we had before this, was built on the classics that brought Europe to democracy and ended the system of serfs in Russia. And one last thing, God trumps human laws, and you all want eliminate the word "God" from our vocabulary, leaving nothing but the law of man.

Education for technology uses the Behaviorist Method, and that method is also used for training dogs. You have attacked and attacked, without making an effort to learn of the Greek philosophy that is behind the meaning of all the words, The Law, Morals, and Logos. What would happen if I did the same thing in a science thread? That is make no effort to know the subject and only attack the people who do know the subject? Does this behavior not remind us of what we defended our democracy against? Wolves are excellent in a pack, and were admired. My words are a warning.

The US is a democracy because it gives political power to the people, however, the form of government is republic. The forum of government is a balance of powers. However, I think that balance of power has been thrown off balance. Should we discuss how this relates to logos and morals? Our best protection is everyone understanding these things, because our military can not protect us from the problems we cause ourselves. Everyone what would happen if I joined one of the science forums where I know nothing about the science being discussed, and made absolutely no effort to understand the subject being discussed, and did nothing but berate everyone who did understand the subject? I am asserting all human beings, not suffering from mental retardation, are capable of reason. Please, make some effort to understand the subject. All of this comes out of Greek philosophy, and the idea we are made in the image of the gods, because we have the capacity for reason. That is what makes rule by reason possible. That is, we resolve our differences with reasoning, rather by fighting like animals. For thousands of years we denied women and slaves were capable of reason. That has changed. We hold everyone is capable of reason, the whole 100% of us. However, we have not done well in understanding the importance of education to our ability to reason. This discussion requires knowledge of Greek philosophy, or at least a willingness to learn of it. I think you are making really good points. How well do these representatives understand logos, The Law and morals? I don't think they have any more understanding of these things the doG. We should NOT limit ourselves to thinking of ourselves. Our national politics, must be globally conscious. I am hoping, more people accept this reasoning and join me. A problem with the God of Abraham, is this humanized God has favorites, and not a very good understanding of science and our world. To understand Logos, The Law, is to not have favorites. Invading Iraq is not doing the will of God! Doing the will of God is paying attention to the realities of a finite planet, and caring for all life on this planet. The US capitalist violate moral law, when they enter a foreign country and exploit its wealth, ignoring the people who live there. The best way to resolve such problems is getting rid of this false God that has favorites and maintains morality at a very low level, bible morals may be fit for ignorant people, but certainly this not our moral potential. At the same time we get rid of the false God, we must expand our conscious of logos, The Law and morals. That is the organizing force of the universe and ourselves. This mentality begins with Greek philosophy, and it is the foundation of our democracy. Unlike all the other animals, we can become of aware of this stuff and we can govern ourselves with this knowledge. Honey, doG is completely ignorant of Greek philosophy and knows nothing about the reasoning behind democracy. How does authoritarianism require well educated people? Modern societies require trained technicians, but it is possible to have trained technicians by using the Behaviorist Method for education, and the Behaviorist Method is also used for training dogs. However, this is not a good education for a democracy, because in a democracy people need to understand increasingly complex concepts. Liberal education prepares people for democracy, by using the Conceptual Method to teach increasingly complex concepts. In the modern society is it not the people who govern themselves, but policy set by policy makers who are dismissed when the policy is written, leaving no one to alter the policy. Under this Prussian bureaucratic model, it takes an act of congress to change the policy that runs our lives, and the people who are trained technicians only need to obey. Oh dear, this is getting more political than I intended, but we are moving from democracy to authoritarianism. Democracy is rule by reason, but that is not what have today, because only when democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended. and we obviously have not done that. Maybe I shouldn't do this, but I am having fun playing with ideas at the moment. We are the beast of the bible. We are a mass of humanity driven by our stomachs, and our lust, not reason. One big, brainless beast, capable of destroying all life on earth, and as we expand our power around the world, it is a lie that we are spreading democracy.

Okay, maybe this thread can be what it is suppose to be. This site explains a little about McGuffy readers. http://en.wikipedia....cGuffey_Readers McGuffey was the first to make graduated reading books for children. The object is to not just to teach reading, but the reading is also learning morals. He ended his career life, by teaching morals at the college level. Then there is John Dewey, he gave us pragmatic philosophy and was also very influential in education in the US and Russia, before the communist take over. http://www.albany.ed...ewey_progr.html Christian Conservatives absolutely hated Dewey. He stands for individualism and the best morality based on reason. This is a higher morality than religious religious morality. It is not fear of God, but caring about everyone now and in the future. It is doing what is right, because it is the right thing to do, and our liberty depends on this. Today is Memorial Day. For me this remembering more than the people who died, but also why they died. What makes democracy possible is we can reason, and because we can reason, we can be self governing. Education for technology is not the education for individuality that was the Dewey's focus. Education for technology is pretty restricted to the narrow band of intelligence that is useful to the military. This does not transmit a culture, nor the principles of democracy, nor morality. Instead of advancing our own democracy, we are now what we fought against. Do you fully get, what is at the center of education for technology is the state, not the individual. It is a police state, because the individual us not prepared for independent moral judgment, but thinks morality is a matter of religion! The democracy that was defended in two world wars, can not survive, education for the state. Would you please pay more careful attention to what I am saying. I have made it clear that what lead to NAZI Germany is education and the Prussian influence that emphasizes certain characteristics. I gave the contrast between the German people, because this is the contrast that has arisen in the US since education for technology. Especially on this Memorial Day, I want to raise our awareness of what has happened to our God loving country with constitutionally protected freedom of religion, and how doG's demonstrated characteristics are what we defended our democracy against. Now the NAZI movement is still alive, and many are proud to be members of it. Saying someone has these characteristics is not an insult, but a warning. It is a warning to all of us who are loosing the democracy we had, because we no longer remember it. We have been educated for what we fought against, since 1958, and now I struggle to explain philosophy is about judging morals, and moral judgment can be completely separate from religion, and is based on an understanding of The Law, which comes from ancient philosophy. This is a fight for the democracy we are loosing, not a personal insult. That was not a personal attack, it is a warning that our education has produced that which we defended our nation against, because our young no longer understand the reasoning of our democracy. Now perhaps you do not think you demonstrate the characteristics of the youth who followed Hitler? However, you appear just like my 24 year old grandson who is sure he knows all he needs to know, even though he can not keep a job, and was so focused on his own pleasures, he was force out college. His understanding of the pursuit of happiness is not exactly what Thomas Jefferson had in mind, when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. I am defending the democracy we are loosing from the education that has made us what we fought against. Okay my love, who do you think my commander is? I am saying, because of the change in education, our youth are basing their judgements on feelings, instead of reason. Morality is a matter of reason. Morality is understanding The Law and good manners. I am saying our democracy depends on this understanding and that education is no longer transmitting this information to our youth. If you want to prove me wrong, please do. What do you think you are saying that is different from what I am saying? And for the education thing, what about replacing our liberal education with education for technology? There are huge social and political ramifications to this. Number one is no longer understanding the reasoning of our democracy. The greatest point of contention here is the matter of The Law and the word "God". Understanding The Law is vital to understanding morals, but perhaps we should have established an understanding of The Law, before discussing morals. Hey, everyone the thread about The Law is also about God. How about going to that thread and basing your arguments on the information provided there. Morals is about how God works, not the existence of God.

There is no law? The biggest argument in the moral thread is over the understanding of The Law. Michael S. Schneider wrote "A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe- The Mathematical Archetypes of Nature, Art, and Science". Now there are so many words of wisdom I don't know where to begin. How about quoting Philolaus a fifth century B.C. Greek Pythagorean philosopher.

This is an interesting project to bring us out of denial about the torture done during the Bush administration and to make it clear that this torturing was directed from the top. As responsible citizens, I think we should take action. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/torture/

This may not seem to answer your question, but it appears the best answer I can give you at the moment. I am quoting Charles Sarolea form "The Anglo-Saxon Problem", "The Prussian remains as he has always been, unartistic and dull and unromantic. Prussia has not produced one of the great composers who are the pride of the German race; and Berlin, with all its wealth and its two million inhabitants, strikes the foreigner as one of the most commonplace capitals of the civilized world. The Southern and Western German is gay and genial, courteous and expansive; the Prussian is sullen, reserved, and aggressive. The Southern and Western German is sentimental and generous; and the Prussian is sour and dour, and believes only in hard fact. The Southern and Western German is an idealist; the Prussian a realist and a materialist, a stern rationalist, who always keeps his eye on the main chance. The Southern and Western German is independent almost to the verge of anarchism; he has a strong individuality; his patriotism is municipal and parochial; he is attached to his little city, to its peculiarities and local customs; the Prussian is imitative, docile, and disciplined, his patriotism is not the sentimental love of the native city, but the abstract loyalty to the state. .... Prussia is a settlement, an army, and a bureaucracy rather than a nation; but the Prussian is unswervingly loyal to the commander of that army, submissive to the chief of that bureaucracy." So now, why God? Because I sure as hell don't want to be as Charles Sarolea describes the Prussians. I think God, and I am totally free, and feel joy and gratitude for the beauty and gifts of life. I think God and feel connected with all of humanity since the beginning of time, and therefore, with the universe. This doesn't have to make sense. Thank God it doesn't to make sense. I am free. And yet, with this joy and love are virtues, morals and a thirst for truth, and a total conviction that if this were so for everyone, life would get better and better, instead of worse and worse. I know the ideas that float around in my head come from the literature that was the foundation of our culture, and that out of this literature sprang a great nation, and awesome science and technology, and great wealth, where even our poor are comparatively rich. I know we replaced this education, that often mentioned God in the text books, with the Prussian model of education for technology. Thank God we have a choice, and I will fight for that choice until the day I die. I watch my amoral grandchildren struggle in an amoral society, and I think this is not good. It is not good at all. Wonderful, that is the purpose of science and philosophy. Go for it. And for the rest of your demands. Hail Hitler, you would have made a perfect NAZI. And if anyone objects to this statement, read my above post, and clarify your objection.

The reason for making your argument, "you said---------------- and I think you are wrong because_____________" is so I can know what you are talking about, and address that. If you are insisting on a definition of God, you will never get one from me, because that is religion, and my thing is philosophy. The closest I come to defining God is the say God involves The Law and logos. Morals are directly related to that. Someone argued I am wrong for saying atheist support Christians by insisting Christians are the authority on God and morals. Okay, here is what happened to my post asserting philosophy is not crap, because it deals with important moral questions. I do not use religion to determine morals, but reason through cause and effect, however, this is what happened to my post, and this applies to your question doG, because I assert efforts to know The Law and logos are philosophical efforts to know God and morals. However, we do not directly experience God, so we can not empirically know God, we can only philosophize about God and morals. Morals are a matter of cause and effect. Understanding cause and effect is to know The Law. Anyway, this is what happened to my efforts to say philosophy is important to moral judgement. This insistence that talk of God and morals belongs in religion, is not helpful.

Thanks, you helped figure out another piece of the communication problem. First, if everyone had liberal education, we would not be having such a communication problem. Second, many of words have Latin roots, and we used to promote study of the Latin language and folks like Thomas Jefferson, could read Latin and often Greek as well, and they read the Greek and Roman classics in their original language. This was the meaning of being literate in their time. I use a very large Webster dictionary that provides the roots of words, and my understanding of words does come from the dictionary. For example a root for law is "that which is laid or fixed". The rest of the definition for law, in this Webster Dictionary fills 3/4 of the page, and pages are very large. Logos is, "reason, the controlling force of universe.." also from this dictionary. Do you know the root for "human" is "moist soil"? Our language carries religious beliefs without our awareness of this fact. And morale is what comes our being moral. The "e' is used to tell us what comes of what. So truly understanding what I am talking is understanding our language and it does come from a dictionary.

Wonderful, and what is wrong with every individual having a personal God? We project ourselves into others, and into god and Satan as well. We can expand our consciousness by doing this, and learn a lot. Each Greek god and goddess is an archetype. I am not sure modern day psychology has surpassed the genius of the ancient Greeks. Apollo is among other things, a god of reason. Athens was about where we are now, when it was realized things were spinning out of control, and they needed a God of reason, so they invented one. Athena started out as holding Demeter's place. That is the people of Athens thought if Athena was pissed off, they would go hungry. Like the Persians hadn't destroyed her temple, the common man would have ignored the Persians, instead of agreeing to get into a boat and engage in sea battles. What united them was fear that if they didn't appease Athena, they would starve. But this war is crucial to our history! More was needed to make people willing to fight for Athens. Athens had no money for defense, so those in power agreed to share a say in government with everyone who defended Athens. At this point, Athena becomes a goddess of Liberty and Justice, and those who stand for liberty and justice. My point is how we project ourselves into gods, and what we have to gain from doing so. I think it is misguided to deny everyone a concept of God, rather than be tolerant, and from there argue what is true of not true of God. As Socrates would handle this, is it good to be jealous, revengeful, punishing and fearsome? Is the God of Abraham jealous, revengeful, punishing and fearsome? How about our choice in husbands? What God is their role model. Or is you like, how a woman in your life whose role model is mother nature? God's are perfection and what is perfect? If I gave you all my thoughts in one post, it would be far to large to post. However, I have repeatedly said our democracy is built on Greek and Roman classics, so it is not like I am keeping my thoughts a secret, they just are no longer a part of public education, so we are having a communication problem. Actually, you all are helping me formulate my thoughts, and I pray I will get that book written before I die. The challenge is to pick out thoughts from many, many books, since ancient times, and then organize them in such away that people as yourselves can relate to what I am saying. You all are having a problem relating to what I am saying, because you have education for technology, not liberal education. My challenge is huge!

Well Moontanman, you are making a liar of me. that is a good thing in this case. I started two other threads to address the God issue, "The Law" and "Logos". Both are about how things work and we think of this as God. It is not exactly man's reason, but the reason things are as they are. The Law includes the laws of physics as well as morals, and even the gods are controlled by logos, reason, the controlling force of universe. That is neither the gods nor ourselves can do anything we please, because if we do wrong the thing, things will go bad. This line of thinking brought the philosophers to one God, and then they argued with Christians over who has the right to define God. We can not define God, beyond logos, the controlling force of the universe, but we can study nature and learn something about how things work. We can use language to write laws, from the laws of physics to moral stories, and even the laws that govern us as an united civilization under God. Consider this please, if it is not a God, reason, the controlling force of the universe, that unites us, what will, and if we are not united by reason, democracy, then what is our reality? I had a terrible argument with my grandson yesterday, and it breaks my heart that he is totally ignorant of The Law which includes morals, and at his age there is no way he is going to listen to me. This argument made me so aware of the importance of religion. I would rather he believe in a false God and understand morals, than have no concept of God or understanding of morals. He can't hold a job and screwed up his college opportunity, and he is so damn sure he knows it all and doesn't need to listen to anyone. I have no idea how he will pay rent, and stay off the streets. I know I sure can't live with him, nor can I afford his rent. The Greeks explained this problem as youthful folly, and we built our culture on Greek and Roman classics. But today, the concept of youthful folly is not a working part of our culture. When it was, the young respected their elders and we had compassion and tolerance of making mistakes. Education for technology did an end to that. Not even legally do our children have childhood, but they are to preform like college students as early as age 3, and are tried as adults in our courts. Education for technology, made most parents old fashioned and out dated, and left our young thinking they are so superior, they don't need to listen to anyone. We declared a national youth crisis, but instead of realizing this was the result of the change in public education, we blamed the parents for this. I think we are really screwed up, and expect things to get worse. When my generation dies, there will be no one left who remembers when we had a democracy built in the classics, instead of a technological society with unknown values. If I am wrong, please convince me of that, because I am dealing with a lot of pain, as I try to make a difference on the Internet. Back to God and morals. Things are as they are, and we can not change them. However, we can dramatically change our lives, by gaining knowledge of the "reason, that controls the universe." God is not defined, as the X in math is not defined, until we work through the problem, but we use this unknown God so we can work the problem. Make sense? We can ask all kinds of questions of this God, and in so doing expand our consciousness, and the more we expand our consciousness, the more moral we can be, the more moral we are the more liberty can we enjoy, and our lives get better and better instead of worse and worse. Oh you have a definition for God? A chair is defined and a table is defined, but God is unknown. Now that is so mixed up, I don't know if can straighten it out. What is my definition of God? It most certainly is not the church. As I understand, the church is an institution based on mythology. Now how do you determine morals without a concept of The Law? I don't think I am the one misunderstanding the point, but think if others did understand the point, there would be no argument.

Right here. Time and again I have tried to argue an understanding of God that is not based in religion, and this understanding of God is important to understanding morals and the both understandings are important to democracy, and you all operate with the God of Abraham and can't get beyond that. Call in Moontanman, he will most surely prove what I am saying. He is so completely intolerant of the word "God", that discussions of God can never get past his insistence that there is no God.

Can we talk about our rights? Especially property rights seems to apply here. I know we do not have property rights as other authors do, but why have humans even agreed there is such a thing as property rights? I feel something when my post are arbitrarily changed by someone else, and that is not a good feeling. It feels like some kind of violation. Is this true only of me? Or might that have something to do with threads coming to an end, when they are split? I looked at the post you think should be moved to the morals thread and that makes sense to me, but it includes post of others as well, and perhaps post should not be moved without people's permission? We are talking broken people here, and how do people get broken? I can think of nothing more destructive than denying them power over their own being and their expressions of themselves. When we have good morals, we do not cause harm, and we have pleasure in being together. A problem we have today is we do not have an institution like the church, to civilize us. In the past public education served that purpose, but it stopped doing that when we replaced it with education for technology. Now we are fighting each other like animals. I think arguing against the argument of this thread is important, and that removing those arguments would violate the search for truth about being broken, so while it seems rational to move discussion of morals to the moral thread, perhaps that discussion also belongs here, because the premise of this thread is wrong. Believing in god protects people from being broken. Personally, I would like to try making each person the moderator of his,her own thread. I have often wanted the power to remove post that take my threads off topic or attack someone. None of us want our threads ruined. If a thread owner ever objected to what I am saying in a thread in a pm, I would certainly take that into consider and probably remove the offending post. Respecting one another in this way is very important. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- part two It appears you all are arguing the truth of religious myth, and this is a different subject from broken people. Religions have been a huge benefit to mankind, but they no longer serve us well, because they are unbelievable to so many people. However, before we destroy religious institutions, we need to consider what will take their place. Holding a concept of God that is not humanized, and does not violate the laws of nature, is a problem why?

Oh my, I hope everyone can appreciate how difficult communication is. Often I am totally stunned by how someone understands what I said, and it is really helpful to these discussions when someone paraphrases as well as you have, Xittenn. Not only do we need a working understanding of The Law and moral, but also liberal education. If I "have not" answered your question, please rephrase it, because I am having to not only explain my meanings, but I am also having to deal with everything others do not know, not knowing what they know and don't know, and also their distortions of what I am saying. This is a huge challenge. We have never had religious agreement, and that is a main reason for having separation of church and state. In some school districts Christians were able to control education more than in other districts, because we left these education decisions to the community and the parents who had children in school. Our federal government did not interfere with local education decisions. However, text book makers tended to be few and schools didn't have a whole of lot choice. Often the God is used in old text books, but this God is not defined. We might ask, what does it mean to have God and morals without religion? One of the characteristics of democracy is the search of truth. To know The Law is to know truth, but the search for truth is an on going process, so we taught our youth how to think for themselves. That is, teaching them how to think, not what to think. We prepared each child to be her/his own authority on truth. Education for technology does the opposite. Education for technology prepares everyone to be dependent on authority, because this is the fastest way to advance technology. It assumes we are born with blank brains and anything can be written on them, providing the right technique is used. This assumes the state has the right to write on those blank brains. And what the state has decided to write on them is restricted to subjects that serve that military industrial complex. Leaving everyone unprepared for the discussions I keep throwing out here. Moving along... You say "But, then something happened to change our process and we renounced The Law in favour of our own laws, and this has caused some disruption in society." The change began in 1917 with the demands of modern warfare and the first world war. That is when vocational training was added to education, and we began focusing on science, rather than literature that was previously the foundation of education. Education can serve many purposes, and each one manifest a different culture. I think our biggest communication problem is not realizing how many different purposes education can serve, and how a culture is manifested. I like to say, education is like a genie in a bottle. The defined purpose is the wish, and the students are the genie. In 1917 we added vocational training and increased the focus on science for military reasons, but we did not change the wish for good citizens who understand democracy and why it must be defended, and who understand that we defend our liberty by being highly moral people. The addition of vocational training and the sciences was a huge benefit to all of us, and I would love to explain all the wonderful benefits, but I want to keep this as short as possible. It was not until 1958 that we declared an emergency and replaced our liberal education with education for technology, and left moral training to the church. This is when we actually changed the wish, and I am sure when you all understand the ramifications of this change you will be pissed, but not at me. Anyway, at this time WE LEFT MORAL TRAINING TO THE CHURCH. Man, I hope you all begin to get what I am saying soon. We are now behaving as though the church is the only authority on God and morals, and that really pisses me off, and atheist are making matters worse, with their arguments that support the idea that the church is in fact the only authority on God and morals.

I will argue a moral is a matter of language, because animals also learn by imitation, and they do have moral judgment. We go a step beyond imitation. It is that step beyond imitation that is important to this discussion. It is our ability to use words to represent things like "justice", that allows us to hold such concepts, and reason through morals in a way animals can not. This is what makes us capable of being self governing, instead of like animals. I know this distinction can be difficult, because it was argued in last night's problem. It is also a topic of discussion in the book "Science of Good and Evil," where the author uses the term pre-moral to distinctuion between the natural behaviors of animals, and the human difference made possible by language. It is not exactly a moral, until give it words. Like the laws of physics do not exist until we give them words. But cause and effect do exist if have words for them or not. Animals can know the reasoning of cause and effect, but a human can. Morals and laws exist in our heads, because we have language. I do not think you should say "you're making too many generalized this=that statements", instead of saying exactly what that statement is, and giving your argument. If you think I said something false, please quote me and then explain you think what I said is not true. Your problem with the word "God" is your problem. Granted you share that problem with most people here, but I do not have a problem with the word, and I will continue to us it, because it holds everything together. Now if you think I am making a false statement about God, certainly address what is not true. In the meantime, if you are just going to complain about the word, that seems a pretty empty complaint. I am sure, like my arguments are making more sense, so will my use of the word "God" make more sense, and this is the best cure for the problems of religion. The last thing you want to do with a religious person is say there is no such thing as God. It is much more effective to agree there is a God, and then argue what is true or not true of God. Now you will be arguing truths instead of beliefs.

Yeah I read about this. There was mention that it could be hormonal. That just sounds too strange to me. We know plenty if behaviors are associated with hormones, but a sense of direction? Wow, how about a hormonal pill to improve our sense of direction. I would so try that. When I was young and felt invincible, I didn't mind being lost, because it was part of the adventure. Now age related problems leave me feeling very vulnerable and I don't take the trips out of town I want to take, the combination of being in trouble and being lost is not my idea of fun. I think if I could take a hormonal pill and gain a sense of direction, I would have a whole lot more self confidences and feel less vulnerable. This sight is fascinating! It is about how birds find their direction. http://serendip.bryn...xchange/node/71 It should be noted, recent research has put the special cells in a pigeons beak in question. But what is said about genes and rhythms is fascinating, and I think it applies to humans, because in the spring, like a migrating bird I want to travel, and in the winter I am preparing my cave for a long stay. I mean these compulsions lead to irrational behavior, like having to get out of town in the spring, or buying stuff I don't need as we head into winter. When I was young, I satisfying this need to leave town by putting the kids in the car and going to visit my mother. I believe a compulsion to travel is inside of us, and fortunately most people have a sense of direction. However, just for the sake of discussion. I have heard when people are lost they tend to go in a circle. This study says, when we don't have landmarks, we do go in circles http://news.discover...ng-circles.html Interestingly, birds bunch up in cloudy weather. I think this indicates they rely on each other more when they can't see the sun or moon. Maybe many brains are better at going the right direction than one brain when there is no sun? Would formation matter?

For sure religion causes morality. It works like this, human populations are much larger than animal populations because we create our social world with language and representations. Civilizations are held together with ideas of rights, duties, obligations and responsibility. It is religion that makes our huge populations possible. The alternative to religion is democracy when all the concepts of democracy are known. Being one nation under God is very, very important, however, we need a believable God, and religion is always based on myth, not science and logic. Democracy, however, can give us God and morals without religion, when all the concepts are understood, and if we don't get over our hangups about God, and bridge this gap between the secular and religion, what do you think will hold civilizations together? Anything without morals is self destructive. Capitalism without morals is self destructing. Government without morals self destructs and humans without morals self destruct. I am witnessing all the self destruction happening right now, and doing my best to put back into our consciousness, awareness of why education for good moral judgment is essential. The US had education for good moral judgment without religion, from the beginning, until 1958. We called this liberal education and the foundation of it was Greek and Roman classics, and religion, especially Christianity, and seasoned with mythology and history from around the world. Amoral education for a technological society focused almost exclusively on technology, is manifesting a society with unknown values. This is breaking down all systems that manifest civilization. It is now not just individuals who are broken, but our institutions and then our civilization. Edit, I like the way you did that. EDIT: Furthermore, there is the issue of cause-and-effect because people who join religion-based community service groups might do it out of a desire to be helpful, not out of religiosity. There are benefits to morality set by religion, and disadvantages. A benefit is, being good simply because one learned a rule about being good. But then a problem comes up when this is associated with superstition instead of reason. When it is associated with superstition, people can wrongly believe they can get away with doing the wrong thing, if they sacrifice to a God, or burn candles and pray. When morality is a matter of reason, we know there is no supernatural power that is going to step in and save our ass. What happens is the consequence of what we think and do, because that is how things work. I am highly motivated to be moral, because I don't believe there is a supernatural force that can alter the consequences of what I do. By the way, this also means I am highly motivated to do all I can so everyone understands morals, because I don't think there is a supernatural force that is going to safe us, and I want my grandchildren and their children to have good lives. This won't happen if we don't start talking morals real fast. Another problem with being reliant on religion instead of reason, is morality based in the passed, includes assuming slaves and kings, and doesn't work so well for modern moral questions. Google explains complete violation of our privacy as a means of giving us better individualized service. I don't think you will open a holy book and find the moral rule for this. EDIT: However, that same idea can be applied to the evils committed in the name of religion. Do people who murder homosexuals truly do it out of religiosity? How about taking your moral questions to the philosophy thread about "morals". It would make the thread much more interesting on on subject. Not all people who murder homosexuals do so because of religion, however, religion does lead to much killing, including killing one's own daughter, or selling her into slavery.

Well of course the cause and effect must be observed, before we can use language to state a moral, but is a moral a moral before we create it with language? I listened to a philosophy program last night that I am using to improve my explanations. We are social animals and that means we are programmed like other social animals, and in last night's debate they were splitting hairs to argue is there a difference between our morality and animals morality? The difference is, because we have language we add a whole lot to nature. We add thoughts about rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities. We use language to construct our reality in away other animals have not done. This is not to say other animals do not communicate. Test have demonstrated chimps might even be capable of a degree of conceptualizing, but they do not organize themselves around concepts as humans do. So yes, the cause and effect is observed, before we use language to state a moral, but is it a moral before language? Are animals that are programmed to be social, just like us, being moral, or is it only when we apply language to what can be observed that we are moral and animals are not, because without language that represents our observations and thought, there can not be morals, nor the laws of physics. However, what talk about, does exist before we speak it. Animals mate but they do not have marriage and divorce, property rights and taxes. Like the gods, we create our reality. Now what is a god? What is a moral? Both are concepts. When we realize a concept, our rationality sets restraints on us. We judge those who are not restrained as insane, and in troop of chimps these unrestrained individuals are driven away, just as humans drive away or kill unrestrained individuals. God=concepts and Moral=law. This is not different from science. Physics=concept and then we get the laws of physics. Because we can conceptualize we can create our own reality, however, the reality we create is limited to what we can conceptualize. So we want to teach our children morals, in moral stories, before they learn the hard way, what will hurt them and others. We want to take advantage of the benefits of language, right? What we call western civilization, begins in Athens, and is the result of humans naming concepts, just like those who study quantum physics do, and then explaining these concepts. Such as the Greeks worked with a concept of justice, and Socrates questioned what did they mean by justice? What are the rules, the pattern of cause and effect? That is, each god and goddess is a concept, and mythology is stories built around these concepts, and from there a culture is manifest. Only Socrates pushed this envelop, breaking superstition and pushing us in the direction of science. Democracy is a result of this conceptualizing, name a god and telling a story. Democracy begins with the idea that we are made in the image of the gods, because like them we can think in concepts and we can create. And as our scientist look for a unified theory so did these early philosophers, and the many gods became one. Logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. This is how Cicero and Jefferson understood God, and there is nothing supernatural about this concept of God. God is manifestation. To know of God we study nature. It is possible because we have language and use words as representations of our thoughts. Philosophy is speculation. It asks how does the universe works, and how should we live together. That is what is God and moral? I think if we treat God as a concept, we can correct false notions of God, without loosing the benefits of an unified theory. To clarify, philosophy asks the questions and religion provides the answers. However, because religion provides answers with myth, instead of science and on going debate, there is a problem with religion. On the other hand, there is also a problem with science, if there is no way to question how does it all work and what is our place in it?

Our culture is build on previous cultures. So for us, many of the moral stories came first. However, anything can be turned into a moral story. All that is needed is an understanding that a moral is matter of cause of effect. Now we can tell millions of moral stories that do become learning tools if our stories are good enough to be repeated. I like the moral stories of Athens very much and wish they were still used, especially in understanding the difference between youth and adulthood. Joseph Campbell said the purpose of myth is to transition youth to adulthood. If you are trying to get points across, seriously what are they? I present my reasoning and you present yours, right? Where is your reasoning? Did you see the thread I opened to answer your question titled "The Law", and then I opened another one titled "Logos", because there is much philosophy and custom behind these terms. We need to understand all these concepts to understand democracy and I am doing my best to explain everything. May I suggest google? If I do not understand what someone is talking about, I google it.

I really think this depends on how one defines god, and my opinion of those who do not understand this is extremely low. I understand the bible as mythology and would argue this understanding of God is no better than Zeus, however, I very much respect the benefits of believing in this god, that seem so lacking in those who do not have religion, or a philosophy, or some kind of framework of principles to live by. Going through life basing our decisions on our feelings, is not a good way to go! I would say, the people who are broken are more apt to be those who do not have religion, or any other frame work of principles to live by. If we returned to liberal education and education for good moral judgment and citizenship we would not have the problems that we have. Amoral education for a technological society with unknown values, means not only a lot of broken people, but possibly a very unpleasant future as well. Capitalism with morals is self destructive. Science without morals is very dangerous. I think we are head for big trouble and don't even have the concepts essential to reasoning our way out out this.

I have prefect wrong way direction sense. I am sure if I kept a record of when I turn the wrong way, it would be at least 90 percent of the time, and I vaguely remember hearing of man with this condition. Like if I am not sure which to turn, I feel pulled to turn the wrong way so often, I am really surprised if it turns out to be right way. I try to out guess myself, knowing I have this problem, but usually end up going the wrong way. And is a sense of being pulled in the wrong direction. One of my female friends drove a bus. She had a map of the city in her head, and a medical problem temporarily prevented her from accessing the map in her head. Sun down syndrome is a condition that makes it impossible for a person to get directions right after sun down. I once drove in circles for 6 hours, and when the sun came up, I found my way to where I was going. It was the strangest thing. After that, I do not drive at night unless I am sure of the path and it is a simple one.

I like the suggestions for relaxing. Personally I use audio tapes, informational, meditation, gentle music, and usually am asleep before the end of a tape. Tapes of college lectures work good for me. Being too warm can prevent a person from falling asleep. On really hot nights, I cover myself with a damp towel. I suppose sitting in a cool tub would also reduce the body temperature, and isn't a hot day a good excuse to eat ice cream? I like the suggestions for relaxing. Personally I use audio tapes, informational, meditation, gentle music, and usually am asleep before the end of a tape. Tapes of college lectures work good for me. Being too warm can prevent a person from falling asleep. On really hot nights, I cover myself with a damp towel. I suppose sitting in a cool tub would also reduce the body temperature, and isn't a hot day a good excuse to eat ice cream? In answer to Captain's question is mixed. Cold water can wake us up, but if it is cold enough and we stay in it long enough, it can reduce our temperature too much. http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/coastal_communities/hypothermia The recommendation for reducing a fever is slightly warm water, or what I would call cool water.