Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not under your definition.
So if you were to present a concept of "perfection", would it be reasonable for me to contradict you?
Think (original Marxian) communism. It presents the concept of a (nearly) perfect society.
It's really hard to say. Lots of people will have different ideals. And when we get toward the extremes, it's no longer realistic or possible or free from contradiction."
I'd like to be able to shapechange into a housecat and run around for a bit and catch a bird. I probably wouldn't want to be the bird, though.
I'd like to be able to eat as I liked without affecting my perfect (for me) figure. And I'd only poop once a month, but it would always be one of those really satisfying poops.
There would be no want or disease. These things are practically impossible.
People would live, hearty and hale, as long as they liked. And when they got tired of it all, they could stop living.
All children would be wanted. And if longer lifespans caused a population explosion, the earth would expand so there was more room for everyone.
Everyone would have an excellent baloney-detector.
Robots would perform any menial tasks that nobody else wanted to do. And the robots would find it very satisfying (to the extent that they can experience satisfaction).
Adam Sandler would be prevented from making films.
People would not care about what other people did in their bedrooms.
Space travel would be cheap and simple and fast, so there would always be new places to go, new worlds to explore.
"I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, freedom of choice. I'm the kind if guy who would sit in the greasy spoon and think "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the big rack of Barbecued spare ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I *want* high cholesterol. I want to eat bacon, butter and buckets of cheese alright? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinatti in a non-smoking section. I wanna run around naked with green jell-o all over my body reading a Playboy magazine. Why? Because maybe I feel the need to okay pal?"
I could continue the laundry list, but I don't see the point. Most of it is a fantasy.
You define a "perfect" existence as one where all the imperfect (on the goodness standard) things that do exist now do not exist. Under this definition, this existence now is not "perfect". Therefore there is no need for me to be "perfect" under the same standard.I don't understand what you mean, please explain.
But we don't have and cannot present an objective standard. So how could we establish what a "sensible reason" is?It would only be reasonable for you to object if you had a sensible reason to object. Besides I'm the one asking you to present a concept of nearly perfect existence of a society of beings.
The perfect balance between production, consumation and desire of every means to fulfil human needs.Please explain how this society would work in your own words.
You define a "perfect" existence as one where all the imperfect (on the goodness standard) things that do exist now do not exist. Under this definition, this existence now is not "perfect". Therefore there is no need for me to be "perfect" under the same standard.
Under my definition, the existence itself is perfect. It is, to use your words "as good as it can get". Thus I, as a part of this existence, am also perfect.
Near perfect for the purpose of peaceful coexistence with other beings.
When I cease to exist, I don't exist. But to "become imperfect"? How would that be possible? I would have to exist in order to "be" anything.Okay, so if you're perfect because you exist in a perfect reality. What happens to your perfection, when you cease to exist in perfect reality(when you die)? Does it become imperfect?
Haha nice!
So basically you don't think humans can ever achieve a nearly perfect society because imperfect humans would prevent it from ever happening?
When I cease to exist, I don't exist. But to "become imperfect"? How would that be possible? I would have to exist in order to "be" anything.
No, it would render non- existence imperfect. But non-existence, per definition, does not exist.If you perfectly existed at one point and then ceased to exist, wouldn't this mean perfect existence would cease? Thereby, rendering existence imperfect?
No, I don't agree with that. The perfection of existence is limited to the sole fact of existence. If it exists, it is perfect. The impossibility of cessation of existence is not part of that deal.I'm just trying to understand your logic. If existence is perfect, then anything within existence would perfectly exist, therefore, never would it be possible for anything within perfect existence to go out of existence. Does this make sense to you?
What? No. Some of the requirements for being how-I'd-like-things-to-be are just physically impossible. Imperfect humans are not preventing rapid space travel to other planets. It's just not possible.
No, it would render non- existence imperfect. But non-existence, per definition, does not exist.
No, I don't agree with that. The perfection of existence is limited to the sole fact of existence. If it exists, it is perfect. The impossibility of cessation of existence is not part of that deal.
My notion of this would be a libertarian society, which would (by definition) be based on the common recognition that all relationships between adults should be based on mutual understanding and consent.
This would, of course, be only "near perfection" since there would still be the inevitable criminals.
eudaimonia,
Mark
No, and I don't understand where you get that from. (Ah, perhaps the non-existence does not exist? Meaning, non-existence is impossible? If so, you got that wrong. What I was meaning is: non-existence is not describable in terms of existence.)Okay, so what you seem to be implying is that when you die, you will not cease to exist. You will continue to exist in some other form unknowable to you in your current state of existence. Am I understanding correctly?
No, and I don't understand where you get that from. (Ah, perhaps the non-existence does not exist? Meaning, non-existence is impossible? If so, you got that wrong. What I was meaning is: non-existence is not describable in terms of existence.)
When I cease to exist, I do not exist. But it is only of very limited meaning to assign a "state of non-existence" to "me".
No, and I don't understand where you get that from. (Ah, perhaps the non-existence does not exist? Meaning, non-existence is impossible? If so, you got that wrong. What I was meaning is: non-existence is not describable in terms of existence.)
Ah, because ceasing to exist is part of perfect existence. See, no contradiction here.I understand what you're saying it just seems contradictory. If you perfectly exist to begin with, why would you ever go out of perfect existence?
I'd say that it only seems contradictory to you because you apply your own definition of "perfection"... not mine.It just doesn't seem to make sense to me because its seems contradictory for something to perfectly exist and then go out of perfect existence for no good reason. It just seems like it would always perfectly exist forever since its perfect.
It can be described in terms of non-existence.Also, whats the point of believing non-existence is possible, if it can never be describable in terms of existence?
Could that fact that you don't think rapid space travel is possible be the reason its not possible. Whereas, if someone thought it was possible they might figure out a way to do it, given enough time.
do you think that there are "things" that do not exist? If so, how would you describe them in terms of existence?
It can be described in terms of non-existence.
Simple question: do you think that there are "things" that do not exist? If so, how would you describe them in terms of existence?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?