Oh the folly of chastity belts.

[Parallo]

Ah, yes. Th moral Zeitgeist. Its quite a strange thing. Just to think that one hundred years ago we would look at someone who thought themselves equal to another race the same way we look at a racist today. Crazy stuff! Well anyway, the bible. I'm not trying to ruffle any more feathers but the bible is no source of morals. Its filled with horrible stories and the very fact that we can tell the good from the bad in the bible means that we all have the criteria to decide whats right an wrong without religion. Pascal had it right when he sad good people will always do good and bad people will always do evil but religion is the only thing that can make a good man do evil.

[Atomica]

Um... not to digress, but doesn't anyone else think 'sexual fetish' when they hear about chastity belts?
Or am I just horribly perverse...?

[miadon]

thats not the frist thing that comes into my head when I hear about them altough some people do use it for that purpose.

[Atomica]

thats not the frist thing that comes into my head when I hear about them altough some people do use it for that purpose.

Right. It's either that, or that 'Robin Hood and his Merry Men' movie with the huge iron chest locked onto the woman's... area.

[ThomPhoenix]

* ThomPhoenix votes for Robin Hood: Men in Tights.

[zanzibar]

This is what we're trying to tell you; everything you believe as 'right' has been taught to you by your parents of this century. You could never understand what it was like to live in that time.

Prove it.  Prove an absolutist negative.  I dare you.

Aperantly slavery is ok

I don't believe in the bible.

Back when the bible was written, yes. That's actually a pretty good example of what I'm talking about. The Good Book...

There were people back then who were both for and against slavery.  There were people 200 years ago who were both for and against slavery.  There are people today who are both for and against slavery.  In fact, there are more slaves alive in the world today than ever lived during the 300 years African peoples were enslaved in the Americas.

Does that make slavery ok?  No.

[Atomica]

* ThomPhoenix votes for Robin Hood: Men in Tights.

That's the one...

This is what we're trying to tell you; everything you believe as 'right' has been taught to you by your parents of this century. You could never understand what it was like to live in that time.

Prove it.  Prove an absolutist negative.  I dare you.

Wait... I'm not sure what an 'absolutist negative' is, but are you saying you do understand what it was like to live in that time, or that you're not sure and need proof of what century you're from...?

S'far as I can see, everything we know about the past is gotten from bones, broken pottery, biased manuscripts and ruined buildings. How're we supposed to be sure of anything?

[zanzibar]

Wait... I'm not sure what an 'absolutist negative' is, but are you saying you do understand what it was like to live in that time, or that you're not sure and need proof of what century you're from...?

S'far as I can see, everything we know about the past is gotten from bones, broken pottery, biased manuscripts and ruined buildings. How're we supposed to be sure of anything?

I'm saying that emerald can't really prove all his claims, even though he's essentially correct.  We can't really know what it was like without having lived it ourselves.  That said, life wasn't the same for everyone back then, and it would be silly to think that everyone agreed with eachother on everything.

As far as knowing stuff about the past... we have more than just bones and pots.  We have art, literature, historical accounts... lots of stuff.

[Atomica]

Wait... I'm not sure what an 'absolutist negative' is, but are you saying you do understand what it was like to live in that time, or that you're not sure and need proof of what century you're from...?

S'far as I can see, everything we know about the past is gotten from bones, broken pottery, biased manuscripts and ruined buildings. How're we supposed to be sure of anything?

I'm saying that emerald can't really prove all his claims, even though he's essentially correct.  We can't really know what it was like without having lived it ourselves.  That said, life wasn't the same for everyone back then, and it would be silly to think that everyone agreed with eachother on everything.

As far as knowing stuff about the past... we have more than just bones and pots.  We have art, literature, historical accounts... lots of stuff.

Well yeah, I guess, but then by your logic everything is right, because for every thing, there's always someone somewhere who's believes it's right. So, thusly, it would be 'wrong' to discriminate against the sicko who likes to cut off innocent people's heads and do a voodoo dance around it, because who are we to say that's not right?

I understand where you're coming from; everyone has their own beliefs - but there will always be a sole set of beliefs underneath it all - passed down from your parents, like Mr. Fool said - that will make you not wanna kill folks, and help people, etc.
Beliefs inherent in our society - just like burning witches was in the past. Presumably. Otherwise it wouldn't have been such a wide practice...

[zanzibar]

Well yeah, I guess, but then by your logic everything is right, because for every thing, there's always someone somewhere who's believes it's right. So, thusly, it would be 'wrong' to discriminate against the sicko who likes to cut off innocent people's heads and do a voodoo dance around it, because who are we to say that's not right?

I understand where you're coming from; everyone has their own beliefs - but there will always be a sole set of beliefs underneath it all - passed down from your parents, like Mr. Fool said - that will make you not wanna kill folks, and help people, etc.
Beliefs inherent in our society - just like burning witches was in the past. Presumably. Otherwise it wouldn't have been such a wide practice...

Moral relativism doesn't really say that "everything is right"... it's more of a statement that right and wrong are values which are "audience dependant".

Personally, I view witch burning as a practice used by a group of people with power designed to subjegate and eliminate anyone who dared think outside the box.  But yeah, there were people who believed in it back then, I'm not debating that.  I just don't see what the point of discussing it is because the fact that some people aproved of it doesn't make it seem any better in the eyes of people who see it as reprehensible.

[Parallo]

The way you identify whats right and wrong is different to the way people in the past have and people in the future will. Thats the moral Zeitgeist. There is no steadfast right and wrong. Just what the people of that time in history percieve as right and wrong. Naturally there are exceptions and not everyone is under the spell of the moral Zeitgeist like the people that are victem to supposed good eg. witches. Were it not for the exceptions it would be stagnant.

[Atomica]

The way you identify whats right and wrong is different to the way people in the past have and people in the future will. Thats the moral Zeitgeist. There is no steadfast right and wrong. Just what the people of that time in history percieve as right and wrong. Naturally there are exceptions and not everyone is under the spell of the moral Zeitgeist like the people that are victem to supposed good eg. witches. Were it not for the exceptions it would be stagnant.

See, Z; 4 against 1 - you lose. You've amounted to nothing as a human and your opinions are worthless. Fall to your knees and weep!


(I'm joking, naturally )

[Parallo]

I wasn't disagreeing with him
Just explaining my views on morals in relation to time.

[Atomica]

I wasn't disagreeing with him
Just explaining my views on morals in relation to time.

Aww... c'mon. Come to my side... for me? *batts eyelashes*

[Parallo]

Depends on whats in it for me
Wait no. I'd have to read the whole thing then. No.