">FlayedAngel: my apologies if my method of conversation is not to your liking. *bows*
ASATHOTH1: No, I got disconnected.
ASATHOTH1: It was fine
FlayedAngel: *nods*
ASATHOTH1: Anyway, what were we saying before I got cut off?
FlayedAngel: hmm.. i'm not sure.
FlayedAngel: communication, i believe.
ASATHOTH1: yes, words definition being an imortant part of communication.
FlayedAngel: i should probably mention that i'm a bit of an adversarialist at heart, so be warned. *winks*
FlayedAngel: ah, yes.
ASATHOTH1: Meaning that you will always play the opposite of the conversation?
FlayedAngel: more or less, yes.
FlayedAngel: i define myself by what you are not, ergo, i am nothing.
ASATHOTH1: I see, well, at least it makes the conversation interesting to an extent.
FlayedAngel: to an extent, yes...
ASATHOTH1: After a while it gets redundant and boring.
FlayedAngel: of course.
ASATHOTH1: I encounter people like you too much.
FlayedAngel: but so can an ordinary conversation.
FlayedAngel: how so...?
FlayedAngel: vague, undescriptive...? *wry grin*
ASATHOTH1: I just do, people who play the opposite, the devils advocate.
FlayedAngel: and you would prefer...?
ASATHOTH1: Truth
FlayedAngel: god's advocate?
FlayedAngel: who's truth?
FlayedAngel: mine, or yours?
ASATHOTH1: The truth of who you are.
FlayedAngel: you could never know the truth of who i am.
FlayedAngel: it is an unfortunate compilation of fact.
ASATHOTH1: That's not what I mean
FlayedAngel: ah, my mistake.
ASATHOTH1: Same with all humans
ASATHOTH1: We are all complicated
FlayedAngel: yes, indeed.
ASATHOTH1: Even if we think we are simple
FlayedAngel: perhaps we could trade some portions of the truth?
FlayedAngel: truth for truth.
FlayedAngel: and see what matches.
ASATHOTH1: What do you mean by truth, personal or real.
FlayedAngel: well, what definition of truth did you mean?
FlayedAngel: what is true for me?
FlayedAngel: what is true for everyone, i assume?
ASATHOTH1: True about you, I wasn't meaning the truth of everything.
FlayedAngel: well, as i said, i am nothing.
FlayedAngel: that is true for me.
FlayedAngel: but not true for everyone....
FlayedAngel: *sighs and shrugs*
ASATHOTH1: Well, that is your emotional opinion of your self.
FlayedAngel: that is my opinion of my spiritual self.
ASATHOTH1: So you don't believe you have a spirit in other words.
FlayedAngel: hehe, here we go again...
FlayedAngel: well, what of you?
FlayedAngel: do you believe you have a spirit?
FlayedAngel: being an atheist....
ASATHOTH1: I don't believe in the spiritual, the idea of spirits or the spiritual is all imagination, no such thing exists.
FlayedAngel: may i correct you and expound on that?
ASATHOTH1: If you think it needs such correction, proceed.
FlayedAngel: i believe in the spiritual, just as i strongly believe in the imagination..
FlayedAngel: just as i believe that the two of very much connected.
FlayedAngel: i do not believe in the "reality" of spiritualism.. of course not.
FlayedAngel: it does not exist, not in the strictist sense.
ASATHOTH1: Yes, Spirit is a figment of imagination, they are connected.
FlayedAngel: the imagination is a realm that exists solely in the mind.
FlayedAngel: i do not believe that to be a bad thing.
ASATHOTH1: Of course not, but it can be a distructive thing when it comes down to it.
FlayedAngel: it can be.. but so can reality.
ASATHOTH1: But that is just natural.
FlayedAngel: it can also be a beautiful and moving thing
FlayedAngel: and it can better a person.
ASATHOTH1: Nature is neutral. Spirituality is in the mind and like art can be beautiful or ugly, it's all in the viewing, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
FlayedAngel: so then, nature cannot be destructive..?
ASATHOTH1: I have not, however seen someone become better or worse by being spiritual, just decieved.
FlayedAngel: perhaps you have not met the right people.
FlayedAngel: define "better" for me...?
FlayedAngel: or "worse"...?
ASATHOTH1: Nature is neutral, it does what it does, it is both constructive and destructive but in that destruction it is being constructive.
FlayedAngel: you say "deceived"...
FlayedAngel: such deception implies a deceiver..
ASATHOTH1: Religious people believe they are righteous and holy and in touch with the truth, they believe they are good, but I have seen good do evil in the name of Good.
FlayedAngel: well, i have seen evil do good in the name of evil..
FlayedAngel: again, it is subjective.
ASATHOTH1: ......That is if you believe in Good and Evil.
ASATHOTH1: Which I don't
FlayedAngel: but you just chose to define them..
ASATHOTH1: That is why Religion is invalid.
FlayedAngel: do you believe in consequence...?
FlayedAngel: cause and effect?
ASATHOTH1: Yes, they are definite words created by society to define things real or otherwise.
ASATHOTH1: Yes, I do believe in Cause and effect.
FlayedAngel: so are good and evil.
FlayedAngel: good and evil can be -very- real for some people, it just depends on how you define them.
ASATHOTH1: Good and Evil are human concepts and as such are not real.
FlayedAngel: because they are human concepts..?
ASATHOTH1: Plus if you consider human nature in the equation then good and evil become null and void.
FlayedAngel: i am not sure that i follow your "equation"..
ASATHOTH1: Lets take theft....
FlayedAngel: very well.
ASATHOTH1: Theft is good or evil, which one?
FlayedAngel: it is dependant on circumstance.
FlayedAngel: and also, perspective.
ASATHOTH1: Not really
FlayedAngel: not really?
FlayedAngel: a natural disaster..
FlayedAngel: positive, or negative?
ASATHOTH1: Is theft ever good?
ASATHOTH1: Negative by human standards.
ASATHOTH1: Positive by natures
FlayedAngel: positive, in what way?
ASATHOTH1: This is what I am trying to get at by good and evil.
ASATHOTH1: Change is always positive.
FlayedAngel: oh, i agree with you that good and evil are conventions of human nature...
FlayedAngel: i just don't think that makes them invalid.
ASATHOTH1: Natural disasaters is natures way of getting comfortable.
FlayedAngel: but that is to assume what nature is.
ASATHOTH1: Lets take eating cats, some societies find it evil some find it good, most find it necessary for survival.
FlayedAngel: and, indirectly, to assign human qualities.
ASATHOTH1: Or Cows....
FlayedAngel: yes, of course.
ASATHOTH1: In some places Cows are sacred, to eat them is evil.
ASATHOTH1: So the USA is evil.
FlayedAngel: here, we consume then daily in great numbers.
ASATHOTH1: Exactly.
ASATHOTH1: Lets take murder....
FlayedAngel: most christians, etc, etc...
FlayedAngel: you see my point, i'm sure.
FlayedAngel: yes?
ASATHOTH1: Is canniblism good or evil?
FlayedAngel: it seems you cannot assign good or evil to a generalization.
ASATHOTH1: Oh?
ASATHOTH1: Then is murder evil or good or neither?
FlayedAngel: it only becomes applicable in particular instance.
ASATHOTH1: Meaning?
FlayedAngel: meaning, it may be good in one instance to one person, completely different in another instance to another person...probably the victim.
FlayedAngel: they are not definitions in themselves.
ASATHOTH1: Exactly, one may find murder necessary for one reason or another, so can something necessary be considered evil?
FlayedAngel: only in the instance of one.
ASATHOTH1: One?
FlayedAngel: good and evil are linked with individuality.
ASATHOTH1: Are they? Or are they societal constructs?
FlayedAngel: just as our "truths" are probably different.
FlayedAngel: your "good and evil" may very well be, yes.
ASATHOTH1: Well, I do believe that what ever I must do and have no alternative but to do cannot be evil, and society would agree up to the point that religion comes into play.
FlayedAngel: they merely play the part of something larger..
FlayedAngel: oh?
ASATHOTH1: Larger?
ASATHOTH1: Part?
FlayedAngel: you believe yourself incapable of ever doing evil, then?
FlayedAngel: well, at least, without choice?
ASATHOTH1: I believe there are choices in everything.
FlayedAngel: then you are completely incapable of doing evil?
ASATHOTH1: But when it comes to the will to survive then choices become narrowed.
ASATHOTH1: Yes.
ASATHOTH1: Actually I am.
FlayedAngel: you do not believe in self-sacrifice?
ASATHOTH1: I would die for someone I love so I do believe in self sacrifice.
FlayedAngel: then you beleive in good and evil.
FlayedAngel: "a" good and evil.
ASATHOTH1: No
FlayedAngel: no?
ASATHOTH1: Self Sacrifice doesnot imply good or evil.
FlayedAngel: are animals devoid of good and evil?
FlayedAngel: do concepts of morality not apply to them?
ASATHOTH1: They have no concept of those terms and are capable of doing either of what we consider good or evil.
FlayedAngel: but because they have no concept, they have no ability to sacrifice themselves..
FlayedAngel: agree, or disagree?
ASATHOTH1: They do what is necessary for survival of their entire species.
ASATHOTH1: They do actually
FlayedAngel: yes?
ASATHOTH1: Survival of their species is what is necessary, same goes for humanity, but our imaginations have gotten in the way.
FlayedAngel: but thusly, we would chose self-sacrifice.
ASATHOTH1: Yes
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry, i use "self-sacrifice" in a somewhat broader term.
ASATHOTH1: Then I am not sure what you mean by it.
FlayedAngel: the idea of placing an ideal above survival.
FlayedAngel: may i ask you a question...?
ASATHOTH1: Or it's point in our conversation of good and evil
ASATHOTH1: sure.
FlayedAngel: you say you would die for someone, yes?
ASATHOTH1: yes.
FlayedAngel: may i assume this is an individual...??
FlayedAngel: a specific person...??
ASATHOTH1: One or more yes.
FlayedAngel: would you die for me..?
ASATHOTH1: I don't know you.
FlayedAngel: then you would not die for me?
ASATHOTH1: Probably not, my death for you would not serve any purpose, unless.
ASATHOTH1: If your survival meant the survival of the human race then I probably would.
ASATHOTH1: Even if I didn't love or like you it would mean alot to the people I did love/like.
FlayedAngel: my point being, i (myself) do not see the connection between your dying for an individual, which would -not- insure the survival of the human race, and an animal's self-perservation.
FlayedAngel: it is an ideal.
ASATHOTH1: Animals can sacrifice themselves for the survival of their entire species.
ASATHOTH1: It's not an ideal, it's nature.
FlayedAngel: can an animal sacrice themselves for one specific animal...?
ASATHOTH1: Only if it's their cubs
ASATHOTH1: Their children
FlayedAngel: even if that animal would not in any way insure the survival of their species?
ASATHOTH1: Or maybe their mate who is pregnate
ASATHOTH1: They don't necessarily distinguish that.
FlayedAngel: so then you completely divorce your sacrice from emotion...?
ASATHOTH1: I am not sure what you mean?
FlayedAngel: or ideals?
FlayedAngel: well, let me see..
FlayedAngel: have you ever been "in love"...?
ASATHOTH1: My ideals are not the same as yours.
ASATHOTH1: I believe I am currently in love.
FlayedAngel: well...
FlayedAngel: would you die for this person...??
ASATHOTH1: Yes.
FlayedAngel: may i ask.. why?
ASATHOTH1: I believe that her happiness is above mine.
FlayedAngel: it is my believe, you may disagree, that an animal is not capable of this particular type of sacrifice..
FlayedAngel: perhaps they are...
FlayedAngel: perhaps not.
FlayedAngel: and thus, this is seperate from "survival" sacrifice.
ASATHOTH1: Yes, we are slightly more complicated mentally than most animals, perhaps not all animals but most.
FlayedAngel: yes.
ASATHOTH1: Yes.
FlayedAngel: may i present a senario for you?
ASATHOTH1: Ok
FlayedAngel: er, scenaro.
FlayedAngel: argh..heh
FlayedAngel: can't spell... anyways.
ASATHOTH1: I know what you mean, it doesn't matter.
FlayedAngel: let's say you were in love with an individual..
ASATHOTH1: Ok
FlayedAngel: and that indivual was incapable of reproduction.
FlayedAngel: and, through peculiar circumstance, you could surrender your life to save theirs.
ASATHOTH1: Like I said we are more complicated than typical animals.
FlayedAngel: yes, perhaps i'm building on a point already made, sorry.
FlayedAngel: hopefully, you can fill in the rest of the scenario.
FlayedAngel: -why- do you think you would chose to die in that person's stead?
FlayedAngel: i ask this genuinely.
FlayedAngel: not for purposes of argumentation.
ASATHOTH1: Because I believe that even if they don't produce that they are someone that has my same ideals and could spread them....ie, survival in some other way than genetic.
FlayedAngel: hmm.. interesting.
FlayedAngel: and... what if they did not share your ideals..?
FlayedAngel: not always do two people who fall in love see eye to eye..
ASATHOTH1: Then how is it that I love them?
ASATHOTH1: Love comes from connection.
FlayedAngel: so then ideal = connection ?
ASATHOTH1: Genetic or ideal.
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry, genetic?
ASATHOTH1: Survival of the species, we have given ourselves an alternative to genetic survival because we are such a large body of species.
FlayedAngel: so then you have absolutely no believe in romantic ideals...?
FlayedAngel: no believe that sometimes the result is more important than the "why" and "how"...?
ASATHOTH1: Did I just say I would or wouldn't die for the one I loved whether or not they could produce?
FlayedAngel: you said you would.
FlayedAngel: and then - pardon me if this is incorrect - but you attributed to genetics.
FlayedAngel: and population of ideals.
ASATHOTH1: It's actually an unromantic way to say I'm romantic.
FlayedAngel: understood.
FlayedAngel: but you don't believe that romantism could be applied elsewhere...?
FlayedAngel: for example, you don't believe that the "imaginary" presense of god could be more important than the reality, or lack thereof?
ASATHOTH1: I believe it does more harm than good.
FlayedAngel: i agree with you that most religions are, from my perspective, are fucked up.
FlayedAngel: or rather, the people associated with them.
FlayedAngel: but do you believe it can be good?
FlayedAngel: or, for instance, that it can "help" the individual even if it harms you or others?
ASATHOTH1: Sometimes
FlayedAngel: may i say, somewhat disjointedly, that you make very interesting and valid points...? *bows*
ASATHOTH1: Thank you
FlayedAngel: er... where were we...?
ASATHOTH1: ?
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry, other IMs... i'm afraid i lost my train of thought... *raises eyebrow*
ASATHOTH1: Me too
FlayedAngel: heh.. oh well. *grin*
FlayedAngel: care to continue a new thread, or shall we stop here?
ASATHOTH1: Ok
FlayedAngel: well, it's been a pleasure, then... thank you. *bows*
FlayedAngel: or was that...?
FlayedAngel: hmm.
ASATHOTH1: Continue talking or saying farewell for now?
FlayedAngel: *laughs* yes, which?
ASATHOTH1: Either one, It's fun to talk to you.
FlayedAngel: well, thank you.. the feeling is mutual. *bows*
FlayedAngel: if it's all the same to you then, shall we continue while i can...?
ASATHOTH1: Sure
FlayedAngel: any topic in mind?
ASATHOTH1: Not really.
FlayedAngel: hmmm..
FlayedAngel: well... judging by your profile and whatnot, you seem to have a very negative view of religion...
FlayedAngel: is there any religion at all that you don't find...well.. offensive?
ASATHOTH1: Well, wouldn't anything that causes harm be considered in a negative way?
FlayedAngel: well, many things cause harm...
FlayedAngel: but can also cause good.
FlayedAngel: for example, someone is depressed and suicidal..
FlayedAngel: becomes converted to fundimental christianity, and would never think of killing themselves.
ASATHOTH1: But it is selfish....it considers other bad and give the right to end others ways.
FlayedAngel: well, many religions embrace others...
FlayedAngel: any particular religion you're thinking of?
ASATHOTH1: Outwardly and only recently
ASATHOTH1: All, except Buddhism
FlayedAngel: i mean, a person can be an atheist and not be altruistic at all, you know...
ASATHOTH1: Yes.
FlayedAngel: i agree with you, that some religions are very closed-minded.
FlayedAngel: i do not consider this to be a good thing.
FlayedAngel: but i suppose i speak more of what i perceive to be the -purpose- of religion...
FlayedAngel: rather than the facts of what they teach.
ASATHOTH1: Well, the original purpose religion was created was not to improve life but to control the masses.
FlayedAngel: when are you refering to...?
FlayedAngel: sumerian religion...??
FlayedAngel: and whatnot...?
ASATHOTH1: All religion
FlayedAngel: but if you're refering to the point that it was created...
FlayedAngel: i was just curious as to what specific point that was.
FlayedAngel: or, if you were even refering to such.
FlayedAngel: what if i were to create my own religion... ?
FlayedAngel: just make it up, on the spot.
FlayedAngel: would you consider that the same?
FlayedAngel: would you argue my validity?
ASATHOTH1: Not, excatly, let me put it to you this way, why do Christians try to convert people?
FlayedAngel: i don't know, i'm not christian...heh
FlayedAngel: brb...
ASATHOTH1: They do it because they want everyone to be like them they think that it's the only way to acheive peace on earth, to have everyone in control by God.
FlayedAngel: well, yes... i can see your point.
FlayedAngel: but that's to assume that all christians are that way.
FlayedAngel: and thus, to fall victim to the same sort of narrow-mindedness that they seem to uphold.
ASATHOTH1: According to the Bible that is their purpose, so I've been told.
FlayedAngel: there are many offshoots of the bible.
FlayedAngel: and many, many interpretations.
FlayedAngel: most people choose to believe the obvious.
FlayedAngel: i do not agree with most tenets set forth by christianity..
ASATHOTH1: Well, I have not seen many different versiuons of the Bible, They all say generally the same things.
FlayedAngel: but christianity is not all religions..
FlayedAngel: and what are those things...?
ASATHOTH1: Most religions, except Buddhism, have the same purpose, facsism
ASATHOTH1: fascism
FlayedAngel: oh..?
FlayedAngel: and you feel fascism is wrong..?
FlayedAngel: why?
ASATHOTH1: Yes
ASATHOTH1: Fascism destroys individuality and choice.
FlayedAngel: i agree...
FlayedAngel: do you believe in purpose?
FlayedAngel: or simply living?
FlayedAngel: why do you remain alive?
ASATHOTH1: First, instict, my purpose is to live, second is my individual purpose, to study and learn and enjoy
FlayedAngel: but, doesn't attributing purpose to instinct also limit your choices...?
ASATHOTH1: No
ASATHOTH1: It extends it.
FlayedAngel: after all, if your choices are based on an ingrained sense of behavior, doesn't that make them less of a choice?
FlayedAngel: ah.. and how..?
ASATHOTH1: First, the instinct to live/survive, but if you are mentally esteem less then you might lose this instinct.
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry, could you.. reiterate, please...?
ASATHOTH1: Instict dictates behavior to a point.
FlayedAngel: if you mentally esteem less...?
ASATHOTH1: Then why would you think your survival means anything?
FlayedAngel: personally, i don't think that it does.
FlayedAngel: but that's just me. *grin*
FlayedAngel: well, other than enriching the lives of others, particularly people i care about.. arguably, that's the only "reason" i'm here.
FlayedAngel: but that is a reason i can accept or discard at random.
FlayedAngel: would you consider that a choice...??
ASATHOTH1: That's outside
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry, outside of what?
ASATHOTH1: Outside choice
FlayedAngel: what would you consider an "inside" choice...?
ASATHOTH1: No, it's outside of Choice, choice ahs nothing to do with it, there are things that we don't choose like who we are where we are born, circumstance, and things we choose, like how to deal with those choices
FlayedAngel: but i choose how to perceive that choice..
FlayedAngel: was my only point.
ASATHOTH1: I see what you mean.
FlayedAngel: i am free to believe anything that i want... i could believe that the world is flat, and that my soul is made of marshmellows in an alternate dimension.
FlayedAngel: it doesn't really matter what you tell me, it is up to me to accept it.
ASATHOTH1: True
FlayedAngel: i don't believe christians are right.. not at all.
ASATHOTH1: But what is it you are choosing to accept, something real or something imagined?
FlayedAngel: well, that's where it becomes difficult..heh
FlayedAngel: no one truly knows what is "real".
FlayedAngel: if they did, then all the mysteries of the universe would have to become clear to them in that one instant.
ASATHOTH1: Not really
FlayedAngel: oh?
ASATHOTH1: Lets take a puzzle, that you've never seen before.
FlayedAngel: yes..?
ASATHOTH1: Just because you realize it's a puzzle and you know how it works doesn't mean you know what it will make.
FlayedAngel: well, that's an excellent analogy..
FlayedAngel: but, how can you be certain it's a puzzle, then?
FlayedAngel: what if it's purpose was something else entirely?
FlayedAngel: until you know the whole, the whole is incomplete. *shrugs*
ASATHOTH1: Then you would find that out in the process
FlayedAngel: the process of solving the puzzle?
ASATHOTH1: Not really, take the universe, we know that it's made of atomic particles and empty space, that doesn't mean we know all the combinations.
FlayedAngel: we think we know.
FlayedAngel: keep in mind that ours is a history of mistakes.
FlayedAngel: and false realizations.
FlayedAngel: that doesn't mean it can't happen again...
ASATHOTH1: Not all are mistakes, we learn from mistakes, it's good to make mistakes.
FlayedAngel: yes, exactly...given a choice, i will chose to believe that we will make mistakes again...
FlayedAngel: rather than believe we are definably correct.
FlayedAngel: we believe the best we can...
ASATHOTH1: Lets put it this way, if you don't understand something you can't use it.
FlayedAngel: we believe the universe is the universe, and the laws and substance that apply to it are what they are because that is the best we understand..
FlayedAngel: yes...?
FlayedAngel: not true.
FlayedAngel: you can use a book as a doorstop, even if you can't read...
FlayedAngel: until a full realization of the object is acheived, you can't be certain whether you are using it, or -mis-using it...
ASATHOTH1: That's not what I mean.
ASATHOTH1: Lets take books, what are books for?
FlayedAngel: i'm sorry... could you explain..?
FlayedAngel: yes?
FlayedAngel: imparting knowledge??
ASATHOTH1: Information, right?
FlayedAngel: yes?
ASATHOTH1: Exactly.....how do we get books?
FlayedAngel: we create them.
FlayedAngel: other than that, i'm not quite sure i follow...
ASATHOTH1: Created or put them together...
FlayedAngel: mm-hmm...?
ASATHOTH1: Creating means to get something from nothing.
FlayedAngel: within the description you provide...
ASATHOTH1: Anyway, we made that book by abusing what it's made of.
FlayedAngel: how so..?
FlayedAngel: you mean the chief material components...?
ASATHOTH1: What are books made of?
FlayedAngel: hmmm... but, we didn't "create" the universe..
ASATHOTH1: Yes.
FlayedAngel: paper.
FlayedAngel: trees.
FlayedAngel: knowledge.
ASATHOTH1: Right, but nothing is a creation, just a set of combinations
FlayedAngel: well, yes.. i suppose given the beliefs you applied earlier, you would not believe otherwise.
FlayedAngel: *nods*
ASATHOTH1: And trees grew by using the elements around it as building blocks to itself.
ASATHOTH1: Food
FlayedAngel: but, again.. i think where we differ is how we view this.
ASATHOTH1: Yes, but I am trying to show you what I mean
FlayedAngel: *nods* yes.
FlayedAngel: please, continue, if you were not finished.
FlayedAngel: my apologies if i interrupted you.
ASATHOTH1: A tree eats elements around it, materials, it abuses the elements in a sense to make it grow.

(Unfortunately, this is the last point that I remembered to save at.. oh well.)

-- previous entry : : - exit to "the mouth" - : : next entry --