මෙහෙමද බුදු වෙන්නේ

[sustharapuncha]

i believe he was trying to be radical
but didn't come out that good

who ? lord buddha ?
he was doing fine

 

[Pessimist]

but i think its acceptable to break them as long as they aren't laws.

Nope. For example as far as I know there isn't any law against cannibalism in Sri Lanka. I've read in somewhere that it's only in 1 state cannibalism is against the law in US. Laws are for things that are not obvious in a society. We adhere to many things that are the foundation of our society for which there isn't any law because they are so obvious we don't even notice they are there.

 

[Vandetta]

but i think its acceptable to break them as long as they aren't laws.

and if it isn't acceptable, there sure is a law to avoid breaking 'em am i right ?

 

[sustharapuncha]

but i think its acceptable to break them as long as they aren't laws.

YES

and also

 

[Vandetta]

Dont expect idiots to understand logic.. dont argue with them.

forgive us for the ignorance
why don't you enlighten us about your precious logic that we are all unaware of ?

 

[sustharapuncha]

Nope. For example as far as I know there isn't any law against cannibalism in Sri Lanka. I've read in somewhere that it's only in 1 state cannibalism is against the law in US. Laws are for things that are not obvious in a society. We adhere to many things that are the foundation of our society for which there isn't any law because they are so obvious we don't even notice they are there.

This is really stupid ..
you don't need laws against cannibalism.. there are other laws to protect people from killing each other..

Its like there are no laws against you from having sex with aliens .. meaningless !!

 

[Harvard-Bio]

This is really stupid ..
you don't need laws against cannibalism.. there are other laws to protect people from killing each other..

Its like there are no laws against you from having sex with aliens .. meaningless !!

Yeah Right wonderful LOGIC!

 

[KasunKDP]

Nope. For example as far as I know there isn't any law against cannibalism in Sri Lanka. I've read in somewhere that it's only in 1 state cannibalism is against the law in US. Laws are for things that are not obvious in a society. We adhere to many things that are the foundation of our society for which there isn't any law because they are so obvious we don't even notice they are there.

But there are laws against killing people. So it indirectly prohibit cannibalism.
And i personally dont see anything wrong with cannibalism as long as u dont kill, don't help in killing and u know that the person was not killed for consumption, at the time of consumption.

 

[Vandetta]

Yeah Right wonderful LOGIC!

thread closed
im out

 

[sustharapuncha]

forgive us for the ignorance
why don't you enlighten us about your precious logic that we are all unaware of ?

This idiotic statement

so since it's a tradition in our society to not break into other people's houses and steal their things we should all go against that tradition and start stealing other people's properties ? some traditions are there for our own wellbeing. start breaking traditions like a fool won't do any good and this much should be obvious to any fool.

I wasn't even talking about anything like that .. I was having a philosophical discussion about spirituality and monks.. not everyday things..

If you really wanna compare that I see modern tax system as government stealing from people.

 

[Pessimist]

This is really stupid ..
you don't need laws against cannibalism.. there are other laws to protect people from killing each other..

Its like there are no laws against you from having sex with aliens .. meaningless !!

This only shows your inability grasp even the simplest of things of which is understandable given the way you have generalized something without even a proper explanation for why it can be generalized.

You have forgotten about corpses and natural death. You don't need to kill people in order to eat them. People die. One day your parents are going to die as well. And according to your stupid generalization, you should cook and eat them instead of holding a funeral and respect them for the last time because we should break the tradition.

 

[sustharapuncha]

But there are laws against killing people. So it indirectly prohibit cannibalism.
And i personally dont see anything wrong with cannibalism as long as u dont kill, don't help in killing and u know that the person was not killed for consumption, at the time of consumption.

This

 

[Harvard-Bio]

 

[Vandetta]

This only shows your inability grasp even the simplest of things of which is understandable given the way you have generalized something without even a proper explanation for why it can be generalized.

You have forgotten about corpses and natural death. You don't need to kill people in order to eat them. People die. One day your parents are going to die as well. And according to your stupid generalization, you should cook and eat them instead of holding a funeral and respect them for the last time because we should break the tradition.

somebody has not fully returned home from angoda

 

[Harvard-Bio]

somebody has not fully returned home from angoda

 

[Pessimist]

But there are laws against killing people. So it indirectly prohibit cannibalism.
And i personally dont see anything wrong with cannibalism as long as u dont kill, don't help in killing and u know that the person was not killed for consumption, at the time of consumption.

You are trying to derive ethics with reason with the underlying assumption that morals are objective. This really isn't the case and moralities are defined or rather accepted within a society in order to maintain it's functioning over a long period. So it might sound okay to eat a corpse at first thought, but it can shake the foundation of that society and have unprecedented affects affecting everyone's lives. For example what would happen if there occurred a shortage of corpses for people to eat ?

This is why even societies that practice cannibalism construct a tradition around that practice that saves them from harm. See it's traditions again.

This idiotic statement



I wasn't even talking about anything like that .. I was having a philosophical discussion about spirituality and monks.. not everyday things..

If you really wanna compare that I see modern tax system as government stealing from people.

If you've properly read anything about philosophy, it must be obvious to you that this kind of generalizations cannot be done. Philosophy studies the nature of generalizations more than anything and what you are doing here is using the mere word philosophy to justify your stupid claim without even the basic understanding of philosophy.

 

[sustharapuncha]

This only shows your inability grasp even the simplest of things of which is understandable given the way you have generalized something without even a proper explanation for why it can be generalized.

You have forgotten about corpses and natural death. You don't need to kill people in order to eat them. People die. One day your parents are going to die as well. And according to your stupid generalization, you should cook and eat them instead of holding a funeral and respect them for the last time because we should break the tradition.

I personally don't see a philosophical problem with that, these traditions made because they are tested with time and proven to be working (if not they are replace with others). One reason you can think is is health risks. we are far more susceptible to catch diseases by eating meat from our same species (eg. Prion diseases even after cooking). so its generally discouraged.

 

[Pessimist]

I personally don't see a philosophical problem with that, these traditions made because they are tested with time and proven to be working (if not they are replace with others). One reason you can think is is health risks. we are far more susceptible to catch diseases by eating meat from our same species (eg. Prion diseases even after cooking). so its generally discouraged.

So here you are accepting traditions must be conserved. Do you see how incoherent your view is ? Do you understand now that the generalization you have just made was wrong and traditions can benefit us ?

 

[sustharapuncha]

You are trying to derive ethics with reason with the underlying assumption that morals are objective. This really isn't the case and moralities are defined or rather accepted within a society in order to maintain it's functioning over a long period. So it might sound okay to eat a corpse at first thought, but it can shake the foundation of that society and have unprecedented affects affecting everyone's lives. For example what would happen if there occurred a shortage of corpses for people to eat ?

This is why even societies that practice cannibalism construct a tradition around that practice that saves them from harm. See it's traditions again.



If you've properly read anything about philosophy, it must be obvious to you that this kind of generalizations cannot be done. Philosophy studies the nature of generalizations more than anything and what you are doing here is using the mere word philosophy to justify your stupid claim without even the basic understanding of philosophy.

you are the one who generalized it, I was talking about changing tradition, and its ok to do that even if you are a monk. not all traditional values in our society .. and you gave stupid examples.

 

[Pessimist]

you are the one who generalized it, I was talking about changing tradition, not all traditional values.. and you gave stupid examples.

I have explicitly stated that generalizations don't work on society as they do in natural sciences and here you are saying it's me who have generalized. Are you hallucinating ?