TheMadFool

Are you issuing a challenge to me? Good luck! :grin:

So, I define my joy as the feeling that I get when someone punches me in the face, that punch on the face will magically transform in terms of the acc...

:ok:

:fire:

It's absolutely ridiculous because you're treating Buddhist scriptures like the Koran/Bible - a, as Christopher Hitchens puts it, final solution. That...

You're welcome.

:rofl: Q. Does the Buddha argue his position or not? A. He argues his position. Q. Why, may I ask? A. Simple, the Buddha respects rationality. Q. Does...

So, I could then define your joy and suffering away? A variation of the naturalistic fallacy. Remember, morality is about oughts and not ises, the lat...

I never implied that Buddhism is a DIY hobby. Straw man. The Buddha doesn't have to to, like some people, spell out everything he wished to convey. Yo...

Yep. I want your opinion on something that's bothering me for as long as I can remember. The Taoist harmony principle between opposites (hot-cold, goo...

Copy that!

I'll work on that. Looks too complicated but I'll give it my best shot. Thanks.

Right, Buddhism & Hinduism take a page out of nature's book, specifically the part that's about the laws of nature. I suppose whoever the person was w...

:flower:

I see, so that's how you want to wiggle out of my trap. :grin: Here's a variation of the Name The Trait Argument: Name the species-specific trait that...

Explain...please.

Clarification 1. No trait absent/present in animals which if absent/present in humans would justify the killing of humans. Ergo, 2. Killing animals (i...

:flower:

Clarification 1. No trait absent/present in animals which if absent/present in humans would justify the killing of humans. Ergo, 2. Killing animals (i...

Nice! However, I fail to see how a death match, which life is, can be thought of as "...all was well in the Garden of Eden..."? I recall @"jorndoe" ha...

Indeed! How fascinating. Taking the Kantian route to morality, evil violates the laws of logic if not the laws of nature. Interestingly, Kant was, in ...

Hmmm.... :chin:

:up:

I can find none, I suspect the same goes for anyone and this exposes, completely, the fact that non-vegetarianism is not, in any sense of the word, ra...

@"Wayfarer" :up: That says a lot. No wonder, ancient moral theorists needed God, a being not of this world, to prop up their ethics. Morality is a con...

That, I'm afraid, is not going to do the job. By your logic, we should be killing immoral people but that just doesn't seem the right thing to do. Yes...

There's no point in providing a reference, canonical or otherwise because, unlike other religions, buddhism isn't what philosophers refer to as arguem...

The first step towards a solution to a problem is to realize that there is a problem. Humans have, in a sense, awakened to the fact that all is not we...

In other words, reality just is and no amount of mental manipulation/acrobatics can/will alter/affect it. Reality then is that which you have to accep...

It looks like you're right and I'm wrong. I'm guilty of a non sequitur. Sorry to have wasted your time. I'll have to be more careful next time around....

Religious ethics tries to eat the cake and have it too. To be good/bad we must exercise our free will but then it has a list of things (e.g. the decal...

The law of the jungle = No laws; no holds barred death match; nature is red in tooth and claw.

:up:

:ok: Sorry, I took it literally. Interesting. We usually don't kill carnivores (unconditional savagery).

I'm sorry but it was you who brought up money as a/the reason why climate activists have slipped up in their mission to get the movers and shakers of ...

:up: I have a lot of catching up to do.

Perfectionism (psychology)

It exposes the paradox at the heart of religious morality - free will (ref: the problem of evil) and religious moral injunctions (no free will).

You can try. I don't think it's possible. At least not in the foreseeable future.

It'd be like thinking you've finally found the holy grail of philosophy aka living well but unbeknownst to you, it's a fake! So, you go around the wor...

What happened?

So, it's permissible to kill a brain-damaged human? So, someone could go to a special needs school and spray bullets inside the classrooms and nobody ...

:ok:

This is the main premise I reckon. Animals or humans can either possess/lack a trait. Ergo, the questions are, 1. Which trait that's missing in animal...

Sorry I can't respond to your request but for what it's worth, Buddhism is, inter alia, an argument, the key premise being the doctrine of impermanenc...

I'll give it my best shot. It might take some time though. I'm not the brightest bulb on the chandelier.

This might help: Identity of indiscernibles/Indiscernibility of identicals 1. The indiscernibility of identicals: \forall x \forall y For any x and y,...

I'd like you to expand and elaborate \uparrow

Imagine a person X. 1. X believe God exists. Insofar as X is concerned that God exists is true. X has no proof/evidence. God exists, assumed true by X...