NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
April 18th, 2008 at 05:36pm
I think you guys are arguing over the definition of a word. Habits exist and the majority of humans have them regardless of whatever background. But they aren't necessary to our survival. Instinct and fortitude are.
However also i do not agree that Habit is for those who can afford it because it covers a wide range of activities, yes looking for a shelter every night to sleep is not a habit thats instinct to survive, but then when said place is found you then sleep in the same position that you always do, thats habit.
I found your debate hard to follow because of your confusion over what you think habit stands for. What you are really arguing is whether humans can survive without ORDER which although in the same word group as habit is altogether different and actually makes sense to the topic.
Order is something that does break the class boundries, its order that see's us awake in the daytime and asleep at night, Order or Time is what structures are eating habits. It disciplines are school systems and how we practise religion.
That's what we are debating over. Anji claimed it was a fact that no one could survive without habits and I disagreed. And I do believe that she did actually mean habit, not order. Order would be a different discussion than what we're talking about.
At any rate this thread has gone way off topic so if anyone wants to continue this discussion we should make a new thread. I'd make it, but I'm not exactly sure what we all want. "Is Habit necessary to life?" or something like that? Maybe a better topic would be what is necessary to survive in general.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
April 18th, 2008 at 08:49pm
Oh my god, you're right. I kind of forgot what the point of this thread was in the first place!
i guess greed is the root of all evil and not religion.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 19th, 2008 at 01:29pm
Kurtni:
NeoSteph:
But they aren't necessary to our survival.
That's what we are debating over. Anji claimed it was a fact that no one could survive without habits and I disagreed. And I do believe that she did actually mean habit, not order. Order would be a different discussion than what we're talking about.
At any rate this thread has gone way off topic so if anyone wants to continue this discussion we should make a new thread. I'd make it, but I'm not exactly sure what we all want. "Is Habit necessary to life?" or something like that? Maybe a better topic would be what is necessary to survive in general.
To the previous discussion, maybe squatting in different locations is not a habit, but to find a place to sleep and to sleep every night is a habit. Infact, I think that under-pirviledged people are more vulnerable to forming habits because they cannot afford to live freely as they wish due the the economic stress. Especially if you're in the proletariat class, labouring, there is no more a habitful life than that.
But also, to rephrase perhaps to make more clear, maybe habit isn't necessary for survival, but I think it is for mere existance.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 19th, 2008 at 01:34pm
By habit I mean a periodical, repetitive routine. Not order, literally habit as in Samuel Beckett or James Joyce and how they used the theme of habit in their literature.
To exist idealistically or dualistically, not materialistically because that would physically be surviving.
Ah, I see. Well, you said "I think" this time, so I'm satisfied
On another note, I think I'll make a thread about Dualism later. I think it's the most ridiculous philosophy I've ever heard, but I won't get into that here because it's off topic.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
April 20th, 2008 at 04:06am
*Is prepared to totally disagree.*
By the way, make it about ontology in general because it's interesting and in my own ontonological theory, impossible to talk about one without any of the others.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
April 20th, 2008 at 11:49am
*waits patiently for thread to be made*
I've just spent the last 5 hours categorising the different effects of malnutrition in infants, i need a discussion that doesn't involve the words, food or nazi...possible only courtney knows what the hell i'm going on about it XD
i believe religion doesn't cause evil, the people that can't accept other religions do, if we want to live in a stable society without fear of terrorism and extremists then people just need to accept other people's choices in their religious aspects of their lives, once people do that, it will make the world a much better place
Sherlock Board Parasite Age: 39 Gender: Female Posts: 35331
May 2nd, 2008 at 09:45am
laks;;LICIOUS:
i believe religion doesn't cause evil, the people that can't accept other religions do, if we want to live in a stable society without fear of terrorism and extremists then people just need to accept other people's choices in their religious aspects of their lives, once people do that, it will make the world a much better place
Hmmm. One of the main points about ~most~ religions is that you believe that your God is the only true God tbh.
Jax. Was Here Two Weeks Ago Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 42834
May 2nd, 2008 at 03:56pm
bjtp:
laks;;LICIOUS:
i believe religion doesn't cause evil, the people that can't accept other religions do, if we want to live in a stable society without fear of terrorism and extremists then people just need to accept other people's choices in their religious aspects of their lives, once people do that, it will make the world a much better place
Hmmm. One of the main points about ~most~ religions is that you believe that your God is the only true God tbh.
That's fine as long as those groups don't force their opinions on anyone else, or try and make them change from their own religion.
I don't think religions need to recruit people, they'll find the religion if it's what they're looking for.
It's the extremists who take away human priviledges that cause problems in my opinion.
Sherlock Board Parasite Age: 39 Gender: Female Posts: 35331
May 6th, 2008 at 05:14am
Jax.:
That's fine as long as those groups don't force their opinions on anyone else, or try and make them change from their own religion.
I don't think religions need to recruit people, they'll find the religion if it's what they're looking for.
It's the extremists who take away human priviledges that cause problems in my opinion.
They don't need to recruit people.. whoever 'they' are, they don't even need to exist, but they live to spread the word of God and his teachings.
Religion has set ideologies, which, if you aren't a part of that religion, and don't practise, 'they' see it as a sin, or paganism.
Again, not speaking for all religions, sticking with predominantly Christian, because its what I know best.
worn-out astronaut. Had A Life Before GSB Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 28177
May 6th, 2008 at 07:15am
I dont think they necessary disapprove of other religions (except of Buddhism which they consider to be basically a form of Atheism), but they to dislike atheist.
I was taught in school in R.E. that if you ever meet an atheist that you should try to ~recruit~ him. And besides, every priest will say that Atheism is the biggest enemy of Catholicism which does make sense, but also opposes the fact that only ~hardcore catholics and freaks~ disrespect other peoples choices.
Sherlock Board Parasite Age: 39 Gender: Female Posts: 35331
May 6th, 2008 at 07:33am
Firstly, I just choked on my cereal and thought you said ~hardcore Catholic freaks~ Thank you for that.
Secondly, that's SHOCKING about Buddhism and about recruiting athiests!! I'd love someone to try and recruit me, bring it on.
We were taught, in Roman Catholic secondary school, to sort of pity those without religion, and view them as uninformed and ignorant.
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
May 7th, 2008 at 11:20am
Atheism is the biggest threat to all religions in general. I mean, at least most religions follow a similar code which is that there is some sort of supernatural entity which oversees our lives, and religions all have set moral codes to live by. Atheism, though, doesn't. This biggest threat to your morals is not opposing morals, but the suggestion that those morals which you live your life by, fundamentally do not exist, at all.
Jax. Was Here Two Weeks Ago Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 42834
May 7th, 2008 at 12:48pm
Anji:
Atheism is the biggest threat to all religions in general. I mean, at least most religions follow a similar code which is that there is some sort of supernatural entity which oversees our lives, and religions all have set moral codes to live by. Atheism, though, doesn't. This biggest threat to your morals is not opposing morals, but the suggestion that those morals which you live your life by, fundamentally do not exist, at all.
Just because you're atheist doesn't mean you don't have any morals.
This biggest threat to your morals is not opposing morals, but the suggestion that those morals which you live your life by, fundamentally do not exist, at all.
Well its pretty obvious the morals exist seeing as how millions upon millions of people believe in them. The only thing atheism does is say that the source of those morals is not from some god, but people. Anyone who says they "don't exist" would be very wrong, they exist in the lives of millions.
The biggest threat to religion, in my opinion, is common sense.
Anji claimed it was a fact that no one could survive without habits and I disagreed. And I do believe that she did actually mean habit, not order. Order would be a different discussion than what we're talking about.
I think it's the most ridiculous philosophy I've ever heard, but I won't get into that here because it's off topic.
