|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Rudy CanozaRudy Canoza Date: Oct 1, 2007 22:30
Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
Life per se isn't good. It is the *content* of a life
that is good, or at least better than a life with an
imaginable different content. Some guy working at a
steady buy low-wage job, who struggles to provide his
family with a little more than the basic necessities of
life, can think that his life is good compared with
someone who is homeless and can't keep his family
together for whatever reason. A rich person can think
his life is terrific compared to both of those other
two. But it is the *content* that is being compared,
not life per se.
Life per se isn't good; it's either the content, or the
prospect that the content will improve, that people
think of as good.
|
| |
|
| | 89 Comments |
|
|
Author: Leif Erikson's Smarter BrotherLeif Erikson's Smarter Brother Date: Oct 2, 2007 12:07
On Oct 1, 10:30 pm, Rudy Canoza excite.com> wrote:> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
How do you know that? Please EXPLAIN your reasoning.
>
> Life per se isn't good. It is the *content* of a life
> that is good, or at least better than a life with an
> imaginable different content. Some guy working at a
> steady buy low-wage job, who struggles to provide his
> family with a little more than the basic necessities of
> life, can think that his life is good compared with
> someone who is homeless and can't keep his family
> together for whatever reason. A rich person can think
> his life is terrific compared to both of those other
> two. But it is the *content* that is being compared,
> not life per se.
Your "content" I wouldn't wish on anyone.
|
| Show full article (1.12Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Oct 2, 2007 12:18
Leif Erikson's Smarter Brother wrote:
> On Oct 1, 10:30 pm, Rudy Canoza excite.com> wrote:>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>
>
> How do you know that? Please EXPLAIN your reasoning.
He knows it because there is no evidence or coherent reasoning
that can show otherwise.
Things that don't exist:
Rocking chairs floating in the rings of Saturn.
Entities that were never conceived.
Your common sense.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: RonRon Date: Oct 2, 2007 12:27
On Oct 2, 12:18 pm, Dutch email.com> wrote:> Leif Erikson's Smarter Brother wrote:
>
>> On Oct 1, 10:30 pm, Rudy Canoza excite.com> wrote:>>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>
>> How do you know that? Please EXPLAIN your reasoning.
>
> He knows it because there is no evidence or coherent reasoning
> that can show otherwise.
The evidence that there is "something else" is all around us.
The earth, everything on it and in it and the entire universe are
witness and evidence of Intelligent Creation.(Rudy/Dutch being the
exception)
|
| Show full article (0.85Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Oct 2, 2007 12:31
Ron wrote:
> On Oct 2, 12:18 pm, Dutch email.com> wrote:>> Leif Erikson's Smarter Brother wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 1, 10:30 pm, Rudy Canoza excite.com> wrote:>>>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>>>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>>>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>>> How do you know that? Please EXPLAIN your reasoning.
>> He knows it because there is no evidence or coherent reasoning
>> that can show otherwise.
>
>
> The evidence that there is "something else" is all around us.
Don't change the subject, we're talking about life being a
"benefit" or not.
> The earth, everything on it and in it and the entire universe are
> witness and evidence of Intelligent Creation.(Rudy/Dutch being the
> exception)
|
| Show full article (1.01Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Malrassic ParkMalrassic Park Date: Oct 2, 2007 14:39
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:30:01 -0700, Rudy Canoza
excite.com> wrote:
>Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>
>Life per se isn't good. It is the *content*...
|
| Show full article (1.09Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Oct 2, 2007 16:03
Malrassic Park wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:30:01 -0700, Rudy Canoza
> excite.com> wrote:
> >> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>>
>> Life per se isn't good. It is the *content* of a life
>> that is good, or at least better than a life with an
>> imaginable different content. Some guy working at a
>> steady buy low-wage job, who struggles to provide his
>> family with a little more than the basic necessities of
>> life, can think that his life is good compared with
>> someone who is homeless and can't keep his family
>> together for whatever reason. A rich person can think
>> his life is terrific compared to both of those other
>> two. But it is the *content* that is being compared,
>> not life per se.
>> ...
|
| Show full article (1.17Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Malrassic ParkMalrassic Park Date: Oct 2, 2007 17:59
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:03:48 GMT, Dutch email.com> wrote:
>Malrassic Park wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:30:01 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>> excite.com> wrote:
>> >>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>>> you never had been born...
|
| Show full article (1.35Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: -Phil Clemence-Phil Clemence Date: Oct 2, 2007 20:39
"Malrassic Park" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u2t5g31k4856m4kj4er6pckbqha0n95lv0@4ax.com...> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:03:48 GMT, Dutch email.com> wrote:
>>>Malrassic Park wrote:
>>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:30:01 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>>> excite.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>>>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>>>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>>>>
>>>> Life per se isn't good. It is the *content* of a life
>>>> that is good, or at least better than a life with an
>>>> imaginable different content. Some guy working at a
>>>> steady buy low-wage job, who struggles to provide his
>>>> family with a little more than the basic necessities of
>>>> life, can think that his life is good compared with
>>>> someone who is homeless and can't keep his family
>>>> together for whatever reason. A rich person can think ...
|
| Show full article (2.12Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Oct 2, 2007 21:46
Malrassic Park wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:03:48 GMT, Dutch email.com> wrote:
> >> Malrassic Park wrote:
>>> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:30:01 -0700, Rudy Canoza
>>> excite.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Life per se isn't "good", because that implies that if
>>>> you never had been born, you'd be in a "bad" state, but
>>>> clearly you wouldn't be in any state at all.
>>>>
>>>> Life per se isn't good. It is the *content* of a life
>>>> that is good, or at least better than a life with an
>>>> imaginable different content. Some guy working at a
>>>> steady buy low-wage job, who struggles to provide his
>>>> family with a little more than the basic necessities of
>>>> life, can think that his life is good compared with
>>>> someone who is homeless and can't keep his family
>>>> together for whatever reason. A rich person can think
>>>> his life is terrific compared to both of those other ...
|
| Show full article (1.72Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
