[pinkfab]

Originally Posted by Kitsune17

What eally gets me about the Bible is this; if its the WORD OF GOD, books shouldn't have been taken out of it; Judas and Mary both had a book and it was removed a LONG time ago. I don't remember the exact year, but That just makes it hard for me to believe in Christianitly; I don't in fact; I'm Pagan. Bu my mom makes me go to church. It's really hard to mantain your own beliefs when your literally suround by a society that is like a bunch of sheep. You get pushed along; I have done anything my religion for a long time and I feel bad about it, so I got out of the swing of doing it; now I'm agnostic, I think(atheisst and Agnostic always confuse me,) Does anyone know the diference and can enlighten me?

Kit-chan

Atheism, as i read in wiki, its an explicit position, can be either the affirmation of the nonexistence of gods,or the rejection of theism. It is also defined more broadly as synonymous with any form of nontheism, including the simple absence of belief in deities or divinities..atheism is also called a godless religion while on the other hand, agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims, particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of God, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality..

i don't understand this much coz im a catholic but im still open-minded & curious to what other religions claim..

[yasiru89]

Member List

1. Tommy12345
2. Yukitake
3. Amythist
4. snail13579
5. xxcutepunk25xx
6. cowtopia
7. ladyofdestiny
8. TheRandomChocolate
9. Dylan Wolf
10. jthm
11. AlyssDwyn
12. xshadows-r-nothingx
13. LadyEmi
14. Zane
15. Mitsuki-pyon
16. Sailor Hinata
17. Danue
18. yasiru89
19. hatyou
20. ZERO PHOENIX
21. Ax-taichou
22. yellowyell
23. ShojoLuver
24. neji sama
25. TrisakAminawn
26. Kay-c
27. kaye-chan
28. dark_9tails
29. AzurePein
30. dylansmom
31. gody04
32. Saotome Yoshimi
33. col18
34. HitoriMisaki
35. Kitsune17
36. Kage2013
37. Striped_Scarlet
38. pink007fabulous
39. banoffeedreams08
40. Azur3Sil3nt
41. mangaman1890
42. paradis3
43. dagger94
44. Imamaru_Kazuo
45. Sarah Rose
46. ILoveUchihaSasuke
47. Cappy1985
48. Videogamerkm
49. Aura
50. yellow flash yondaime
51. theBLOO
52. Kugayo Rokudo
53. kasumi_yyh07
54. MS_Yumiko
55. shojohime02
56. ncascarolina
57. Menotyou
58. areem
59. adrianalucero
60. Black Goddess
61. x---loveless
62. Kerophile.
63. gordez
64. gingerbreadtree
65. p1e99y
66. LeftoverNoodles
67. Mike-LP
68. Kenji-soto
69. jiggyboi
70. angel1725
71. The Turin
72. idioticsmile
73. Wirerose
74. kevin111092
75. Doll-Gun
76. MoonFyre12
77. wolffy7
78. lunarshadow89
79. HeatoN
80. Pheonix Kamisama
81. Shichi-san
82. SlipOut
83. Electro Drift
84. momicchi



Please PM me if I've accidentally overlooked your membership requests!

[col18]

im looking forward to posting here when i get nuf time..

[pinkfab]

Originally Posted by col18

im looking forward to posting here when i get nuf time..

sure col! you can post here anytime!!!

@ yasiru, thanks for the new update!!!

[yasiru89]

Originally Posted by Tommy12345

Ok, I have the member list update once in the order posted It seems my first semester will be more difficult then I thought so I will be focused on my affairs here. With this I believe I am no longer needed as the leader of this club and will be passing leadership onto yasiru89 who has more time to commit to the club I will post as a member if I can when I have more time but he is now the official leader. I guess I will talk to you guys later!

Yess... yess... bow down minions to your supreme overlord!!

Nah, just kidding- this seems a lot of work, and Tommy makes it look like I'm jobless!
But I guess there's some truth in that, so no harm done!

Hope to see you in more convenient times then!

Originally Posted by yellowyell

Philosophy in general, i think is best described in poetry. any poetry. because philosophy is trying to discover truths about our universe (to me at least) and poetry always comes to a truth. somehow. so for Philosophy i would read the works of Sappho in the original Latn and Greek texts and th works of Lucretius translated by John Dryden.

Truly, this is a good observation. Much the same is true of mathematics, and I do believe Russel put it in the same way with regards to mathematics and poetry!

However, it need be kept in mind that the very thing that seperates mathematics from poetry also applies here- that which is 'cold and austere'; a sense of reason!
Hence, as emotionally appealing as a poem is it lacks the rigour to be quite as penetrating as a philosophical investigation can be!

Originally Posted by pink007fabulous

uhm... how about sophie's world by Jostein Gaarder.. it's all complete package! try to find this book & read it..

uhm.. have you read dan brown's novels like the da vinci code & angels & demons??? they're great too!



yep!!! glad to be here!

aww.. too bad for you.. uhm.. what's the quantum theory btw??

wow!!! ur the new leader now!!! congratssss

Originally Posted by pink007fabulous

uhmmm tommy.. r u still there??? i just wanna inform you that you mispelled my name.. its pink007fabulous... not 008... uhm but maybe it's yasiru's job now to edit it ryt?

yasiru??? can you please update it again???

(smilies edited out due to space considerations...)

Thanks! and as you might've seen, I made a new post for the member list and had your name corrected. As for Tommy's initial post, you'll have to wait a while for that to be sorted out (seeing as I can't edit his posts and you know his situation)! Sorry...

Of quantum theory, its basically physics at really small scales, where particles behave as if they'd had a shot of acid! ha ha
I hope to have a topic on this later!

And the Dan Brown books, I'd have said this in the theology discussion but it slipped my mind; but I see three possibilities here;

a) The church is too orthodox to even cash in on the controversial
b) Vatican policy may be dictated by monkeys who speak Italian
c) The Church is actually funding/supporting Dan Brown in writing these books but keeping clear of it publicly!

Though a) is most likely, I put in b) and c) there (apart from for just dramatic effect) to highlight the fact that Angels and Demons as well as The Da Vinci Code, do more to reiterate faith and glorify the church than it ever does in offence of these!
In Angels and Demons particularly, the church comes off as a reformed good guy (much like the atypical drifter hero in a movie!), trying to make up for the inquisition, the crusades, et al. (but being constantly picked on because of these deeds of the past) and having a markedly justice prevailing political system!

The Da Vinci Code, then establishes a more personal deity with its Jesus theories (or rather 'histories') and glorifies that aspect while portraying the church as a 'victim' of sorts, being unable to escape orthodoxy!

In a way, these portrayals are much more fanciful of the author than the activities of the secret cults ever are!

Originally Posted by Kitsune17

I've read the Da Vinci Code...well am reading it actually. I'm still in the beginning, sadly; I've been taking alot of really difficult courses, so it's hard to read nowadays

Hobbs...he was the one who was in favor of absolute rule, right? I'd like to think we've grown since then, but at the time, I'd say his idea was very well thought out. There were all kinds of problems back then!

Kit-chan

I can appreciate how difficult it is to read a book with impending work- I had to leave reading Dune for a while now...

I wouldn't say we've 'grown', indeed there's no real concept of the times here despite how we might be inclined to feel! After Hobbes', John Locke proposed a formulation using similar methodology but very different proposals; and to me, it sounds like an ideal precursor to a democracy (which one might agree retains some 'modern' flavour); but even this seemingly degenerates to a Hobbesian case in a state of nature!

Originally Posted by banoffeedreams

May I join, please?

Philosophy is my meedle name!... lol

Of course, your number is 39!

Originally Posted by gody04

The statement of that guy is just totally wrong. Yes in the nature of the human you need to protect yourself from other. But by attacking everyone that could be a treat, you just make everyone hate and, by consequence, make them actually attack you for real, and in number and at a moment you will less expect it.


Attack when you need to defend yourself or when you know for sure that person is hope to no good or when that person hurt someone you care about.

Attacking just because of the maybe in this world is totally ridiculous. By doing that you just prove you are a babaric idiot who cannot do anything except hurt other.

Of course it could give you total power. And total loneliness. And total hate. SO that total power is just not worth it.

What do you think about that statement?

Actually, his precent to strike first puts you in a disposition to fight should a situation arise rather than actually being required to indiscriminately attack! As for the other person, this being a state of nature, neither of us knows the others mindset even arbitrarily (no laws means there's nothing to even guage by) so for our own sake, its most reasonable to be ready to strike first and not trust the other (and the same thought applies to the other about you)!

And since this applies to everyone, no reasonable person would associate 'hate' in the matter; since the reasonable thing to do is aim for one's own self-preservation! As for loneliness, that may certainly become an issue; but again, this being an unruly state of nature, the main idea is to stay alive. Pleasures such as companionship are too risky to put survival on the line for!


Azur3Sil3nt- should I put you down as a member? We'd be happy to have you!

Kitsune17- I think agnosticism is, to use a ahem.. 'technical' term- without balls. ha ha
Agnostics are just happy to not know; and while this may be the most prudent approach, it takes something greater to believe (whatever it may be- God or not God).

[col18]

.oh nice!
so yasiru, ur the new leader now, isee..

[yasiru89]

Originally Posted by col18

.oh nice!
so yasiru, ur the new leader now, isee..

Oui! Hence the commemorative long-ass post! XD

[col18]

Originally Posted by yasiru89

Oui! Hence the commemorative long-ass post! XD

LOL!..i will check the topic here as soon as i buy the nuf time to do so!
btw, i read ur post asking God of Pain abt me, cuz u thought i was a guy!
why so?
nwys..he thought so too at first!
but hey, do i sound like a fangirl of Sasuke?..cuz he teases me abt bein one. tho he always do.
but i wanna know..and good luck here!

btw, what's ur recent topic here?

[yasiru89]

Originally Posted by col18

LOL!..i will check the topic here as soon as i buy the nuf time to do so!
btw, i read ur post asking God of Pain abt me, cuz u thought i was a guy!
why so?
nwys..he thought so too at first!
but hey, do i sound like a fangirl of Sasuke?..cuz he teases me abt bein one. tho he always do.
but i wanna know..and good luck here!

btw, what's ur recent topic here?

No particular reason for the confusion, sorry about that anyway? heh heh

I think you're less of of a fangirl for Sasuke than God of Pain is a fanboy of Pein! ha ha

Here's what we're talking about right now.

I'm just interested to know what everyone thinks about Hobbes and his case for absolute rule!

To continue with it,

Hobbes says that the only way to avoid such a state of nature, which as he puts it would be chaotic, is for everyone to give up their natural right to all things and endow a third party with this absolute power (so long as it facilitates survival of course) and have this third party rule over them!

Hobbes would go for an individual as this third party, probably because of his own political inclinations and the simple fact that a bunch of people instead of one who have absolute power and freedom will again be in a state of nature with each other.

So what do you say to this?

[dark_9tails]

hi!!....wow!!...yasiru, u are the new leader??...congrats!!......

topic---> i don't really understand what Hobbes is saying....he said that we should strike first, right?....but what if millions of people saw his speech saying that 'i should always strike first'??...doesn't that mean that the millions of people will strike at the same time??.....very confusing....