Profile image

Meaning of love
My girlfriend came tonight. She's now sleeping beside me.What is the meaning of love for lovers who can only see once in two weeks?I think it's scarce.

Price of pride

When I married her, I thought she was a star of hope in my life. I persuade her to marry me proposing many fabulous words to her.
It is no wonder if she thought she would be my perpetual or life long partner. She agreed to marry me. One million dollars seem to be considerable money. Yes, but I'm not a salaried man. I'm a writer. This money is a compensation for the weight of responsibility I owe to her. I bought her life. I couldn't pay her compensating my life. Instead one million dollars. Rather I'm glad to her submitting this amount of money. This is a price of my responsibility. Not cheap, but not expensive at all.
Three people, one is judge and the other two will be chosen among private citizen, will see her and me each. They will decide whether her claim or my sue are appropriate corresponding to worldly standard.
This money is a price of my pride, I'd rather appreciate that.

Misalliance

Three women have passed through my life after I started living alone. First one was 5 years senior to me and she didn't want me to marry her. She was very rich - her asset was 14 million dollars. She told me when I proposed her that whether there's any benefit from our marriage. It might have been just out of the question for her to marry me -it would have been misalliance so to speak.

Sue for divorce

I married a woman in October, 1995 and at the same time we started living together. We lived together till January, 1998. So we lived together for two years and four months.
It is already 11 years and 5 months since we separated. Three women have passed through during these years. I am now in love with a woman whom I knew in April, 2006. We are in love for three years till now.
I asked my legal wife to divorce me. She said it's OK on conditions that I pay her alimony $1,000,000 and living expense $2,000 per month.
I'm glad she agreed to divorce me. I sued the issue in court to settle the money I ought to pay and get a document paper for it.
I haven't slept with my wife for more than eleven years of course. Is she still my wife only because we are married?
In relevant information, we have no kids.

Meaning of Redemption

Hello good evening Br **..

Long time no see. How are you?

I need your opinion.


I was thinking overnight as to why Jehovah's Witnesses can eat pork but cannot get one of medical procedures -blood transfusion.

I thought about the meaning of Jesus's last word -wine represents his blood, and the meaning of Redemption, prohibition under Mosaic law and their likely release under New Covenant.

Religious freedom is more important than life itself. If Jehovah's Witnesses say no to transfusions we all have to pay deepest respect to their decision no matter what the basis of their decision might be. It is their solemn, own freedom. Freedom of faith, which is a right guaranteed by Constitutions.

So I leave it to them. And here's my thought.

No meat has been banned under New Testament. Likewise in my opinion, blood is now OK for humans to make the most of from every aspects as much as we can.

Let' s think about the symbolic meaning of Redemption. This idea is very unique in Christianity. Blood of humans from Adam had been made unclean by original sin, yet Jesus redeemed its sin in his death on the torture stake. So humans are now eligible to get access to eternal life if they really repent.

Blood was originally used in pagan traditions in ancient times and of course in modern times contaminated blood causes many fatal diseases such as AIDS, hepatitis.

However once it is used and applied in completely sterile states, transfusion has been saving tens of precious lives and many other blood related products such as plasma, globulin have been a key to cure for many diseases. Then all of a sudden we understand why Jesus compared wine to his blood.

Then we also agree with the claim that blood stands for life made by Jehovah's Witnesses.

Doctor prescribed immunoglobulin when I was likely to suffer from tetanus three years ago, which is made of blood.

I know my idea is over-interpretation of the meaning of Redemption, but I believe scientific truth and religious belief go with in the long run.


My wishes,

Mer

Water & oil

OK, the economy is now invading my dreams"
1 Comment -
document.write("\x3ca onclick\x3d\x22COMMENT_PAGE.togglePostBody(); try{this.blur();}catch(e){}; return false\x22 id\x3d\x22showOrHidePost\x22 href\x3d\x22javascript:void(0);\x22\x3e\x3c/a\x3e\n");
Hide Original Post
And the nightmare of a response is- fraud will happen until draconian punishment is applied to stop it.
posted by Ted Seeber at 10:56 AM on Apr 22, 2009

Eiko Onoda said...
Fraud is hard to prove. You'd better not have religious or moral obligation in market and no one have it.
April 23, 2009 2:39 AM

Rewarded means do good

Ted Seeber said...
Yes, but we mustn't do evil, because it restricts itself -the freedom to do evil. As long as we do good, we keep on having two freedoms -freedom to do good or evil. Therefore we need to do good.Not always true, look at the evil done during the credit crisis in the United States- the majority of those doing the evil have actually been *rewarded* for the behavior.
April 21, 2009 3:20 PM
Eiko Onoda said...
Let's try to think about the matter from slightly different point of view.Some ordinary people sometimes do evil out of the feeling he has a right to do evil, observing many others do the same thing. For example, ignoring traffic signal, speed limit, or tax evasion, etc. People sometimes do evil as these. They have been rewarded from those acts. In this case we notice law is not an absolute rule that regulates what is right or wrong. People are actually doing the right thing by violating the written code. It is not evil what people did in the credit crisis and rewarded from that. Because they thought it a right - entitlement to do something.Really bad people do evil not from the feeling of entitlement, but an obligation. Very different.
April 23, 2009 1:33 AM

Season of cherry blossoms (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.03.31 18:30 (#27399521) Homepage Journal
Hello, Johndiii..
I sent a couple of photos of cherry blossoms. Very blur. Forgive.. I'm going to move back to Fukuoka on 11th of April. I spent one year and three months in Kokura.
I left this hometown at age 20 and my homecoming was for the first time in 27 years.
I don't come back here any more.
Poems are cry of your soul. Nice magic of words!!
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:I'm to the point (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.03.31 4:32 (#27392389) Homepage Journal
>The US, seen as a federation of states, is a very effective system at keeping inter-state disagreements in the political realm, and not falling into the military's domain.
Agreed.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

In and out

mercedo wrote today at 6:43 AM
I often feel 'in' and 'out' are a relative matter. For me Japan is a big asylum for those who need protection from outside the world. So I am 'outside the asylum'. As a matter of fact it's true that Japan forms a language island.As the inlets of Langerhans it produces insulin, which is probably bitter. Many people believe they live inside the asylum. A kind of feeling they live outside the asylum is strange, used to be often called 'estrangement'. I live inside the asylum to keep myself sane. Internet community is for me an asylum. 'Outside the asylum' is something that expresses some impossibility from its own. I guess autistic people might not equip this natural ventilation in their mind.I didn't know as to the novel. I found lots of entry other than his in search engine, so I thought the title is from someone else.

Pro-life

Eiko Onoda said...
For me, sealess garment of life means different. Individual life is just a phenomenon of life in general.Current prosperity of humans stands on tens of thousands of corpse.That said, I'm not saying individual life means little, but I'm opposed to the idea individual life means everything. In the case of fetus, they are still a part of their mother's body. Socially speaking their life starts after their birth, not conception. Many people live from their birth to his death. They are forgotten after they disappeared. Some genius live only posthumously though they are forgotten while they are alive. Real life might start after their death in secular reasons. This is a real pro-life.
March 11, 2009 5:04 AM

Eiko Onoda said...
You are just ordinary. Social networking is a tool for incompetant people who can't stand being independent. They rely too much on interdependent, anyway they are dependent on each other. Only those who feel anxiety and have not enough confident get together and make a group.
March 11, 2009 3:42 AM

Re:There are no Words (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.03.10 21:24 (#27132985) Homepage Journal
>words are a broken medium for communication.
This clause beautifully expresses the essence of words.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

A gift from heaven

Re:We missed our snow! (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.03.05 21:02 (#27075787) Homepage Journal
In my opinion snowfall at its marginal area is most beautiful on earth.
If you live between latitude 34 to 35 degrees area of the northern Georgia, you must have several -three or four snowfall days in a year. I live slightly below than latitude 34 degrees so we have a few -two or three snowfall days.
Tokyo is located at latitude 35.5 so they have more snowfall days, but anyway less than a week.
One of the cities located at latitude 33 usually doesn't have any snowfall.
The city located at latitude 37 always has trouble of heavy snowfall evey winter. For them snow is not an objective of nostalgia, but simply it's something that has them feel fear to nature.
Snow is a miracle humans ever had. Let's keep beautiful snow, the symmetric beauty of its crystal suggests it's one of the most beautiful gifts from heaven as such.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
Reply to This
Parent

Re: Chesterton (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.18 5:32 (#26892885) Homepage Journal
In late 18th century when Admiral Perry comes to Japan with the four Black ship the population of the United States and Japan was almost the same. Just twenty years ago the US was two times as populous as Japan. Now population of US is over three hundred million, exceeding Japan almost three times.
The average number of kids in a family in Japan is one point something, by the year 2055 the populatin of Japan will be reduced to 89 hundred million accrding to a survey.
Culture without universality never prevails.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Chesterton

ii (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.15 3:42 (#26857389) Homepage Journal
>Chesterton's system solves this problem rather neatly- only information is traded between communities, and the principle of subsidarity requires the factory be as close to the end consumer as possible, eliminating the need for shipping.
This is also a core of your thought.
Thirty years ago almost all information was monopolised in either Tokyo or Kansai region in Japan, so we were obliged to think about learning in either of the two regions. Because we couldn't obtain enough books in local area.
I started to consider moving to the US to learn more when I was the third grade at the University. Because I thought it was hard to acquire surroundings surrounded only by international common language. So I went to the US. About a year I enjoyed its ambience fully.
How about now? Do I have to go to Tokyo to obtain enough informatin? No. I can get it through the net. Do I have to go to the US to fully enjoy the flood of information? No. I can get it through the net.
Now the time has changed from the age of centralised, monopolised system to decentralised, multilateral world where we can find as many hubs of information and knowledge as possible.
I first saw the name Chesterton in a dialog between you and Mike Hawk and got curious since then.
Our age has come closer to his ideal more and more.

--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Irrational world (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.15 3:13 (#26857111) Homepage Journal
Irrationality is a feature of ordinary people. We can find rational people mainly in a mental hospital, where there are people who think rationality ought to control the world.
Rationality never controls the world. That is a reality we all ought to live along.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Stimulate economy (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.14 1:16 (#26844879) Homepage Journal
These two suggestions are a good idea. One helps middle class households and the other helps create government owned companies. Many companies were first created by government, then later they were sold to private sectors in marvellously low prices. In recession things will be reverse. I suggest 700 billion dollars be used for every household. This is going to be much more direct way to stimulate economy, which is in a word to make the flow of money in society. Recession or depression means money stays in some place..
>the depression doesn't feel half as bad if you have a job.
I myself want to work at least 40 hours in a week. Unless doing so, I would feel as if I were under a potential umemployment.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Public enterprises (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.13 23:42 (#26843253) Homepage Journal
>However, there's still a good reason to oppose pork: The jobs the federal government creates
In well-developed countries, public enterprises contain a lot of needless investment. Because infrastructure was already well-built so there's scarce place to dig up more.
In the case of U.S., however, there's a lot of hinterland to develop. I think it works well if done under well-prepared plans by a superior leader.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

The Questions of King Milinda (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.13 22:42 (#26842335) Homepage Journal
>Happiness can be found when expectation dies.
This is similar to Zen Buddhist world view and also I recall the word of Diogenes - he wanted only a little bit more sunshine. I'm not so sure whether the words found in the Questions of King Milinda.
A kind of religion seeks no worldly profit. This form is indeed an original figure religions ought to be.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Manifest Destiny (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.02.13 22:07 (#26841937) Homepage Journal
>it is those joys that we term the profits of liberty.
Profound words..
In the past oftentimes war had become the big trigger to more liberated stage of human life. But we didn't have to worry about total elimination of humankind in even all out war. Time has changed and now we need to use only human wisdom in order to liberate human nature more and more, without experiencing a war.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Permission or action (Score:1)
by zogger (617870) on 2009.01.18 7:28 (#26500707) Homepage Journal
Although God gave permission, it isn't clear when the action of humans eating meat again started, or how extensive it was. With the command to be good stewards of the planet, they could have held back for some time until the numbers reached a sustainable level.
Reply to This
Re:Permission or action (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.01.18 9:59 (#26501955) Homepage Journal
Thanks! Zog!! I had no idea how to reply to his question. I sent him a letter as follows.
Hi, ..
I had thought about it for a while...My interpretation is secular one, allow me to express it!
I think people wouldn't start eating meat until it reached a sustainable numbers. Today we don't normally eat meat as a result of casual hunting, but through domestication. Animal meat is served through planned slaughtering from a stored pool of livestock evading extinction of precious source of protein.
The point is God gave us permission to make the most of animal as the source of nutrition, so we have to manage the privilege carefully enough.
My reply was not secular!
Mer
Today we take it for granted that we eat animal meat in our daily dietary, but there's a history for everything.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
Reply to This
Parent

Re:"Life is long" (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.01.17 21:53 (#26496097) Homepage Journal
Still three years to come till age half century.
20 years old.. that was a turning point in my life. The first twenty years is as good as the years for the rest of my life after 20 years old. I had felt as if I did almost everything in my minor days what I would do after twenty years old.
That does not mean I had sex, drunk, and smoked. Or rather I had never done these as adults usually do. On the contrary I hadn't done almost anything that ordinary youngsters usually do. I didn't watch TV from age 12 till 25, etc. The reason I felt I lived almost all my life in my minors is due to my psychological factors. There's scarce meaning in the length of life. What we did matters a lot more.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Happy are those

Re:yep (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.01.12 5:12 (#26409247) Homepage Journal
In a sense all our life is illusory. Happy are those who are able to hold illusions in their life.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Illusion

Re:Give? Deprive? (Score:1)
by Mer_panacea (1381133) on 2009.01.11 13:49 (#26405105) Homepage Journal
>You speak of subjective emotions connected to specific points in time.
Probably, so.
Mrs and Mr Mer have been in love for many years, I have stopped seeking for another love like so many years as well. If I lost her or if she said goodbye to me for unknown reasons, I'm sure I will be at a loss so sometimes I've got half a mind that love has been giving me an illusion -this happiness lasts for good, and will deprive me of everything if I rely on it too much.
As to Tillich's word, >Mankind is existentially estranged from the essential goodness of creation in God's image.
A woman was created from a man's rib, so we men seek for a woman to reclaim. Mankind is born to be perfect, but it is estranged because of the original sin they made. I understand these idea stand for Christian world view. But from scientific viewpoint all lives are originally only female and my viewpoint is humans are perfect because they made a mistake properly.
>essentially singular, but existentially plural.
Existence is prior to being.. Existentialism had been a fashion for a while after the war and also it was hard to understand. There were a number of atheistic existentialists as well as theistic ones, but their point was common - subjective judgement matters more than objective ones. I understand the phrase 'esentially singular, but existentially plural' means people are basically alone but they are happy when they are together in love.

--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Home
Notes
Blog
Photos
Reviews
Links
The Real Meaning of 'Gott ist tot'
Jul 16, '07 1:14 AMby Mer for group nietzschean
Until a few days ago I had taken it for granted for a long time that Nietzsche denied the existence of God by declaring Gott ist tot or God is dead. But if God were almighty, he could resurrect himself. If Jesus were God before he arrives on the Earth, he or God experienced human's inevitable destiny through the crucification.
If so, the real meaning of Gott ist tot is different from what I thought. God experienced death because he wanted to give his best creature, that is all humans, an eternal life in Eucharist and wanted to share the same suffering all humans once had to experience, that is death -sharing in other words, Communion.
So real meaning of Gott ist tot is God experienced death through which he was able to give us an eternal life and also share the same suffering. The real meaning of faith was giving and sharing.
God is dead was an ultimate expression of God cares for you.
Tags: gott ist tot, eucharist, communion
Prev: Gustav Klimt Next: Nietzsche speaks.....
edit
reply share
6 CommentsChronologicalReverseThreaded


reply
blindhaed wrote on Jul 22, '07
that's a peculiar interpretation that you give here. i always took "God is dead" as "People dont believe in the existence of God anymore".

edit reply
mercedo wrote on Jul 23, '07
That's why I said real meaning of it. Real meaning is always hidden. We need to explore.

reply
raflaydo wrote on Dec 8, '07
Another way by which we can understand this statement is by considering the need to re-interpret God in our post-modern times. If we are to utilize the "frozen" God that theologians and philosophers of the past used, then God in fact may be a losing proposition. I look at this Nietzschean statement as a challenge for us to look at God in perspectives different from the traditional way we look at Him/Her.

edit reply
mercedo wrote on Dec 11, '07
Nice refreshing viewpoint.

reply
lecody2001 wrote on Oct 30
Given Nietzsche's superman concept I should think that the meaning of Gott ist tot is that with regards to morals, one can no longer turn to God or the church as one's moral compass. It is my belief that Nietzsche was reacting to Darwin's theory of evolution and that man was on his own to create his own ethics and morals to live by and those that were successful at this endeavor were the Supermen and or women and have risen above the rest of mankind that still clung to God and the Church for everything.God, should such a being exist, would not roll over and die just because some man declared him to be dead, but man can disregard God's existence when it comes to creating the rules under which we chose to live.

edit reply
mercedo wrote today at 7:18 PM
Thanks. Your idea is revolutionary new in that you noticed it has something to do with a theory of evolution by Darwin. His idea is as a kaleidoscope of thought. Shall we enjoy reading his again?

mercedo wrote today at 7:18 PM
Thanks. Your idea is revolutionary new in that you noticed it has something to do with a theory of evolution by Darwin. His idea is as a kaleidoscope of thought. Shall we enjoy reading his again?

Hello to Sidotti
2008.09.05 0:29

The name of Sidotti 1668 -1714 appears in Japan's history. In 1708 he came over here from Italy via Manila. He was a jesuit missionary. He was arrested soon after he landed in Yakusima, one of the sourthern islands in Japan. Then he sent to Nagasaki, and finally Edo. He must have been in custody untill his death under the house arrest in Edo.
I thought the house owner must be a descendant from this Sidotti when I found a nameplate near Fukuoka international airport. It is very rare to find the name plate of Chinese characterised 'Sidotti' in any household in Japan. But pondering the fact that he had been in custody throughout his life in Japan, the house owner must be an immigrant from other Sidotti family.
It was already 8 years ago when I found the plate, I for unknown reasons recall it.
I might have been feeling a strong alienation in my job.

Inside our imagination

~mercedo 2 seconds ago
We don't usually see a secretary sitting without wearing a skirt like this picture.But inside our imagination she is always sitting like this way.--Ancient Greek Philosophers - 18c Enlightenment Thinkers - deviantART Users

Secretary? by ~MightyMightyTweed

Re:Five days off (Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2008.08.14 17:19 (#24595993) Homepage Journal
Last year I managed to get three days off, so this year I can take a rest twice as long as last year's. I hadn't taken a vacation of more than three days before last year. Japanese work still too long. But they produce less than European or American. Yesterday I went to the beach, then got tanned very strongly. I had internet access for a couple of hours. Today I had internet access and went shopping. Tomorrow I go to the beach. The day after tomorrow I.. I am likely to spend these six days only for going to the beach, going shopping, and having internet access.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:If you understand their form of Islam(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.29 3:43 (#20024903) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.29 3:02)
There are many different religions who hold only one God. Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism, YHWH in Judaism, Lord in Christianity, Zeus in Catholicism. So do you think those only one absolute Gods are the same but just the names are different or are they all different Gods each other?
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Actually(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.27 1:21 (#19998107) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.25 5:24)
Forgive is for give and forget is for get.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Nature makes the truth(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.23 2:16 (#19946851) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Your proposition contradicts itself since man is a part of nature. This dichotomy of man and nature has been deeply rooted in Western cultures. Anyway if so -nature makes the truth, God in your standard is very closer to nature that doesn't have intenstion.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Ther are many nice and useful parts(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 5:06 (#19918833) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
You recommend we should love women in every details she has and that's simply what I've been doing.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

ullangoo wrote today at 1:16 AMAs I said above: "I have a headache" can't be verified by others. Still all logicians agree that the statement is either true or false - ordinary common sense says the same. I see no reason to claim otherwise.

ullangoo wrote today at 3:54 AMThere are what I call the personal truths. E.g. meditation may be the right thing for you but wrong for me. Therefore, "meditation is the right thing" is a meaningless statement - "right thing" is unqualified and undefined. The majority may hold that it is the right thing - but it could still be wrong for me. We can't take a vote on truths whether they are personal/subjective or objective.


ullangoo wrote today at 4:04 AMThe "self-evident truths" of your declaration are opinions. They are ethical statements. Now, there MAY be an ethical system that is true in the absolute sense - I won't rule it out - but if there is, we don't know how to identify it (yet). We have to live with the existence of several and hopefully learn tolerance.

What is 'Truth' ?
2007.07.18 3:23

Truth includes things that have already verified. Truth doesn't include things that have not verified yet. Does truth include things that cannot verify? Some people insist that 'God is almighty, it's truth.'
List all Journal entries
What is 'Truth' ? I am willing to help test Slashdot's New Discussion System.
What is 'Truth' ? Preferences Top 11 comments Search Discussion
Display OptionsThreshold: -1: 11 comments 0: 10 comments 1: 9 comments 2: 5 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"Truth"?(Score:1, Flamebait)
by johndiii (229824) * <.moc.tsolima. .ta. .iiidnhoj.> on 2007.07.18 5:03 (#19892077) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 8:54)
Truth includes things that have already verified. That is a meaningless statement. Verification is the process of determining whether or not something is true. All that you are doing is defining "truth" as those things that are known to be true. That isn't a good definition, though. "Truth" is all those things that are true, whether or not they are known as such. Your definition also might include things in "truth" that are actually not true, due to mistakes or flaws in the verification process. And it doesn't account for things that are formally undecidable, as per Gödel's incompleteness theorem (which states that any sufficiently powerful formal system contains propositions that are true but not provable within the system).
--As you wish.
[ Reply to This ]
Re:"Truth"?(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 3:28 (#19917923) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Thank you for your very useful comment. There are many things to consider in each point you made in your comment. I'll enbrace them in writing next articles.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Short answer: Yes(Score:0, Redundant)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.18 8:30 (#19894803) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
Does truth include things that cannot verify?Jondiii got it right; truth exists independently of our knowledge of it, and therefore verification isn't the point. This doesn't mean that verification isn't important, for we all want knowledge of truth.
Our lack of knowledge naturally means that we are inclined to disagree, but our disagreement doesn't change what is true; it only changes our opinion of it.
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:2)
by johndiii (229824) * <.moc.tsolima. .ta. .iiidnhoj.> on 2007.07.19 12:15 (#19910081) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 8:54)
Interesting moderation in this JE, don't you think?
--As you wish.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:1)
by Jeremiah Cornelius (137) on 2007.07.19 12:24 (#19910155) (Last Journal: 2007.07.19 23:11)
Yeah. Looks like you have a doctrinaire Christian in Mercedo's friend list. Morosoph gets knocked, and even the lengthy anonymous comment is modded down - like that matters in a JE for someone with no UID!Style is a good way to ID the ACs, tho'. I notice typographical and punctuation convention "tells" that give some regulars away. Foolish to mod such a post down - just an expression of anger.All Love,Jeremiah "secret pre-Raphaelite and Byronic romantic" Cornelius
--So I pass that on to you.Write it down, and put it in your computer, so you can forget it.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Philosophy and Religion(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.19 22:58 (#19913619) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
I am concerned with the state of debate over the internet, mostly with USians. Is philosophy to once again be minimised, even oppressed in the light of its threat to doctrinare belief?
I suppose that arguably Mer Cedo is reaching for faith, and in answering his statements about the nature of truth, we are failing to take his attempts at faithfulness seriously. Mer Cedo has stated elsewhere that he views reality as subjective, so that verificiation, consensus and belief, rather than pre-eminent existance are his stating points; to some extent, we're being cheeky with our answers that assume the objectivity of anything that deserves the title of "truth".
I've met this kind of relativism surprisingly frequently from Christians; perhaps it is in part a response to neo-darwinists and other (frequently atheistic) scientists and their fans claiming objectivity. It's much easier to carve a space for one's preferred beliefs in a relativistic space than in an environment where truth is considered to be singular, if unknown, so that relativism is a considerably more effective shield for one's faith in a hostile environment. Additionally, those who tend to look for biblical quotations for strengthening their arguments are already using thinking in a manner that is closer to the relativist than that of the scientist, or mathematician.
On top of that, there is the curious inversion of Leo Strauss's thesis in his book "Persecution and the Art of Writing", where Strauss's analysis of how thinkers obscured their thinking from the casual reader so that their work, and frequently themselves would survive, or (and the theistic side) so that their work would not be used for the persecution of philosophers despite the authour's disagreement with them. The inversion being that a "responsible" thinker is now expected to write in such a way, so as to leave the masses ignorant.
Sadly, Strauss writes in a style where he expresses forcefully what the writer that he is commenting upon is saying, so that it is easy for the careless reader to take Strauss's rendition as Strauss's view, but if you do that, you end up with contradictions between he views as he's commenting upon different writers, as if he has no mind of his own. Better to look to what he says about Thucydides regarding his commentry on the Peloponnesian war (City and Man, paperback ed. 1978, page 144):
"...the fact that a Thucylidean character expresses a given view proves that that view was known to Thucydides; it may therefore be used for completing a view stated by Thucydides himself if the former view is evidently implied in the latter view. Far from impairing Thucydides' reticence, the speeches only increase it. Since he is so reticent regarding the universals and the speeches are so rich in pithily and forcefully expressed statements regarding them, he as it were seduces the readers into taking these statements as expressing his own view. The temptation becomes almost irresistable when the speakers express views which no intelligent or decent man seems able to gainsay."That Strauss himself is so hard to read is a feature that I like about Strauss; I feel that he isn't telling me how I should think. Many people see a sinister motive in his enigmatic presentation; particularly political readers who want to know which side someone is on, rather than consider the ideas presented in their own terms. To my mind, Strauss is treating the reader as an adult. It is a shame that so many of his readers are small-minded partisans.
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Philosophy and Religion(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 4:06 (#19918193) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
I am as scientific as I have been. But what scientific means is problematic. In ancient times people believe heavy objects drop faster than light ones, the earth is flat, the earth revolves around the sun. Basically many people who learned science know those three statements are not true. But in our ordinary life those three are very correct and true. My point is that the truth changes if conditions change too. I'm not going to undermine the value of science.
I suppose that arguably Mer Cedo is reaching for faith,
I am secular, I used to be, will be so forever.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Hah!(Score:1)
by Morosoph (693565) on 2007.07.19 23:13 (#19913807) (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tim.wesson/ Last Journal: 2007.06.10 2:25)
Well I probably deserved it, mis-spelling your pseudonym as I did!
--My Amigos. Your Amigos.
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Re:Short answer: Yes(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 3:42 (#19917985) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Your statement is simply correct.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]
Truth is Absolute Reality(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on 2007.07.18 15:49 (#19897819)
Truth is not mediated by the senses, the intellect, nor the psyche.The world is a veil on Truth.God is Truth."Other than God" is a ludicrous fallacy. There is only Truth, "Other than Truth" does not, by its nature as fallacy, exist.Haqq, Brahma, Tao. The names of this endless ocean are many - its essence is the Unity, not the many names given under the shadow of the apparent world.The Delphic Oracle says: "Know thyself, and thou shalt know the Cosmos."Jesus says: "the Kingdom of Heaven in within you."Saint Clement says: "He who knows himself knows God."Gautama Buddha says: "Look within. Thou art Buddha."Siddha Yoga holds: "God dwells within you as You."In the Q'ran is written: "He who knows himself knows his Lord."Seeking other than the Truth is self-deception, but Truth cannot be attained by intellectual means.
One night, Nasruddin's neighbors found him, crawling around on his hands and knees under a lamppost."What are you looking for?" they asked him."I've lost the key to my house," he replied.They all got down to help him look, but after a fruitless time of searching, one neighbor thought to ask him - just where he had lost the key in the first place?"Oh. In my house!" Nasruddin answered."Then why are you looking under the lamppost?" he was asked, impatiently.Nasruddin replied, "Well, it is dark in my house, of course!The lamp of intellect does not illuminate the house. When Diogenes as similarly asked why he carried a lamp in the broad daylight, he responded "I am looking for one that knows the truth!" The lesson of this was lost on those who have recorded the deeds of Diogenes - and his rivals branded him "cynic," meaning one who barks meaninglessly like a dog and not engaging in proper philosophical discourse. The lamp of discourse would never illuminate the abode of truth - and in misunderstanding he is even misquoted today as one looking for "an honest man."All of this is the essential teaching of Jesus, as relayed by the Secret Gospel of Thomas, destroyed by the Priestly enemies of Truth:
"Jesus said, If your leaders say to you "Look! The Kingdom is in the sky then the birds will be there before you are. If they say that the Kingdom is in the sea, then the fish will be there before you are. Rather, the Kingdom is within you and it is outside of you."(Saying 3a)"His disciples said to him: Show us the place you are, for it is essential for us to seek it. He responded: He who has ears let him hear. There is light within a man of light, and he lights up all of the world. If he is not alight there is darkness."(Saying 24)"Jesus said: When you give rise to that which is within you, what you have will save you. If you do not give rise to it, what you do not have will destroy you."(Saying 70)That "Man of Light" is the only one who can teach how to find this. Some are struck with realization, but they are unable to explain what they witness. They are rarer than proverbial hen's teeth! But the Truth is known to some in every time - they are hidden from the insincere seeker, by the same ignorance that caused Diogenes to be misunderstood, down to this very day.The Man of Light would not be accepted by ordinary seekers - he would not appear "holy" - even ridiculing many of the pieties of religion. He will have both fools and sages among his followers, and contempt for this condition hides his being from the casual seeker. Without knowing they have done so, they fail even the very first test.I guess that leaves us with Bayazid Bestami, who I will quote - like a tape recorder, accurately but not comprehending:
"I never saw any lamp shining more brilliantly than the lamp of silence."
[ Reply to This ]
Re:Truth is Absolute Reality(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.20 4:10 (#19918249) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.18 3:23)
Whoever you are thanks for posting this comment. It contains a lot of useful information.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Reply to This Parent ]

Thank you for your very useful comment. There are many things to consider in each point you made in your comment. I'll enbrace them in writing next articles.

Re:A nipple is not a sex organ(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.18 1:26 (#19888869) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.17 1:14)
Really? I didn't know that! :)
The term sex is narrowly used for pornographically, sexual act or sexual pleasure. But sex biologically means reproduction, unification of gamete and semen, further growth and feeding children of course. Sex includes feeding children in the first place in definition.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

mercedo wrote today at 12:46 AMYour reply is likely to be an optimal answer.

Re:Bollocks(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.17 0:04 (#19876423) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.16 2:34)
My asumption was as follows.
Men used to be in his mother's womb, in there he had been nourished through umbilical code. I must say he had been passive. Those who feel affectionate to hips must have a strong yearning to the state in the womb, where he was able to stay in passive protection.
But once he got out of his mother, he had to start feeding himself. Its first step is to suck the nipples of his mother. This action is based on his intention to fulfil his hunger and this is the very first step of socialisation. This action is active. Those who love bosoms are more socialised than the bottom lover, because sucking the nipples is first active action to people other than him.
Mother complex is in other words the desire to be protected by his original homebase.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:What if(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.17 0:12 (#19876529) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.16 2:34)
I remember I was particular about women's hip for a long time when still I was in minor. Time goes by, I realised hips are only for artistic appreciation. Besides hips are not sex organs, but nipples are.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:This is(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.16 3:28 (#19869233) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.16 2:34)
This was my philosophical conclusion and I was amazed to hear there was a precedent.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Obsessed

Obsessed
2007.07.14 4:15

Someone who claims something is danger more than 5 times in ten minutes talk is the very danger itself from the viewpoint of something.

Re:No(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.14 4:05 (#19851927) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.14 2:26)
God resurrected himself. I think you get the message.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Cain & Abel(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.11 1:09 (#19814323) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.10 3:19)
If they are friendly, their power adds up to more than 2. If they hate one another, one of them goes so far as to kill another one.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Hamlet?(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.11 0:58 (#19814181) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.10 3:19)
The title Hamlet refers to late King Hamlet, not his son who went mad.
Father Hamlet appeared in his son Hamlet telling he was killed by his younger brother. I think the main theme of this famous play is the overwhelming influence of Father Hamlet even after he was killed by his younger brother who also married his wife. I think Shakespeare didn't give the son of late King Hamlet a name emphasising how feeble and fragile his son's character was. Son Hamlet and Ophelia are described as they lived in a fantasy in comparison with the realistic and strong figures of Father Hamlet, his brother, his wife.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Ask Sir Richard Francis Burton...(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.10 3:23 (#19803577) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.10 3:19)
This is something like slash, slash, slash, dot dot.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Re:Ask Sir Richard Francis Burton...(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.09 1:46 (#19790335) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.08 2:11)
It is persuasive to explain the term sumsum was used like shiboleth, to differentiate his people from other people. Only those who can pronounce the word properly can get access to treasures anyway. I always perplexed in r and l sounds. Koreans pronounce t in the place of d sound, etc.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

mercedo wrote today at 2:46 AMYeah, my question is why sesame was particularly chosen in a magic word. Does sesame have special sense in Arabic world? We can just accept the expression as you pointed out if the cave was actually called Sesame, but I think it's not likely ;)

Re:This is the kind of Manichaenism
The finding of monotheism is closely related to the establishment of self. Still people believe in animistic omnipresence of gods, their identity as independent humans was ambiguous.
--
Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Witness

Re:That explains(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.06 22:53 (#19766633) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.07.06 2:37)
I have two witnesses, so I don't intend to be a witness.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Users

Users Are More Important(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.01 2:04 (#19700279) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.27 3:09)
I have an account under the same user name not only in Multuply but also in MySpace, Lastfm, etc. Let's not talk about what is Slashdot, what is Multiply, but talk about how is the main character of the users in them. The opinions of users won't change whatever the site they are.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Apocrypha

Re:Language(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.07.01 1:00 (#19699877) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.27 3:09)
I undestand all Apocrypha left were written in Koine, probably many of those were written firstly in Hebrew, but those left were only Greek translations. Those circumstances suggest one of the reasons why Apocrypha were excluded from Canon. God must direct humans to write down his words in Hebrew, but it was human who translated them into another tongue.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

God's words

Re:In general(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.25 2:39 (#19628775) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.23 16:34)
Bible has been believed to be the words of God. I think the meaning of the words of God is the books reflect the real historical events. So the Book of Judith regarded as religious novel had to be excluded from the Protestant canon. How about other cases? In short other apocryphal books must be written in Hebrew first but we are uable to find the original texts. All those that must have been translated from the original Hebrew but unable to find the original ones were excluded from the Protestant canon. Personally I feel those transactions were a bit strict, but considering the importance of the meaning of the word the Bible is the words of God, the words of God must have been unable to be just the presentation of translation at least from Luther's eyes.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Root

Re:Try Credo, the board game(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.23 2:01 (#19610305) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.22 2:02)
Thanks for the link. This is an interesting game. Christian doctrines were so devided because they were not originated from themselves but were rooted in a Jewish monotheism. Firstly adopted by Greeks, then Romans. After long period of time, those were adopted by various cultures. Many translations gave rise to many interpretations as well.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Reformation

Re:Close(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.23 1:32 (#19609865) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.22 2:02)
I examined each cases as closely as possible. There were many cases but generally those apocryphal scriptures have common characters, that are not included in Hebrew canonical scriptures, but included in Septuagint, Vulgate, many were written in 2nd to 1st BC. Generally Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox use those apocryphal Bible and Jews and Protestant don't. In short Protestant Reformation was an attempt to restore the Jewish tradition in Christianity.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Homo sapiens spiritus

Re:Creation AND Evolution(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.19 3:46 (#19554593) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.17 22:13)
You are absolutely right. Probably we are subspecies and distinctive from humans before Adam.
If we were able to be a being that is free from the restraint of physical boundary, we would be rightly called 'evolved'. Homo sapiens spiritus will be the next new species. It will need another Biblical day -one billion years though.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Unit Alteration

Unit Alteration (Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.18 2:24 (#19542015) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.17 22:13)
We learned we ought not to take the figures in Genesis as they are, some include exaggeration like the earth was created in 'one' day or Methusela lived up to nearly '1000' years old. We need to interpret them as one day is equal to one billion year for example and 1000 years old was 100 years old, etc.
In the same manner it's just fine for us all to interpret young earth creationist's claim like the Earth was created 10000 years ago as one year is equal to 457 thousand years. Then mathematically their claim will be in accordance with the result of current archaeological achievement.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Difference

Difference(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.18 0:51 (#19541331) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.17 22:13)
Those who got bachelor's degree think whether it was necessary. Those who didn't go to college think it was necessary.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

!

Re:Genetic, not economic(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.14 0:17 (#19491633) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.12 2:40)
Taboo is not originally taboo, it came to be taboo as a result of practicing too many times and resulting in some inconvenience that cannot be evaded unless we stop doing or prohibitting as a form of taboo. I think incest falls on this category.
Current humans firstly appeared in some part of Africa 200,000 years ago and it was only 10,000 years ago that humans started building a civilised society, which means 190,000 years long humans had experienced a dark age. My assumption is humans must have had an incest-prone breedings during this period. As a result of this, humans had been unable to reproduce any more decent offsprings unless they had to seek for their mate outside their family. This is the background what I think why incest came to be taboo. So rare examples of incest in a limited lineage or enclosed area might have been correct to consider they are few examples of atavism. I observe those birth defects are both the result of incest and a cause of prohibition.
As to how humans conceive the notion of time and space, I think humans had been too long neither aware of sequence of time nor noticing they are occupying in a certain space. My assumption is their consciousness to time and space must have been much more ambiguous than now, that's what I proposed in my previous JE -Adam, etc.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Lot

Re:Genetic, not economic(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.13 3:25 (#19480695) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.12 2:40)
As a matter of fact, incest was held as a way of insemination in the case of the lack of offsprings who inherit the fortune of their parents, see Bible example. I think it was Lot who was obliged to have affairs with his two daughters for insemination purpose only. Those acts were held out of the purpose, it has nothing to do with birth defects.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Adam's Findings

Re:Spacetime(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.13 3:10 (#19480475) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.12 2:40)
My argument here is it was Adam who noticed for the first time human's mortality or when he was born and he ought to die in the end. Before him, no one noticed humans are to die. This is related to the rise of self-consiousness. Because no one was unable to reach the point of self-consiousness Adam was able to reach, humans used to repeat their daily lives without intension to expand their economy. So before Adam, humans stayed in a primitive barter based society for 190000 years. Current development of mankind is the direct result of Adam's findings of the concept of time and space. This concept is defined in subjective perception Adam acquired first time among humans.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Suppose

Re:Genetic, not economic(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.13 2:50 (#19480243) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.12 2:40)
Suppose those who got a gene defect got married to those who got the same problem in their genes, the kids they had are more likely to got a gene defect.
I believe that incest itself has no significant meaning here, it is simply a sexual act between family members. And family members of those who happened to have got a gene defect. Incest ought to be regarded as just a symptom of those people, not a cause of those birth defects.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Economic

Re:Genetic, not economic(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.12 3:28 (#19468159) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.12 2:40)
I hardly believe so.
Before civilisation, limited number of humans inhibited in a limited place for a long time, where repetitious incest must have done. Judging from the expansion of human population and later development of human civilisation, I must say incest had nothing to do with genetics, but only that mattered economically. Economy kept on being in a closed circle that prevented them from acquiring wealth other than theirs.
I think the first civilisation started only after they abandoned the habit of incest.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

Return to nature

Re:Even if it were legal(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.12 0:38 (#19466053) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.09 22:29)
The development of civilisation hasn't contributed to promoting our happiness. Return to nature is now to be called.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters

??

Re:So...(Score:2)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2007.06.11 2:49 (#19459075) (http://www.blogger.c...00096157591312337186 Last Journal: 2007.06.09 22:29)
It's hard to say so explicitly though in my eyes, both prostitution and marriage are based on the same principle that is both beneficial to others. I think prostitution exists outside of our ordinary economic system. Prostitution itself ought not to be considered bad, but we observe that the excessive amount of prostitution is not just productive from social viewpoint.
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters