Interests:Writing, Racquetball, Danger, & Fun times Expertise:Making a fool of myself (which is a lot harder than it sounds and takes a lot of practice).
Writing: messed up (Chuck Palahniuk style), happy (Shel Silverstein style), Romance (Dave Berry style), and other cool things (Vincent style). Occupation:Student
The debate about weather people are inherently good or evil has been going on since before a worldwide flood wiped out all the people that voted for inherently good.You’d think that with only 8 people in the world, who all believed the same thing, the human race would get along.Sadly, people were still inherently evil, so things got out of hand again.
People don’t like to think of themselves as evil, so they’ll do all sorts of things to justify their actions.People want to think of themselves as inherently good.They’ll come up with the argument that sounds a lot like “I can’t believe, that while holding a baby, that it is an evil creature.”It’s a good argument because no one wants to insult a baby, but apparently these people have never interacted with two year olds.I can’t think of a single parent that has taught their child how to lie, steal, or commit random acts of violence towards others, and yet I can’t think of a two year old who doesn’t do these things.It’s like they are…inherently evil!
Okay, maybe evil is too strong of a word to use here.How about bad?People are inherently bad.Because I do have trouble seeing a population of inherently good people having a murder problem so big that it deserves it’s own term of “murder rate”.Or an inherently good population ever enslaving another, or wiping out another, or oppressing another.Or inherently good men treating women terribly, like they are simply there to be looked at, .I’ll settle for “inherently bad” instead of “inherently evil”.
Of course, this argument implies that there is a universal moral system out there.I’m glad everyone agrees that there is (I can use the “punch you in the face” method to see what your stance is if you aren’t sure.If you get mad, then you believe in a universal moral system).The trouble is, we’ve been trying to hash out the particulars of that system to see what we can get away with, and we haven’t been trying to hash out the character that the moral system drives us towards.
A jerk has several key descriptors that gives himself/herself away: fatuous, tedious, annoying immature, bumbling, idiotic, stupid, dull, lacking good judgment, rude, mean, despicable, dishonorable, disrespectful, shameless, and unpleasant.They are referred to as “worthless fellows” or “fools” in the Psalms.They are shunned from a society that is filled with same.So we all know what jerks are, but do jerks know what jerks are?One step further, do jerks know that they are jerks?
This brings me to “How Jerks are Made”.No person in their right mind would want to develop from their inherently good status into a jerk.That’s like devolving into a lower class of human as you go through life.No, I’m pretty sure that jerks are simply born, five of them every second.They start out concerned only about their personal world, crying whenever something is wrong with comfort, expecting it to be fixed.They later develop into creatures that use only the words “Mine!” and “No!”The next stage in development is the jump to becoming a fraternity brother.
So the first step to becoming a jerk is birth.Having been a jerk for most of my life, I know that there are a lot more aspects to look at as to why people remain as jerks.More on that in Part 2.
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"> name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 9"> name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 9">
I know it’s taboo to say, but I don’t believe in “evolution”.Sure, microevolution exists, I won’t argue against that (horse breeders everywhere can attest to it), but I refuse to believe that a person evolved from an amoeba. There are too many jumps to make (life from nothing, life from nothing that can reproduce, DNA code that can be interpreted by primordial goop, asexual to bisexual, cold blooded to warm blooded, single-cell to mutli-cell, the list goes on and on).Normally, I wouldn’t have a problem with a theory, but this one is widely accepted on doctored up proof, and hasn’t contributed one bit to the progression of technology.In fact, this theory has been harmful to society as a whole.The problems I have with this theory is that it requires certain things to be true in order to exist that I don’t agree with.
1.) That there are no morals in the world
2.) There is no need for a god of any sort
3.) That my potential is limited by the genes of my parents
4.) There is no system of truth
5.) The eradication of the weak members in my species is absolutely okay (that’s all of you guys)
…and the list goes on and on.
Now, if we as a people are REALLY going to believe this theory, we should reflect that in the way we talk about life in general.
When evolution was first widely accepted as a theory, slavery was still an institution in this country.We actually used this theory to justify slavery, saying that these almost people are the missing link between monkeys and real people.We had our collective sigh, because we were treating those almost people terribly, and now we don’t have to feel so bad because “they aren’t as advanced as us”.
Then there was the Holocaust.Hitler was actually a Darwin enthusiast, read the guy’s work, and bought into the theory.He then went out into the world and started to eliminate everyone that wasn’t as “advanced” as his prized race.This meant killing Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and other genetically inferior races of people.Over 6 million died by extermination to keep their genes out of the gene pool.When the Allied armies finally seized the Nazi leadership, they hung them for their “war crimes”.Apparently, the Allies didn’t believe in evolution back then like they should have.
Fidelity in marriage, once an honored and cherished notion, has been falling by the wayside.The weird thing is that the cheaters can soothe their conscience with the notion that evolution backs their actions up (after all, a monogamous relationship can’t possibly produce as many specimens for future progressions).The victims of infidelity seem to be extremely hurt by these actions.Apparently they think there are morals out there that their partner was supposed to adhere to.
Schools are set up right now to leave no child behind (in theory). This is completely backwards thinking, seeing how the advanced students should not be held back by the genetically inferior. We should instead teach at the highest level, and let the slower kids fall by the wayside in hopes that they will die off before being allowed to reproduce.
I’ll stand with MLK Jr. on this one; he had a dream that people wouldn’t be judged by the content of their genes, but by the content of their character.MLK Jr. felt that there was a universal standard of morality that should apply to every human being.We’ve honored him with a holiday, how about we honor him by considering his beliefs?
HELP! I'm a cook and I don't know what my best creation is! Vote for your favorite food I've made for you! I'm trying to compile a top 10 list, so I know what to pick from in case of an emergency.
Vincent creations to pick from: 1.) Man sandwich 2.) Sushi 3.) Orange grilled Salmon 4.) Red Lobster Biscuits 5.) Spaghetti 6.) Chili 7.) Oyster Stew 8.) Chipotle Rice 9.) Italian Marinated Chicken 10.) Improved Gail's world famous burritos 11.) Orange Julius (drink) 12.) Texas Potatoes 13.) Kwiki Kays (special K bars) (Dessert) 14.) Grilled Hamburgers 15.) Grilled Brauts 16.) Chicken Gyros 17.) Smashed Potatoes (specieal recipe) 18.) Jack Daniel's Chicken 19.) Sopapia Cheesecake
Well it’s true.A relativist thinks that every single person on this world makes up what is true for them, and no one else’s beliefs should affect them.So if I call them stupid, that has to be 100% okay, because that’s what I think and what I think is just as valid as what anyone else thinks.A real Relativistcan not get mad at me for this note, because that would be acknowledging that there is a real morality code out there that everyone has to adhere to.It’s my own reality.It’s my own karma.Relativism is stupid because it will justify racism, sexism, bigotry, and many other prejudices as perfectly fine mindsets, and it makes a complete mockery of any kind of justice.
Since this note can’t possibly offend anyone, I figure it can’t do me any harm.
There’s been a song out there that has been bothering me, and it’s Hoobastank’s song entitled “Same Direction”.It’s a relativist song, to be sure, but unlike most people that adhere to this philosophy, these guys are extremely gung ho about being apathetic (I say ‘apathetic’ because they really don’t care about any kind of truth).The jist of the song is that “everyone is right in his/her own way!Why do we need religion, or any kind of behavior code?”There is also a critique, that I take to be directed at evangelists that try to force their religion on someone else (which seems a valid point, but it’s not the main focus of their song).
But the logic behind the song boggles my mind.I pulled these quotes from their lyrics:
“nobody thinks that there just might be more than one way to our final destination.”
“So why does there only have to be one correct philosophy?”
“But I’m not ever gonna know if I’m right or wrong, ‘cause we’re all going in the same direction.And I’m not sure which way to go because all along, we’ve been going in the same direction.”
“I’d like to think that I can go my own way and meet you in the end.”
This song is a message against any religion, philosophy, or person that claims there is absolute truth out there.Which is fine, they’re free to say whatever they want, but that doesn’t make it right (no matter how catchy the tune).
The first quote speaks for itself.It merely asserts that there aren’t very many relativists out there.
The second quote is where things start to get stupid.There are lots of philosophies out there, and many of them are exclusive to other philosophies.They can’t all be right if many of them are saying that others are wrong.And who’s picking the “correct” philosophies?What I’m trying to say is: how come Hoobastank’s philosophy about all view points being equal is correct, and still they can say my view that absolute truth exists is wrong?It’s a self-defeating argument.
The third quote doesn’t make sense to me at all.Christians have the view that if you don’t believe in Jesus, you aren’t going the same direction (“sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell” -Beck).Muslims believe that if you don’t conform to the Koran, then you don’t go to Paradise.These two religions are mutually exclusive, and yet Hoobastank is saying that both these groups are going to the same final destination.I don’t see how that works.
What if people are going in opposite directions, are they still going the same direction?I’m not trying to be a smart as, but I’m thinking about the Buddhist, who won’t even slap a biting mosquito, and the fanatic, who blows up a market square.Same direction?What if we don’t look at religion, and we take a look at the Nazi’s, who slaughtered millions, and the relief efforts that go to starving third world countries to help out those who are different.Same direction?
You can go your own way Hoobastank, but I don’t think you’re going to meet up with me unless you go the same way I do.The absolute truth crowd is going a different direction than you.And really, do you want to end up in the same place as someone that disagrees with you?
Like any good idea, it needs to hold true if taken to an extreme.If I punch a relativist in the face and then burn down his house, that has to be perfectly okay.He might not see that as right, but I do, so everything is hunky dory.And who is going to put me on trial in this Relativist world?A jury of 12 people who have no sense of right or wrong?
When I hear relativist statements, I turn into an instant smart ass.
“Morals are irrelevant, how dare you impose them on me”
- So…imposing morals is morally wrong?
“No one knows what the truth is”
- except the guy that wrote this.
“There is no right or wrong!”
-So, is this statement right, or wrong?
“Truth is relative”
- meaning in some situations, truth isn’t relative.
“Who knows what the truth is?”
- Why listen to this guy?He doesn’t know.
This is why I’m perfectly safe.A true relativist doesn’t believe in anything, and nothing I can do is morally wrong or reprehensible.A relativist that gets mad at stuff like this is a liar, or confused about what he/she stands for.
Sadly, this note is addressed at the current philosophy of Postmodernism (depending on the definition of postmodernism you use, Postmodernists don’t believe in truth, so they never really defined themselves.).While postmodernism makes for great TV shows (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Family Guy, Robot Chicken), it doesn’t do well for real life.
Our nation has become a bunch of aggressive apathetics.We have no conviction!We stand for nothing and our lives revolve around ourselves.We’ve made ourselves the most important beings in the world, because we are the ones who define everything and determine everything.We determine how things are supposed to be, their importance, and their value to ourselves.In essence, we’ve made ourselves into those uncaring and useless gods that drove us to the postmodern stance in the first place.Way to go team!
I believe in absolute truth.My second favorite poet, Taylor Mali, has a poem that isn’t really directed at this topic, but he makes a point that I’d like to share.His poem “like, you know?” addresses the lack of conviction in the 20-30 something generation.Unlike Hoobastank, he’s not posing questions, he’s declaring things to be true.He’s not appealing to our apathy, he’s appealing to our sense of worth and strength.Rather than live in a world where no one knows anything, he makes his audience want to break out of the world where self-image is all important, and stand for something because you think it is right!
“In case you haven’t realized, it has somehow become uncool to sound like you know what you’re talking about?Or believe strongly in, like, what you are saying?”
“Don’t think that I’m a nerd just cuz I’ve, like, noticed this, okay, I have nothing personally invested in my own personal opinions.I’m just, like, inviting you to join me on the bandwagon of my own uncertainty.What has happened to our conviction?Where are the limbs on which we once walked?Have they been like chopped down with the rest of the rain forest.You know?Or do we have like nothing to say?Has society just become so filled with these conflicting feelings of niillllya that we’ve just gotten to the point that we are the most aggressively inarticulate generation to come along since, you know, a long time ago!”
