boredom is a terrible terrible thing. i've just spent hours in irc, and mr911 and i are going through random profiles from the spark's match test and laughing. i actually messaged a couple of these people. well, three people who said they went to fredonia, and one who's name was jormangund, and how can i pass that up? that is so darned cool for a handle. oh my word am i geeky.

so apparently my profile must be quasi interesting because i've actually had about five people message me. other than 911, that is. hmm. i wonder why i'm bothering with this. it's not like i can even try to actually use this for its intended purpose. just in general it's hard to use a dating service when you're too embarrassed to actually talk to people. plus i can't even try to flirt with these people, which i'm sure i'm supposed to be doing. um. dating services... no. bad.

hey, i still have standards. go me. i guess i'm not desperate after all. *grin*

ok, so i don't use capitalization... but how do people attempt to get away without punctuation? can that really work?? (says the one who uses excess exclamation points at all times.)

wow, i think i'm just too brain dead today to actually say anything of worth. well... actually, it's just the hour. i already had another fun and fabulous irc debate... this time on the possibility of absolute truth and morality. roup turned it into a thread on the brunching board, and i'm quasi bitter because i don't want to go and write all my opinions out again. i could try to cut and paste, but i suspect it'd make no sense. hmm...

lord help me, i'm sticking this here, because i felt it was a good discussion, and i can't paraphrase to save my life. this will be the distilled version, i suppose.

Roup> well, if it's what you really believe, and think is truth, how can it be truth for you? You can't say "the earth is round, but if you think it's flat, that's perfectly valid as well." It's either true or it's not.
Hisao> Truth is the sum of facts and thoughts.
sandry> because so much is not absolute. facts ARE NOT.
sandry> we think we have knowledge.
sandry> but often we're wrong.
sandry> all we have is perception.
sandry> and that is *FAULTY!*
Roup> but that doesn't refute that there *is* a truth, even if we don't know it.
sandry> true.
Roup> saying "there is no truth" is like saying "this sentence is false" it takes you in logical circles. "opposing beliefs can't be wrong either!"
sandry> but since we can't even know if we know it....
sandry> and i think in some cases there shouldn't be a truth.
Seth> Truth is often very restrictive....
sandry> is there an ultimate right in some moral arguments?
Seth> No, that's a matter of opinion.
sandry> and if there were....
sandry> i'd feel *cheated*
sandry> i don't want truth.
sandry> i don't want there to be an answer to abortion. no absolute right.
sandry> i really think that if you want to believe in things i absolutely cannot stand, then that's fine.
Roup> (I'm actually reading a book on this very matter at the moment :))
sandry> and my main belief is not to obstruct you.
sandry> although i can mutter about your idiocy behind my back.
sandry> what book?
Roup> (Beyond Good and Evil - Nietzsche)
Roup> I don't claim to have a better claim to "the truth" or "morality" than any other person. I just think that, logically, we have to admit it exists.
Seth> I still maintain that it is a matter of perspective.
Roup> but I repeat, if you say it is a matter of perspective, then you can't say it's always wrong to rape somebody
sandry> ok, so maybe some truth exists somewhere.
sandry> or some morality.
sandry> but we can't see it.
sandry> so why does it even apply?
Roup> but to play devil's advocate: if none of us has a better claim to morality than anyone else, by what right are there any laws at all? (re: murder, rape, robbery, etc)
sandry> because our own imperfect moralities coincide around those topics.
sandry> for the most part, anyhow.
sandry> stupid tyranny of the majority tries to come up with more of these things, though.
sandry> and i don't want more.
sandry> because i too am libertarian.
Roup> so if it's a matter of democracy only, if all the Germans in WWII decided to kill all the Jews, that's valid and not an absolute wrong?
sandry> that actually falls under the heading of insanity, roup.
sandry> i don't think hitler was evil. just misguided. A LOT.
sandry> and most of the german people were really desperate and taken in by charisma.
sandry> the rallies they had....
sandry> the people there weren't precisely sane.
sandry> or rational.
sandry> because of his incredible speeches, or whatnot.
Roup> so the majority *can* be wrong?
sandry> OH DEAR GODS YES!!!
mr911> Roup, what is this "wrong" you speak of?
mr911> The majority frequently disagrees with me. I think I'm right, and they're wrong.
sandry> we don't have to agree with the majority in our philosophy. as a matter of fact, i think roup and i would both have many differences from the majority.
Roup> well how do we know, then, that our consensus against rape and murder isn't irrational? If we are irrational we wouldn't know... we'd be just like the Germans in WWII
sandry> we don't know, roup.
mr911> Roup, we don't.
sandry> we can only hope we're sane.
sandry> i don't know that i can prove i'm sane, though. or rational.
Seth> I wanna see anyone in here DEFINE wrong.
sandry> we can't define wrong.
sandry> we can't define truth.
Seth> Exactly.
mr911> I don't really want to be raped or murdered, so those seem like good ideas to me. It's not an absolute certainty of righteousness though, just a preference.
sandry> none of these things are capable of definition or absolutism.
sandry> i don't know why we're trying for that.
Roup> I'm trying to be Socratic.. I don't know the answers to these things myself..
sandry> we're all stabbing in the dark.
Seth> Sandry: 'we' are trying for that because society has a natural instinct to create 'order' wherever they encounter chaos.
Roup> Personally I'm at the point where it seems and either/or. If truth and/or morality is relative, you end up at Nietzsche: might makes right. I can't swallow that. On the other hand, I have just as much trouble swallowing absolutism.
sandry> bugger order.
sandry> but it shouldn't be either or.
sandry> because that in itself is absolutism.
mr911> Roup, "might makes right" isn't really the best way to sum it up.
sandry> i know what i think, but that's largely emotional.
sandry> all this is just my attempt to back it up with logic.
sandry> and i won't say that i can really do that.
sandry> and have it remain the essence of my morality.
Seth> Unfortunately, the way the world has been run is by the 'Might is Right' doctrine, if you think about it.
sandry> true.
sandry> those in power make our society's morality.
sandry> and force it on others.
mr911> It's not a praise of pure force, it's a simple acceptance that there is no apparent higher goal than the ones we create for ourselves.
Roup> so would you say that might is right is *wrong*?? :)

dear word is that long. i think we had an hour or so long discussion on it. i love these debates, though. after that we actually headed into relative worth of animals vs humans and i started this whole crock about wanting to be a dolphin--too much poe. the question came up... do other animals ever commit suicide? my gut says yes. i think i've heard of it. and at any rate certainly some animals are known for voluntarily starving to death. yeah. but roup wanted to know if a dolphin would sacrifice for another, i think. i bet it would happen... now i'm dying to know.

in any case... i think it's rather late and that i've already talked my share for the day in irc. dear word did i talk. hmm. someday i'll actually say something. :) g'night.
posted by Unknown at 4:54 AM