...

[Barbarian]

...

[Onasander]

Morals is as old as intuition and reasoning- goldfish are capable of this, even wit their short term memory, they remember not to be caught long after their memory- and thus my memory of scooping one of them up in the pond, goes away..... I think it is cool how I can walk up to the fish pong, catch the first one no problem- but they will remain wary for hours afterwards, even though they can't possibly remember the event as they lack that kind of memory. It's like they can sense that something was wrong from before by remembering something was wrong, but they don't know what- they just remember remembering, which was a remembering of remembering- beware. But beware of what? They don't know.

It's a self sustaining morality, and not a social one- but in terms of a sexual species, this differentiation is still moral as they don't know how to warn one another by all indications beyond their own panic, distress, and greed for food.

Morality is the same as physics, as old as the universe- relative based.

You were hoping I said some priest, didn't you? Well, your fucking wrong, morality evolved with us- is the basis of communication- be it play or language, and of evolution, and is the cornerstone of evolution itself. It just wasn't made up one day- the mind had to evolve to think it in the first place, but the need to think it has to predate consistently the evolution of a centralized thinking apparatus for us to ever even approach that necessity. I see morals and morality in a concept seated in my mind such as offense and defense- which is just a words- but when I look into it's connotative basis in my mind, the theory matches up to memories and insticts, and I can make massive correlations to the animal and plant and inorganic worlds, and see parallels to some of the most complex of systems available- oftentimes labeled in a archetypal. I've seen animals do this as well, not just living a reaction to a moral, but carrying a complex over and beyond the buffer of a daisy chain- purely chemical exchange and express a higher understanding of some of the morals I hold dear- my cat for example would nurse other male stray kittens (but not female ones). If that isn't a moral, I don't know what it.... it has all the elements that humans count for it. I see it in the daisy chain- purely reactive form where intelligence can't even be said to exist down to the smallest of features. It shouldn't be a surprise- as I pointed out before, I am a contributor, like Nietzsche was- we can read into the environment like this, it's part of our nature.



Got a problem with this ideal, take it up with the fossil record or a genetic therapist.... a more objective formulation will be presented from that analysis. Putting the blame on priests is a hoot, they carry the blame no more than merchants or leaders or commoners or the late night story teller tucking their kids away- most priesthoods from most religions looked after their people and gave generally good advice- are of that community, and want to see it succeed, and oftentimes are the most noble and most caring of the local population to begin with. Scoundrels abound in all trades and positions, just the way it is.

Every institution in my opinion- a good many modern and secular, give advice that is very brutal and harmful and lead to a generally horrible existence and great lost of freedoms to the populations as a whole- they are just as backwards as the cannibals and oddities in rites of the olden ages in my opinion by virtue of the fruits of their labor, and yet I have no reason to single one element of our society out over another- everything that fucks up or is harmful is of concern to me, no matter my level of partisanship.

A fun fact you can look up yourself, if you can't find it I will tell you exactly where it is:

Did you know that Karma's most ancient mention in any text from india clearly states that it WAS NOT the invention of a priesthood, but rather of a military cult that up to that moment had never before been taught to a priesthood? It was taught by a king to brahmen who kept harassing his local king for a answer.

Priesthoods- or even philosophers as we like to think of them in the west, haven't always been the ones responsible for the origination of a idea- or even it's chief source of exploitation later on- and a good many are honest and mean the best for the people they serve.

I see no reason to go on a crusade on them because of some possible harm they can do when there are countless sectors of society that have proven themselves to be at times equally if not more destructive. I have many concerns- if you are a atheist, then so be it, move on from religion and stop being a slave of it, your just proving how little you are. I hate chili, but I don't write or yell against hormel or bush's beans because it's a largely passive institution, just as religion is.... I don't get sick if I don't eat it. I bitch about what gets force down people's throats and kills them- especially if one of the perspective people is me. I gotta saw, there hasn't been a religion yet that I felt threatened by personally.... I've been shot at by so called religious people, but I honestly doubt their sincerity in their faith and love of god and their fellow man, as there wasn't very many recognizably sincere and deeply religious people in that country. May be the most atheistic people on earth in a good many of the case I saw.

[Barbarian]

...

[Taz]

I agree. Onasander's a real forum poofter to sprout that shit on here.