Subj : Knowledge.... To : KEVIN GIBSON From : LEE LOFASO Date : Mon Jul 23 2001 09:21 am Hello Kevin, >KG>If we define "evil" as inferior, we might look at mortality as >KG>inferior to immortality. Mortality resulted from the choice. >LL>That may be one way to look at things. KG>It is. That's how I look at it. Analyzing viewpoint to see where it leads... >LL>But if so, one would be stating an impossible happening. KG>I followed your logic but... I don't see it. Mortality implies a definite beginning and a definite end. Immortality implies a definite beginning having no end. Anything that has a definite beginning will have a definite end. Therefore, immortality is an impossible happening. >LL>All men are mortal. >LL>Socrates is a man. >LL>Socrates is mortal. KG>LL>this argument can be extended to include all living things. KG>Insofar as we know things to be, yes. Can't think of any living thing that did not have a definite beginning, and can't think of any living thing that does not have a definite end. >LL>It can also be extended to include all things animate and inanimate. KG>How would you apply this to an inanimate object? Let's take a rock, for example. Before it was a rock it was part of molten lava. IOW, the rock did not come into existence until it became a rock. As time goes on, the rock will cease to be, given that the world it exists in will at some point cease to be. Therefore, a rock has a definite beginning and has a definite end. >LL>Therefore, can anything truly be *immortal*? KG>Yes. That which is not mortal. And *what* is not mortal? Certainly all living things have a mortal existence. And all non-living things have a mortal existence. Even the universe itself has a mortal existence. What then, can be considered *immortal*? >LL>If that were so, then God Himself would be "evil", creating "evil" >LL>creatures for His own "evil" purposes. >KG>That depends on who defines God, evil, and does the assessing. >KG>Can we define God? >LL>We do it all the time. KG>But that doesn't mean that God is so defined. Except in our own image. >LL>But just because man defines God in his own image, does it make >LL>it necessarily so that that is what God *is*? KG>Yeah... that's similar to what I just typed. And I could delete KG>my response and make it look like I read your entire argument before KG>I replied, but I won't. :-p Hey, we're all in the process of perfecting circular logic. :) >LL>And what is absolute truth, if such truth cannot be ascertained >LL>by man as absolutely true? >KG>All evidence is subjective in part because of the way we perceive. >LL>However, given that a man's reason is developed, he can recognize >LL>the existence of a natural moral law. In that light, man can >LL>discern what is absolute truth, at least in certain cases. KG>Only to the extent that we trust our perceptions of the situations KG>or certain cases. The Doors of perception are all windows of the mind. 'Scuse me while I answer the phone. Back again. >LL>How then, can we come up with a definition of "good" and "evil", >LL>and how such good and evil can be measured by man? >KG>This is much more of a response than I expected. >KG>Where are you going? >LL>It could be anywhere, depending on the nature of this thread. :) KG>I think I'm going to watch you and Richard fiddle with it. KG>It would be good if you could interest Frank and John. KG>They seem to like the deep stuff. Just put on a record/tape/cd of songs from The Doors and you'll be able to keep up with the best of them. Trust me. I know. :) --Lee * SLMR 2.1a * --and she's such a capital one for catching mice-- --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:18/140) .