Quote of the Post: "Murals in restaurants are on a par with the food in museums." - Peter De Vries

***

Taboo - Moral judgements, chickens and the yuk-factor. How do you measure up?

"9. A man goes to his local grocery store once a week and buys a frozen chicken. But before cooking and eating the chicken, he has sexual intercourse with it. Then he cooks it and eats it. He never tells anyone about what he does, never regrets it and never shows any ill effects from behaving this way. He remains an upstanding member of his community.

a) How do you judge this man's actions (assume there are no ethical problems with meat eating!)?

b) Should his poultry lovin' be prevented (assuming we know about it) or should he be punished for it? [Note: if you think that either or both of these things should occur then you should answer 'Yes'; only answer 'No', if you think neither of these things should occur.]

c) Suppose you learn about two foreign countries. In one country, it is normal for people to have secret sex with dead chickens. In the other, people don't in the normal course of events have intercourse with frozen poultry. Are both these customs okay morally speaking or is one of them bad and morally wrong?"

Hahahahahaha.

***

Responses to some comments:

PrimusEmpyrian: My condolences.

Atheism is another form of religion.

It seems that most of the points in each headings seem to be preoccupied over the "sufferings" of this world. Because of "sufferings," the notion of "God" gets a discount.

There is a counter point that this world could be a place to test worthy and unworthy humans who will either enjoy the Elysian nature of Heaven or the torture of Hell. "Sufferings" is an element that must be factored in for such tests.

There is also the perspective view. What is "evil," "sufferings" may not be so in the bigger picture, something puny humans can not envision.

2+2=5 does not occur in Base10 maths, but it is possible in other Bases.

That being said, I am not a christian. :p
And I believe the notion that, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." though I understand religions operate on faith not proof...


Thank you but it wasn't my friend who died.

And saying that atheism is another form of religion is analogous to saying that advocating the view that people of all races are equal is another form of racism. Unless you're talking about how the fervour of the few (at least in Singapore) atheists/other freethinkers passionate about their freethought is similar to the devotion that fiery theists have, in which case I would agree.

The notion of suffering does not in itself discount the possibility of gods, just the possibility of all-loving gods. And if this world is just a "test", with the test graded on your happening to guess correctly which of the many improbable gods for whom little if not no evidence exists competing for your mindshare are real, then the marker must be cruel indeed.

Please tell me how having babies born with Down's Syndrome or the existence of flesh-eating bacteria could possibly be good. What appears evil might be good, but working backwards from the conclusion that all seemingly evil events are good and retrospectively justifying them - all based on some wishy-washy notion of faith, is disingenuous indeed. If the evidence does not agree with the hypothesis, then it is faulty. Why not look at the evidence and then formulate theories that fit them, instead of the other way around? If not, one day you may wake up and find that the god(s) you were/was worshipping were/was actually evil, insane or at best apathetic (as all the evidence suggested), then I will say sorry to you.

If you suggest that 2 + 2 = 5 is possible, then I suggest that what is good can be evil, what is evil can be good, what is illogical can be logical and vice versa, in which case the concept of divine morality becomes null and void, as does all forms of argumentation.

I could start a religion and ask you to have faith in me. Would you follow me? I think not :)


PrimusEmpyrian: One can not prove or disprove the existence of God. Evidence might be given, but in the end all you really know is what you are told and what you see. Unless you hear all and see all, you can't really know can you?

Religion is not meant to replace logic and reason, only to address things that are outside these categories.

Besides, what better justice, be it dreamed or real, is there than a visceral overseer who will crush all unworthy and faithless(or people who don't believe like you do) when they die?

You can start a religion but I will decide whether to join you after 3 days... :p Through Thy's exaltness, may I write a book for Thy?

One also cannot disprove the existence of Invisible Pink Unicorns, Invisible, Immaterial Winged Bunnies Orbiting the Rings of Saturn, or Santa Claus either. For all intents and purposes, if no evidence exists for something, it doesn't exist.

There are things outside the realms of logic and reason, but addressing said things with systems that defy logic and reason is surely not prudent. In that case, we might as well give in to lunacy and irrationality.

If that is your concept of perfect justice, then you can hold me in contempt of court. "It is a counterfeit love that is contingent upon authority punishment or reward. In a nutshell, God had to kill Himself to appease Himself so that He would not have to roast us, His beloved creations, in HELL forever. He loves us more than we can ever comprehend, but if we don't return His affections, He will make us regret it for eternity. Now that is AMAZING GRACE!"

I can get people to write contradictory and absurd tales of what happened to me before, during and after the 3 days, but I don't think you'll believe those, will you?


It's not important: looks like you are still trying convince yourself that you are an atheist and loving it...

In that case, theists who enthuse about their faiths are trying to convince themselves that they are theists and loving it...

***

Innovations in Technology reminds me of a good reason why I didn't do Science or Engineering - I suck at using my hands.

From the feedback I'm getting, it seems USP writing modules are greatly overrated by the administration. For example when you have to read and digest passages like this: The "city" founded by utopian and urbanistic discourse is defined by the possibility of a three fold operation:... 2. the substitution of a nowhen, or of a synchronic system, for the indeterminable and stubborn resistances offered by traditions; univocal scientific strategies, made possible by the flattening out of all the dad in a plane projection, must replace the tactics of users who take advantage of "opportunities" and who, through these trap-events, these lapses in visibility, reproduce the opacities of history everywhere;, it makes you wonder.


Hubertian Maps - The Lands of Legend - Maps of the Blood Sword world of Legend.

jAime's adventures - I'm quite sure that this is a big joke.