From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 18:02:58 -0500
----- Original Message ----- From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ"
> > >From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" > >Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 18:40:27 -0500 > > > > > >I think most of us have seen evidence of altruism, or felt a love so > >pure that its memory is painful. (I think what is painful is that one > >is not feeling with such blinding intensity *now*) > > "Nothing takes the taste out of peanut butter quite like unrequited love." > > --Charles M. Schulz-- (Charlie Brown/Peanuts) > > >These are examples of things that most would consider to be *very* > >good. > > The key word there is *most*. So it's all relative right?
I think that what you are grasping for is that it is not "relative" but that it is "subjective". Everything is relative to everything else whether it is obvious or if the relation subtley disguised.
You once gave me a gentle scolding for putting words in your mouth - "Only you know what is in your own mind" - and here is where I return the favor. I am not 'grasping' for anything. I meant *relative* in the way that you used *subjective*. Perhaps a semasiological study should be commissioned "in RELATION" to our posts...<smile>
> >But that kind of *very* good, does not exist without its polar > >opposite. > >Life contains these kinds of symettries, and I suspect that this is > >not limited to human life. > > I don't agree. As far as I'm concerned, what you speak of above is nothing > more than a product of one's mind. Of course, so are my thoughts on > this...<grin>
Imagine a universe that is nothing more than a scum pond. And imagine that there is plenty of life, but only two self aware entities, and for them the scum pond is Edenlike, with an abundance of food and energy. One of these entities writes in his journal "And then the other like me committed the greatest evil imaginable, it ate the food particle *I* wanted".
Good and evil are indeed the products of self-awareness. I've been saying this all along. But there there is an objective measure of good and evil in that it is a product of conciousness, it is self-evident and consensual, and it is a natural filter through which the universe is viewed.
With that illustration I am inclined to agree.
> >The Devil "is" us, but then so is God. > > > > It is entirely possible that God and his Devil do indeed exist.
At the least as some sort of natural metaphor.
Or perhaps as tangible beings that we cannot yet identify. Who really knows?
-Travis
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
