The next lifetime? I think one lifetime is quite enough for me. Maybe children should get another lifetime if they pass away while a child? Maybe there should be a certain age you get to and then you don't get another life?
*those were my thoughts:)*
Obedience to laws, rules, regulations and norms is not bad. That is civilized life. Living to the expectation of others like family and peers, that makes life miserable. That is the key to failure and misery, trying to please everybody (bill cosby)
Maybe the laws escape being immoral, but the punishment for breaking the laws can be immoral?
Know thyself. ;p
If you dont like the laws of a nation, immigration is the answer. And easier than changing the laws to your liking
If a law is immoral, then you should have the ability to force the government to reform it.
I am not advocating blind obedience. In case of tyrannic govt, citizens must do something forceful. If its just a matter of inconvenience like strict laws in Singapore, simply follow or immigrate where it is more convenient. The purpose of laws is for orderly living.
If you dont like the laws of a nation, immigration is the answer. And easier than changing the laws to your liking
And go where?
Please give an example of immoral law.
17rileyc wrote:
If a law is immoral, then you should have the ability to force the government to reform it.
Law is supposed to be expression of general impersonal will.
Above personal interests. In democracies it is a permanent evolution.
Everyone in democracy has freedom to help to change things. So it seems revolutions are useless anymore, which means constant aim to perfect State.
Except a few countries who succeeded in not changing since thousand years.
How to live is connected to where to live. You cannot be the same in Sicily ('"speak softly" country with mafias), better to be paranoiac there to survive, than in the country of all freedoms.
As you may know, man is good in nature state, JJ Rousseau dixit, and then things get worse with life in any society. To be good inside, need to help others , well, after a certain time comes the disenchantement Victor Hugo himself got in "Les Travailleurs de la Mer" 5*.
Hope that was decipherable, OP.
. Homework done.
The laws you quote belong to history now, in XXth century.
in democracies!
I try to figure in my country a law immoral or against nature, except the right for prisonners to get out when they want. the terrorist to get a rest period in Club Med if caught ! it is a shame !.
We just fired our Minister of justice before she prepared something like that. Facts.
Laws are imperfect yet necessary for people to coexist. It puts limitation on freedom. Some wants absolute freedom which are conditions of anarchy.
Nobody is reacting on the 2nd part "Living to the expectation of family and peers".
point is on threads people being honest even if not Ok with what we say are rare.
Most are in assertiveness in mode "me I think ..." or something like "Shoah is bad just saying", which generally has nothing to do with topic. No one quotes past , ignoring it. Few are those miing two sentences to get the light of the genuine idea. They should work for that, prefer to bogart joint, venture of the mind, 99% hate facts or ignore them.
Limit of assertiveness are knowledges, analysis abilities, thinking. How to live with what system of law is : where to live, soon or late segmentation is useful :
democracy / theocracy, men law / God law, license to kill or not, etc ...
Inner good, outside not, like the Op introduced the topic, is possible if stomach is full :
as everybody knows , primum vivere deinde philosophari.
In third world, forth world (not so glamour but existing), who can ask "how to live" ? the turggle fo food is so intense they cannot think each day to "Spirit of laws" by Montesquieu, or theory of Separating powers from Duke de Montfort (Simon I, french english).
Good day Mr Censor, interesting I mean it.
Laws are imperfect yet necessary for people to coexist. It puts limitation on freedom. Some wants absolute freedom which are conditions of anarchy.
Nobody is reacting on the 2nd part "Living to the expectation of family and peers".
Absolute freedom, in France we distinguish from freedom, and call "licence".
Abslute freedom is jus ignoring the Other and his own perception of freedom, my freedom stops were the freedom of the other starts. But you're right in any case: people need general impersonal , even bad or brong written, rules, codex : to drive a car, go hunting, vote, etc ... Anarchy is a childish disease, as said Lenin about gauchism.
Valéry said "Ok, dream, but make your dreams programs".
My favourite sentence, i guess. onpiano i dream when playing, ...to what I will DO after playing. it works. Personal experiment anyone could start when plying guitar, singing, painting, plyaing chess.etc...
Bonne journée.
How to live!!!
Copy and paste from some guy that didn't know where his head was at.
Thoughts ?
WHAT A PILE OF PLONK!!!
yes, illustrating :
Most are in assertiveness in mode "me I think ...". prefer to bogart joint, venture of the mind, 99% hate facts or self haters ?? ignore them.
There is only one type of internally good person. That is the person who purchases his or her power of judgment - that is, doesn't blindly follow obedience but thinks for his or herself. Mind you, the internally good person may appear bad but this is because he or she hasn't enough experience to make a proper judgment. If the person is internally good, he or she will be aiming at what he or she believes to be good, whether or not the judgment is correct.
Along this line, there exist many internally bad people who appear to be good. The fanatic who obeys blindly but obeys commands that lead to empirically good acts appears good. However, at base, the person is evil and at the very least is not happy him or herself. There are two other types of miserable people besides the fanatic who don't get a purchase on their power of judgment. These are the neurotic and the paranoiac. And again, depending on the manifestation of the neurosis or paranoia, these people may appear good. But at base it's rather a stroke of luck and certainly doesn't contribute to their own well-being. It's much like the guardian angel who sacrifices everything for his or herself, literally everything so that there is nothing left to live for.
Luckily, everyone is born with the power of judgment to get a purchase on it and do acts out of good intentions. The healthy person has this and has the normal experiences to sharpen his or her power of judgment. Thus, by maturity, he or she represents the ideal person. But the point is that the ideal is not some farfetched dream, but, in a very tangible sense, can be achieved, if not in the next lifetime, even in this one. We just need to help others, if only to strive towards a better world than the merely good one we are already in.
Thoughts?