Good News: And No Religion, Too
- This topic has 252 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You see people in socialism still rushing everywhere like mad in motor cars, instead of this pollutive and dangerous mode of transport gradually disappearing in favour of more public transport and better means. You also still see today’s ugly towns and cities and road networks still being around.
It wouldn’t, but then they wouldn’t be materialists. Which is ok by me, but the party excludes non-materialists (avowed), which is inconsistent. It’s inconsistency that annoys me.
The last time I saw the Form A there was no question about materialism, or free will.
Of course Socialists don’t believe in “prisons, punishments, abuse, incarceration”.It is not as if this has been discussed before in the Party. Here’s a couple of Conference resolutions on the subject.
“That this Conference recognises that rules and regulations, and democratic procedures for making and changing them and for deciding if they have been infringed, will exist in socialist society. Whereas a ruling class depends on the maintenance of laws to ensure control of class society, a classless society obtains social cohesion through its socialisation process without resorting to a coercive machinery. However, in view of the fact that in socialist theory the word “law” means a social rule made and enforced by the state, and in view of the fact that the coercive machinery that is the state will be abolished in socialist society, this Conference decides that it is inappropriate to talk about laws, law courts, a police force and prisons existing in a socialist society.” (1991)”
“This Conference affirms that any law concerned with the enforcement of class relations or property interests could have no place in socialist society, but that any regulation which may serve the needs of the community could become part of democratic organisation in socialism.” (1998)
What would be the point of having rules and regulations if they could be infringed with impunity by invoking some clever dick argument like “I was only a link in a chain of causation”?
So a Catholic can join?
There is a question about religion. Obviously you’re not a member otherwise you would have known; nor does party “exclude non-materialists” as you alleged.
“…could be infringed with impunity by invoking some clever dick argument like “I was only a link in a chain of causation”?”
Which, from the start, has been you putting words in my mouth.
I said such a person would need to be restrained. How many times do I have to repeat things to you, including my necessarian arguments, just because you must have the last word. You’re like a child.
” nor does party “exclude non-materialists” as you alleged.”
It doesn’t?
So, if one believes in a non-material soul, and rejects historical materialism, they can join?Which they do anyway, because members there are who believe choices are not bound by cause and effect, but are free; that therefore they are made by an independent “self” not subject to cause and effect.
members there are who believe choices are not bound by cause and effect, but are free; that therefore they are made by an independent “self” not subject to cause and effect.
For the record, I know of no member who holds such an absurd view. In fact I have never met anyone who does.
It flies in the face of all scientific evidence of how the brain works.
It was demolished philosophically by the 18th century materialists, and again decades ago even in academic philosophy as the myth of “the ghost in the machine” by Gilbert Ryle (rather boringly if I remember from my student days).
I imagine it is only taught today in seminaries and theology departments along with other obscurantisms and then only in regard to the relationship between humans and “god”. Even there they accept the findings of neurology in respect of everyday material living.
Anyone saying the will is free is saying his choices are not bound by cause and effect (the chain of causation), but are free and independently made (their own first cause).
In fact, the intricacies of the mind we know about today, with all its subconscious and conscious movements, make the notion of feelings, thoughts and choices being free even more ludicrous than in the days of the mechanical materialists.
Tom,
Act and react.
I could consider myself ‘encased in a nutshell’ and consider myself a king of infinite space!
Yet hark: my very acts have consequences!
My shell is bigger than I thought!
We are more than the sum of materialism and mechanical psychology: we are the sum of that and so much more!
Be safe.I would say to the drunken driver (because acts have consequences) that, far from the chain of causation being an excuse, it is because it leads him to drive drunk and endanger life, we must remove his access to a vehicle and ensure he doesn’t drive again. If that involves physically isolating him, which he may bemoan as being “punishment”, then so be it. We have to prevent you. It’s the chain of causation.
” We are more than the sum of materialism and mechanical psychology: we are the sum of that and so much more!”
As i’ve just said, there is more than just the mechanical. But this only makes freedom of the will more ludicrous a notion, since there is so much going on, so many more antecedents in play.
I see that. Causal factor and its impact. It stems with choice… lets hope it is informed choice!
Otherwise I would ban the Brits from driving based on modelling outcomes!
Causal chains and differentiating the signification of an event seem to be contentious still!
If acts go undifferentiated: then we have no clue nor ability to learn from actions.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.