Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FoolThemAll
Robaggio: You seem to consider "can't be understood by humankind" and "can't be understood" to mean the same thing. Not that I can't understand that kind of thinking and its basis, but that's what prevented me from making sense of that link in our chain.
|
Not to be rude, but what's the difference? If humans can't understand the notion, then therefore it cannot be understood. As far as any other natural entity being able to understand, well, I don't think that's really a matter of consideration.
Reality as we know it is built up around our perception as natural creatures. Even the term 'natural' is only such that we can perceive with our senses. If something cannot be perceived with our senses, then it is nonsensical, or, nonsense. To take it another step further, we cannot use intelligent thought on anything that cannot be sensually perceived. Thus, something nonsensical is also unintelligable. - I'll try to dig up some of my sources or find an internet article for you to read. I know I'm missing out on some key aspects of the argument that would solidify it a bit more for you.
Livia: What you're describing is
relative 'good' and 'evil'. Such is an opinion and thus lies in the eye of the beholder. Whether or not everyone believes a certain notion does not make it the truth. Therefore, although the majority of cultures belive killing to be 'evil' or 'wrong', it does not make it such. I can PM you about this if you like- since I don't know if the people in this thread want me to go on a tangent about good/evil & right/wrong.
Asaris: Read what martinguerre wrote. "Why" is not applicable.