View Brandon_Fenton's Posts

<< Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next >>

Re: Quamen Bowls for sale or parts trades posted on 2006-10-15 12:20:25

It's for a good cause :-D

Re: Alliance 'Equinox' prototype f/s Price Drop!! posted on 2006-10-15 12:19:33

Help me live off of something other than macaroni and cheese!!

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-15 10:46:53

Pretty much any text book for an introduction to ethics class should give you some familiarity with the different basic systems and their tennents as well as some current thought. The good thing about getting an intro book in philosophy is that the community of philosophers act as a giant peer group for eachother (critiqueing and revising ideas) so you may find some of the thoughts you have already represented in the book but revised to a very clear and consice description. you can also Google 'philosophical dictionary' or 'philosophical terms' in order to get clear on what exactly certain words mean and how they are generally used. I come accross so many terms that I don't understand at first that I have a dictionary at my side almost always. There are tons of terms I still don't completely get but the more you work with them the more clear they become.

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-14 21:17:14

Cool, sorry for sounding like a dick.

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-14 13:59:01

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg229081#msg229081 date=1160851323]

By absolute I mean pure
[/quote]

Oh now I get it! Pure!! Why didn't you say so? (extra sarcasm). Dude way to define one vague ambiguous word with another. All I'm gonna say is Stop! Stop! Stop! The more I try to get you to clairify, the more you go off course. Your first sentence is simply false, and your second one is an example of the naturalistic fallacy. Take the hint, humble your self and do some reading. I'm not try to rip on you but you're giving me far to many opportunities. There is no shame in not having learned this stuff yet, but to talk about it authoritatively without any real understanding of what you are talking about is a foolish waste of time.

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-14 06:54:29

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg229002#msg229002 date=1160804641]
So if a person's morals can be judged against the majorities, then there is an absolute moral code in a society. I am not saying that an individual couldn't some how create his own set of beliefs, they would just be useless. The morals societies follow were at one point or another created by man, but they have grown into an absolute code. Sure morals can evolve, but at any one moment they must be absolute to exist as a moral code. Everything influences them over time, yes, but they can never be flexible at a point that each person can bend and shape them into any use.
[/quote]

The majority view does not equal an 'absolute' view, and to say that any set of morals is useless is basically an oxymoron. No offense man but, you need to look into things before its worthwhile to talk about them; first look into the meaning of the word 'absolute' and then maybe read an introductory book on ethics.

Re: Who is your favorite rider? posted on 2006-10-13 21:34:31

I've always enjoyed watching Day Smith's riding,...It would be rad to have one video with all of his previous video parts in order. Come to think of it, that would rule if a lot of different riders did that.

Re: Quamen Bowls for sale posted on 2006-10-13 21:28:50

Bumpety bump.

Will trade for:

-new Quamen stem in black + $100,
-G-sport monkey or marmoset front hub + $80,
-G-Sport ribcage rim(s) + $70-$50 (depending on hole pattern and amount)

Re: Alliance 'Equinox' prototype for sale posted on 2006-10-13 21:17:52

This is being bumped and there is a 100$ price drop!!!

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-13 20:27:46

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg228828#msg228828 date=1160772385]
The idea behind morals is that they are a set of values to give guidance. Guidance is hard to achieve when they become flexible. Morals have to be absolute in base, but open minded in implementation.

For the mad man analogy, if each person is able to create a set of moral, then a serial killer is as much in the right as the priest. So if they as flexible as that, how are we to decide what is right in society?
[/quote]

Why can't morals be both flexible and give guidance? Seems that you are almost saying that this is the case when you say that they need to be "open-minded in implementation".

To answer your second paragraph,...we decide what is right via reason. To devise a moral system requires rules (a mad man could hardly accomplish this in a satisfactory way) and even if a 'madman' did devise some set of moral rules, the system could be weighed against the others (just as moral systems are evaluated now) to decide which makes more sense, is more useful, is more in line with our natures, sentiments, intuitions and the like.

Re: put my fly up on ebay, and other bmx stuff too posted on 2006-10-13 19:47:32

How much would you ship those rims to Toronto Canada for?

Re: *******FOR SALE******* posted on 2006-10-13 19:40:30

That seat doesn't have 9mm rails does it? If so I'll buy the seat.

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-13 10:46:48

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg228369#msg228369 date=1160635826]

If morality becomes subjective, then they are no longer morals. Then the madman is as in the right as the priest, or the philospher.

[/quote]

My questions in order for your first and second sentence are: How so? Why is that?

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-11 06:55:20

[quote author=infamous3140 link=topic=20083.msg228047#msg228047 date=1160540287]
Who really wants to listen to someone that (if this isn't close-minded I don't know what is) believes that dinosaurs didn't exist, and were put in the earth by God to test our faith, because they aren't mentioned in the Bible [/quote]

That one is just hilarious; --the trickster god, haha, prancing arround messing with people's heads just cause 'he' can,...priceless. Bill Hicks does a great scketch about that, in fact Bill Hicks has a lot a funny things to say about fundamentalists.

Re: Paul Osicka Interview - Cream #10 posted on 2006-10-11 06:40:46

I think it was in one of the first few transworld bmx magazines but there was a one page thing on him, like just a photo of his face and some of his words but it was seriously probably the most inspiring thing I've read regarding flat to this day. If anyone could find that and scan it in for me I would be beyond greatful.

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-10 06:08:39

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg227799#msg227799 date=1160455945]

Morality doesn't exist outside of religion either, not in a pure form. Our morals dictate our laws, and all of it can be traced back to judeo-christian law.
[/quote]

Now you are treading in murky waters, what the heck is a 'pure' form supposed to mean? Is morality only pure if it is a divine injunction? If so, who's moral reveltions does one trust? You should really look into what you are talking about before you just blurt out an unsubstantiated opinion. There are many moral systems out there, most a which are far more comprehensive than the ones derived from religions; -look at Aristotle's ethics, Kant's moral theory, utilitarianism, etc... I could go on and on. Really man, you need to look into things before you pretend to know all about them.

Re: Parts Needed Will Buy! posted on 2006-10-09 15:45:30

I've got a 24 London check it out here

http://www.pedalbmx.com/forum/index.php/topic,20370.0.html

Re: London Holloway 3 sprocket posted on 2006-10-09 15:44:47

bump

Re: Faith: Not wanting to know what is true posted on 2006-10-08 06:21:05

[quote author=MichaelRatcliffe link=topic=20083.msg227389#msg227389 date=1160289583]
Anyone who doesn't see those as outdated is being ridiculous.

I am just saying is because certain parts of religion are a little bit off, doesn't mean you can throw away the rest, the majority.

The majority of religion has good intentions.
[/quote]

You know what they say about good intentions right?

Actually, that parts of a religion are 'off' is a very good reason to abandon it to some people(e.g. atheists, the scientifically minded).

Not to mention, just because a religion contains a set of moral doctrines does not mean that they are all 'right'. There are many non-religious systems of morality out there, some that are much better then religious doctrine.

In my Ali G voice ***Wag-wan? Evree-tin-ah-right? Yo, check it! you need to learn dis shit, listen-up, edumacate yo'self cause dis is some real shit, safe!***

Re: Hamjam again before the winter? posted on 2006-10-07 15:35:12

Good times guys & girls, see you all again next time.

<< Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next >>