Comments for internal ponderings of the uneducated and the arrogant http://internalponderings.wordpress.com disclaimer needed Sun, 15 Jun 2008 23:31:41 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on The flaw of Aesthetics by edred http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/06/15/the-flaw-of-aesthetics/#comment-14 edred Sun, 15 Jun 2008 23:31:41 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/?p=16#comment-14 i think that so long as their is objective truth, their is objective beauty. The closer an individual is to truth the closer their appreciation of beauty is to objectivity. i think that so long as their is objective truth, their is objective beauty. The closer an individual is to truth the closer their appreciation of beauty is to objectivity.

]]> Comment on The flaw of Aesthetics by rekarnar http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/06/15/the-flaw-of-aesthetics/#comment-13 rekarnar Sun, 15 Jun 2008 22:25:51 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/?p=16#comment-13 could not the modernist then say that the only beauty we can ever see is our representation of it and thus the difference between true and false beauty is negated by our complete separation from it. that beauty is instantaneous, that the false appearing beautiful is beautiful and true at that time. For what it is and what it strives for. For a subjective view but in that, the striving is a True abstract view of Beauty. could not the modernist then say that the only beauty we can ever see is our representation of it and thus the difference between true and false beauty is negated by our complete separation from it.

that beauty is instantaneous, that the false appearing beautiful is beautiful and true at that time. For what it is and what it strives for. For a subjective view but in that, the striving is a True abstract view of Beauty.

]]> Comment on Judgement. part1. by edred http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/04/08/judgement-part1/#comment-6 edred Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:27:55 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/?p=4#comment-6 cool. :) yeah i think this is the conclusion that anyone who sees humanity as a whole has to come to. if the best way to teach a criminal the errors of his crimes is to send him to prison then so be it (i doubt it), but so long as the goal is rehabilitation not retribution. similarly if the best way to reinforce morals in society is through fear of consequence, then it would be ok to include some form of deterrence in a sentencing. (i think "best" would have to take ethics into account and not just efficiency) however i think the Christian view differs a little, for them (and i'm just doing my best to paraphrase here, feel free to correct me adam) we are all responsible for are own actions, and even tho humans are capable to changing if they do not do so by the end of their lives they are eternally danmed.. (trolling for respones from adam :P) sorry to bring this back to religon but that allways seems to be the root of all these debates anyway. tho it'd be interesting to see where atheists stand on this. cool. :) yeah i think this is the conclusion that anyone who sees humanity as a whole has to come to.

if the best way to teach a criminal the errors of his crimes is to send him to prison then so be it (i doubt it), but so long as the goal is rehabilitation not retribution.

similarly if the best way to reinforce morals in society is through fear of consequence, then it would be ok to include some form of deterrence in a sentencing. (i think “best” would have to take ethics into account and not just efficiency)

however i think the Christian view differs a little, for them (and i’m just doing my best to paraphrase here, feel free to correct me adam) we are all responsible for are own actions, and even tho humans are capable to changing if they do not do so by the end of their lives they are eternally danmed.. (trolling for respones from adam :P )

sorry to bring this back to religon but that allways seems to be the root of all these debates anyway. tho it’d be interesting to see where atheists stand on this.

]]> Comment on Judgement. part1. by ninzor http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/04/08/judgement-part1/#comment-5 ninzor Sat, 12 Apr 2008 17:29:09 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/?p=4#comment-5 hmm im not crystal on this but i get the idea, ill have a go at responding. what benefit does retribution achieve?, who does it benefit? In my opinion i dont think the Retribution method of "an eye for an eye" works well in the greater social arena. Sure when you area a kid it seems fair "you took this, so ill take that". But in a criminal sense i dont think Retribution is far from revenge at all! Stooping to the level of the crime committed to get equal in my mind gives no room for triggering the criminals will to change and/or rehabilitate. This is difficult to discuss when the scale and course of crime can greatly influence my point of view, but i struggle see this method of Retribution truly benefiting anyone. Giving someone a dose of there own medicine doesn't seem rational to me in a criminal sense,revenge rotates in a cyclic nature and that doesn't speak peace, resolution and moral learning to me. So; is it possible for people to learn new morals or strengthen old ones? how can this be achieved? is fear a good method of achieving this? Again i keep defaulting to a larger scale of crime here when considering the answers. However in my opinion i defiantly believe people can learn new morals or strengthen old ones. But the simple yet deciding factor to that is, they HAVE to want to change. A mind only works when its open, and when committing a crime of what ever sort, you have to wonder where their mind WAS at. So getting from that A to B it possible, theres not doubt about that. But fear in my opinion isn't and shouldn't be the primary transport in getting there. However unfortunately fear is one of the strongest most powerful emotions in the whole spectrum of feelings. Its threatening, intimidating, painful and frightening. The perfect way of breaking someone into pieces so they cannot function, let alone do them selves some good and look inside to consider the cause and consequence of their actions. ...yeah thats 2cents... hmm im not crystal on this but i get the idea, ill have a go at responding. what benefit does retribution achieve?, who does it benefit?
In my opinion i dont think the Retribution method of “an eye for an eye” works well in the greater social arena. Sure when you area a kid it seems fair “you took this, so ill take that”. But in a criminal sense i dont think Retribution is far from revenge at all! Stooping to the level of the crime committed to get equal in my mind gives no room for triggering the criminals will to change and/or rehabilitate.
This is difficult to discuss when the scale and course of crime can greatly influence my point of view, but i struggle see this method of Retribution truly benefiting anyone. Giving someone a dose of there own medicine doesn’t seem rational to me in a criminal sense,revenge rotates in a cyclic nature and that doesn’t speak peace, resolution and moral learning to me.

So; is it possible for people to learn new morals or strengthen old ones? how can this be achieved? is fear a good method of achieving this? Again i keep defaulting to a larger scale of crime here when considering the answers. However in my opinion i defiantly believe people can learn new morals or strengthen old ones. But the simple yet deciding factor to that is, they HAVE to want to change. A mind only works when its open, and when committing a crime of what ever sort, you have to wonder where their mind WAS at. So getting from that A to B it possible, theres not doubt about that. But fear in my opinion isn’t and shouldn’t be the primary transport in getting there. However unfortunately fear is one of the strongest most powerful emotions in the whole spectrum of feelings. Its threatening, intimidating, painful and frightening. The perfect way of breaking someone into pieces so they cannot function, let alone do them selves some good and look inside to consider the cause and consequence of their actions.

…yeah thats 2cents…

]]> Comment on maxwells demon by rekarnar http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/maxwells-demon/#comment-3 rekarnar Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:23:22 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/maxwells-demon/#comment-3 found this, a little different but quite interesting. "Think of two boxes, connected via a gate as depicted in the diagrams above. Say the gate was a one way gate (connected to the wall via a spring) that opened into one box only (i.e. a particle from the right box could hit the gate to open it and go into the left compartment, but not the other way round). Now before any particles have hit the gate, it is closed, the spring having just tension to keep it shut. When a particle from the right hits it, the particle slows down using some of its kinetic energy to open the gate, the particle has moved into the left hand side, the second law is broken.... No, the gate now has some internal energy (supplied by the particle that hit it), so therefore is unable to be fully closed again as the spring does not have enough tension to close it fully, making the gate bi-directional, and equilibrium is restored. Second law violation has not occurred." found this, a little different but quite interesting.
“Think of two boxes, connected via a gate as depicted in the diagrams above. Say the gate was a one way gate (connected to the wall via a spring) that opened into one box only (i.e. a particle from the right box could hit the gate to open it and go into the left compartment, but not the other way round). Now before any particles have hit the gate, it is closed, the spring having just tension to keep it shut. When a particle from the right hits it, the particle slows down using some of its kinetic energy to open the gate, the particle has moved into the left hand side, the second law is broken…. No, the gate now has some internal energy (supplied by the particle that hit it), so therefore is unable to be fully closed again as the spring does not have enough tension to close it fully, making the gate bi-directional, and equilibrium is restored. Second law violation has not occurred.”

]]> Comment on first post by rekarnar http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/first-post/#comment-2 rekarnar Mon, 07 Jan 2008 00:53:28 +0000 http://internalponderings.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/first-post/#comment-2 good day sir. i await with baited breath this innocuously grand throughfair. good day sir. i await with baited breath this innocuously grand throughfair.

]]>