To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 3070
    Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
   (...) Good isn't objective. What we, society as a whole, consider to be "good" is both up for debate in certain areas (I'm specifically _not_ going to mention ab*rti*n here), and it is no more valid than the ideas of other societies, other than (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John Neal
      (...) Well, that's my point. I'm saying that good is beyond what the particular fancy of a given society says it is. We are not the author of good, we are the seekers of it (hopefully). (...) We'll soon see about that;-) (...) All of these (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
     (...) Which means that there is no meaningful definition of good at all. That's not very useful either. (...) <antagonist>Drat. It was a dud. Well, I'll try again in 100 years. </antagonist> (...) If God is good, why has he never deigned to touch (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
      Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38850a4f.919486838@...et.com>... (...) fancy of a (...) seekers of it (...) I take back what I said. I think Larry could tell you his objective definition of good, which I agree with. I will try myself. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
      (...) You need some qualifiers, or you'd better drop dead now in order to avoid your immune system killing any bacteria, yourself from swallowing one-celled creatures and eating and drinking, and to provide a fertile bredding ground for maggots and (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
      Jasper Janssen wrote in message <389ab7c6.963900110@...et.com>... (...) Life-affirming (...) Search this group for 22/7 - read some of my earliest posts, then follow the thread if you wish. (...) and (...) OK, what if you were a dinosaur? I don't (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John Neal
      (...) Well, at least an all encompassing definition of good. It is not something that can be comprehended in its entirety-- it is a continuous learning process. (...) Sorry if some things aren't easily understood-- that's just the way it is, baby. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
     On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 21:09:41 GMT, John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote: BTW, Neal, your line lengths could use some work. 72-75 is a good value. (...) Oh, I don't really care about how easy it is. I have my own morality, and it mostly coincides with (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Larry Pieniazek
      (...) Sure it isn't you? I'm set to "wrap at 72" for new posts. But it could be my NS Comm is damaged. (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
      (...) Netscape Communicator has a whole host af well-known "issues" in this regard. Bottom line is, unfortunately, that it's impossible to _always_ get it to do things the right way. Jasper (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John Neal
       (...) Agreed. I am and have always been set to wrap at 72. Now, if I could rap at 72 I'd be a happy camper;-) -John (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Tom Stangl
      No, you wrap fine from what I can see. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
      All's well here as well. I think the blame lies with an incompatible reader ;-) Mine are set at 76, is that OK with everybody? Tom Stangl wrote in message <386F0784.8CF5B770@n...pe.com>... (...) -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been dreaming of... (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jasper Janssen
      (...) Larry's hasn't been wrong yet, but the post I was responding to, John Neal's (URL) , apeared for example the following lines: (...) Which are 90 characters long, slightly over 80. This is as I mentioned a known bug with Communicator -- (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Larry Pieniazek
      (...) A post of yours chastised me for my line lengths, I believe. I chose to respond to one and only one of your chastisements, and it was whim that made me respond to this one rather than that one. (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
      Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3899b16b.962273428@...et.com>... (...) Don't we all. (...) Wrong. You can learn from arguing, I have. (...) I am not a Bible-beater, I am not a Christian, but the Bible was written by men for men. There is much good (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Tom Stangl
      (...) Medical virgin birth is quite easy, but I won't go into the details here ;-) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
     
          Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Jeff Thompson
      (...) Two words: Turkey Baster. No, seriously, you're right - what might be known as Extremely Heavy Petting has resulted in the occasional (but rather rare) virgin pregnancy. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily" (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John Neal
       (...) Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but any history account from those times isn't error free. Historians back then were not objective reporters like the press is today.........Okay, I'm back, I just laughed myself silly;-) (...) The Bible is not a (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Dave Schuler
     In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal and others write: (...) One thing that's always bothered me about the dying-on-the-cross thing is the question of how could He have done otherwise? I mean, if He knew, as I suspect He must have known, that His (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
   Jasper Janssen wrote in message <387ab92e.833168838@...et.com>... (...) relativism I (...) others (...) is by (...) Discerning (...) good (...) I think you are just plain wrong. Some societies flourish while others perish because they have a better (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —Tom Stangl
     (...) Until we have a planetary wide homogeneous society, Good Societies will ALMOST NEVER flourish longterm over bad, as history has proven. They may last a while, but sooner or later a "bad" society (more warlike) stomps on them. -- | Tom Stangl, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party —John DiRienzo
   Tom Stangl wrote in message <386EFFA9.A7755EDC@n...pe.com>... (...) who (...) for (...) others (...) I (...) ALMOST (...) while, (...) I remember a country named Germany that did that, and stomp they did, but didn't good prevail? Maybe I am wrong, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR