I always wondered what you did in your spare time, Boaz.

>>If we all started out as 'one cell' then nothing really matters any more .. not even if I've just given HIV to some casual sex partner...
or run over some child on the street....or fill my veins witn heroin<<

You really should get a hobby, you know.

But thanks for reminding us of the herculean non-sequiturs that have been your trademark for so long. This has to be amongst the best thereof.

What, in your fertile imagination, is the link between life originating as a single-cell organism, and casual sex, a road accident, and drug abuse?

I am of course aware that you see life as a simply extension of your religious beliefs. But it would help if every so often you would take a moment to explain these, somewhat bizarre, cause-and-effect scenarios that fill your head.

ALGOREisRICH: Nothing matters because you do not care. I do. Everything means something, every event, every life, every reaction, everything that has happened to us, happened for a reason. I am able to associate everything that happened. It all happened for a very good reason. If you read my first post, how I got on to this forum, it happened because I needed help and security. Which I am getting now. CSO is helping me so good for me.

pelican: As have mentioned before. We have forgotten our instincts, our "Intuation" thanks to evolution. I have managed to overcome that. So everything has an explanation, everyone has played a role in my life. Medication? I never like doctors. I have a disease that apparently has no cure yet, but I have managed to cure it. Why? Because I know what I know, and I believe it. Also, 2 years ago, I had a lifetime injury. I managed to cure it, I didn't listen to the expensive specialist I was seeing, I did not take any of the load full of medication. After being away for 2 weeks against their advice, they couldn't believe how I had cured. 3 months ago, another lifetime injury.. supposedly can only be fixed by surgery. I didn't believe. Cured myself. The pain is always there, but because my brain does not want to accept it, my body can deal with it.

You see, our medication from docs, actually comes from nature. Antibiotics comes from the ground mainly. Herbs, vitamins, etc.. all from natural things. I have not been under medication since I was a child because my body got immune to it.

Stress.. that word does not comprehend to me anymore. Because I understand.

579: Yes, next year, the changes will happen. I respect religion. But I prioritized believes

Thankyou Jinny- it is actually a relief to have someone who can view our culture subjectively and ask hard questions- even the best among the rest of us are simply so used to the way we do things, we never really stop and wonder why.

And Pericles- I think the link between Boaz's four topics is that he simply doesn't like any of them.

Dear Jinny,
There are two choices in life.
1 is random chance which is what is being taught in western education.
2 is intelligent design which most reject. As a result we have stress because we try to turn back time and control our thoughts with will power. The only choices in our mind is what we feed it.Rubbish in rubbish out. My son went to uni studying engineering. All temptations were placed in his path, eg drugs, sex, left & right wing socialism, alcohol, which could have distracted him from his chosen path but his mind had been set on the truth so he never deviated and passed with honors.
Random chance rarely leads to a desired outcome.
Intelligent design always trends upwards regardless of what comes against us. Clear vision and a thirst for knowledge and truth leads to the right path. Seek life abundently for we only have one go. This is not a practice run.

Sorry Pericles.... I thought it would be obvious.

"I am of course aware that you see life as a simply extension of your religious beliefs."

On the contrary, such things are the logical extension of the 'lack' of religious belief. (not mine...but of the unbeliever)

You've been around the traps enough to know what kind of machievellian antics existentialism leads to.. but just in case you're in doubt.

//The early 19th century philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, posthumously regarded as the father of existentialism,[5][6] maintained that the individual is solely responsible for giving his or her own life meaning and for living that life passionately and sincerely,[7][8] in spite of many existential obstacles and distractions including despair, angst, absurdity, alienation, and boredom.//

Argue if u wish...with Kierkegaard, not me.
But to any clear thinker the obvious direct leap from

Cogito ergo sum...I think therefore I am....

to 'whatever turns me on is fine'

This kind of thinking is not exactly hidden like a needle in a haystack you know.
Without our connection to the Almighty, you are left with this...and
anything else is just shallow sentimentality old son.

Your constant refusal to acknowledge this seems more to emanate from fear of admitting it than anything rational I've seen from you to date. (don't know how else to understand your position)

You're going to have to help me out here, Boaz

>>But to any clear thinker the obvious direct leap from Cogito ergo sum...I think therefore I am...to 'whatever turns me on is fine'<<

(thanks for the translation by the way; I would have been lost without it)

I could not for the life of me fathom out the "obvious direct leap" to which you refer.

I did a bit more research, in case I had missed something.

Stanford University, my first port of call in matters philosophical, turned out to be quite confusing.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-epistemology/

Instead of supporting your view that "Cogito" leads to the view that 'whatever turns me on is fine', it started to head in the exact opposite direction!

"In the final analysis, Descartes thinks he shows that the occurrence of thought depends (ontologically) on the existence of a substantial self — to wit, on the existence of an infinite substance, namely God"

Oh no! What to do?

Boaz tells me that Descartes' aperçu leads to depravity, while the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy says exactly the opposite - that it is a proof of God.

So please forgive my sluggish brain, Boaz.

But for the life of me I cannot see the link you made earlier between life originating as a single-cell organism, and casual sex, a road accident, and drug abuse.

Nor can I divine this latter "obvious direct leap", that you feel is so blindingly self-evident.

Can you point out the "obvious direct leap" that you can see, but Stanford cannot?