The reality of what?  That people will die and there is nothing you can do to stop it in certain cases?

I disdain your fatalism, but w/e that philosophical approach is your choice.

Of course people die and that is reality.

Millions of doctors "assigning them the worth they are due which is high" and saving people's lives is a daily occurence in every ER room around the world.

There are a lot of godless doctors who take the hippocratic oath, and "assign them the worth they are due which is high".  There are a lot of doctors (probably including godless ones) who "assign them the worth they are due which is high" and are helping the burmese people right now because either they are burmese doctors or they are outside doctors who want to help.

Again, your point?

My point is that you "assigning them their worth which is high," and donating to charity and saying, "the war in Iraq is wrong," makes no difference to them. None. It is no different than being a christian, going to church, saying you love everyone and praying that they are safe.

The only difference is you are not saying people will burn in hell if they don't do as you do

As for the millions of doctors - if it wasn't for the millions of soldiers, millions of alcohol and fast food salesmen, millions of shoddy toy sellers, millions of dangerous chemical manufacturers, millions of car manufacturers etc, we wouldn't even need those doctors. And would certainly treat the nurses and doctors better than we do. They would be at the top of the tree instead of the pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies.

Mark Knowles wrote:

My point is that you "assigning them their worth which is high," and donating to charity and saying, "the war in Iraq is wrong," makes no difference to them. None. It is no different than being a christian, going to church, saying you love everyone and praying that they are safe.

The only difference is you are not saying people will burn in hell if they don't do as you do

As for the millions of doctors - if it wasn't for the millions of soldiers, millions of alcohol and fast food salesmen, millions of shoddy toy sellers, millions of dangerous chemical manufacturers, millions of car manufacturers etc, we wouldn't even need those doctors. And would certainly treat the nurses and doctors better than we do. They would be at the top of the tree instead of the pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

What the situation "might be" if the world were a better place might just depend on the attitude of those doctors and the implied pacifism rubbing off on the people and things you just mentioned in the here and now.

If you want to "believe", because that is what it is, just a belief, that taking action to make things right in the form of protesting a war, or giving to charity or even better administering charity directly (like a doctor) does not make a difference then you believe that and that is your belief (albeit an irrational one).

Millions of doctors helping people would stilll exist even if those millions of soliders alcohol and fast food salesmen and everything else did not, due to natural disease in the environment we live in, (and also if you want to argue this particular point you better have some pretty solid archeological/biomedical evidence to back this notion up)

That being said, millions of doctors helping people because they are "assigning them their worth which is high" exist before your world could ever exist in the manner in which you portray it.  Perhaps that is what you wish for, perhaps that is what you hope would be the case, but in the order of things people change from worse to better, (if situations, peoples and things are to actually get better), and people realizing that life is of high value and taking action and encouraging other people to realize that too as well as doing good things is not equivalent to goin to church, saying you love everyone, and praying they are safe.  It really is not and if you cannot see how it is not then oh well.  There may be some people who do both, but both are not equivalent, and if both are then gee golly there are a lot of redundant characters who inhabit this planet! 

I will attempt to explain.  On the one hand you have the world as it exists (doctors and soldiers and all), and in order to get to a place where killing and hurting people does not happen, life needs to be viewed in a manner that it is not "expendable" and that people can make a difference and sometimes make a difference by not acting on the impulse when they feel the urge to kill, maim, or commit violent acts and instead communicate and try to understand what it is they are having problems with.  Fatalism of the sort you are hinting at undoes this on a lesser scale to christian fatalism that puts these people in the wars in which they end their own existences in in the first place.  However I would distinguish this sort of fatalism with the attitude people had in the french revolution or in our own american revolution wherein their very lives and freedom's were at stake and they had a survival imperative to fight in order to remain free men and free women.  This as history has shown was quite grounded in reality, similiar to the aspirations of people who longed to be free from the totalitarian hands of the Medeival Inquisition and actually did something about it instead of sitting around and praying to "god".

Also, on the one hand you have people going to church, praying to god, and saying how they love each other.

On the other hand you have people giving time to the red cross, protesting war, and having lots of thoroughly enjoyable sex with each other (some of which may result in a child being born if they decide not to use protection), and actually making a visible difference in all three cases (vietnam war case in point).

These two scenarios existed mutually somewhat in the lives of vietnam era war people who did not support the war, but they are not equal to each other anymore than saying jesus is god is equal to saying my dog is god.  To contend that those two scenarios are equal is irrational because in one your hoping for something to happen and in the other you are translating a kind of hope into action, not just sitting around praying for it to happen.

On a lighter note I do agree that the pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies are pretty corrupt given they are "at the top of the tree" so to speak.  Pretty damn corrupt as a matter of fact.

Zarm Nefilin wrote:

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

If you want to "believe", because that is what it is, just a belief, that taking action to make things right in the form of protesting a war, or giving to charity or even better administering charity directly (like a doctor) does not make a difference then you believe that and that is your belief (albeit an irrational one).

Well, I don't have time right now to do the whole thing so I will go with just this for now.

This is a list of the protests that I know about against the invasion of Iraq:

    * 1 Prior to the invasion of Iraq
          o 1.1 September 12, 2002
          o 1.2 October 26, 2002
          o 1.3 October 31, 2002
          o 1.4 November 9, 2002
          o 1.5 January 16, 2003
          o 1.6 January 18, 2003
          o 1.7 February 15, 2003
          o 1.8 March 8, 2003
          o 1.9 March 15, 2003
          o 1.10 March 16, 2003
          o 1.11 March 19, 2003
    * 2 Invasion to the fall of Baghdad
          o 2.1 March 20, 2003
          o 2.2 March 21, 2003
          o 2.3 March 22–23, 2003
          o 2.4 March 24, 2003
          o 2.5 March 25, 2003
          o 2.6 March 27, 2003
          o 2.7 March 28, 2003
          o 2.8 March 29, 2003
          o 2.9 March 30, 2003
          o 2.10 April 7, 2003
    * 3 After the fall of Baghdad
          o 3.1 April 12, 2003
          o 3.2 October 25, 2003
          o 3.3 June 4, 2004
          o 3.4 June 5, 2004
          o 3.5 June 27, 2004
          o 3.6 August 29, 2004
          o 3.7 October 2, 2004
          o 3.8 October 17, 2004
          o 3.9 November 30, 2004
          o 3.10 January 20, 2005
          o 3.11 March 19, 2005
          o 3.12 June 21, 2005
          o 3.13 August 6, 2005 to August 31, 2005
          o 3.14 September 24, 2005
          o 3.15 November 4–5, 2005
          o 3.16 March 18 – March 20, 2006
          o 3.17 April 1, 2006
          o 3.18 April 29, 2006
          o 3.19 May 22–31, 2006
          o 3.20 August 9, 2006
          o 3.21 September 21, 2006
          o 3.22 September 23, 2006
          o 3.23 October 5, 2006
          o 3.24 November 3, 2006
          o 3.25 January 4, 2007
          o 3.26 January 10–11, 2007
          o 3.27 January 27, 2007
          o 3.28 March 11, 2007
          o 3.29 March 16, 2007
          o 3.30 March 17, 2007
          o 3.31 May 21, 2007–
          o 3.32 September 15, 2007
          o 3.33 September 29, 2007
          o 3.34 March 19, 2008

All over the world. the US, the UK, Europe, Australia. Millions of people were involved in these protests, and here are a few links to some of the organizations involved.


A.N.S.W.E.R
Critical Mass
NION
Port Militarization Resistance

This photo was shot in September last year:


I "believe" that they made no difference. But, if you "believe," they made a difference, you are welcome to show me other wise

Bah, that is so one sided mark.  Just because the war has not ended yet does not mean those protests did not make a difference.

Protesters all over the world are protesting the Chinese treatment of the Tibetan people and China is in a real political tight spot.  Does that mean that the olympic games won't still happen in China?  No, probably not, it will most likely still happen.  However China is going to get hurt pretty bad in the area of foreign relations for the way they are bungling the whole affair, which might force them to rethink down the line the way they handle their relations to the Tibetan people, and possibly, somewhere down the line change that.

I give up man, seriously I do.  Protests are designed to show dissatisfaction with things, so if Obama gets elected or Hillary get elected and the war in Iraq comes to an end then perhaps I could claim that I was correct? In regards to this (with you) I doubt so.  Protests make a difference even if they do not bring about the thing they primarily seek.

Just look at Bush's approval ratings and what the American people think of the Iraq war.  Surely all those protests all around the world made a difference in opinion?  If I see my co worker protesting it makes me stop and think about what it is their protesting.  That is a difference.  Even if the war doesn't end there are people who will protest it.  There are others out there who are prepared to take even greater measures than that and they want Ron Paul in power.

Just because you cannot see a difference does not mean there is not one being made.  The war ending is not the only difference protesting a war can make.  If enough popular support is garnered for the idea that the war should end, then someone gets elected who does not support that war and the war ends.  So until we see who is the next president I am afraid I will just have to say "I give up".

Mark Knowles wrote:

LOL At last!

I think learning to love people we find offensive is a challenge we have all faced.

I must have been unclear with the whole sand thing.

I think we are no more important than a grain of sand. Not that we become a grain of sand.   Although we may do. We may also become a fossil or an oil deposit.

One more question though.

What makes you believe this?

I did not say I believe this, Mark

I intentionally used the word "think" to stress that this is not set in stone belief, but just a working assumption. I can't point out specifically what exactly made me thinking like that - this is a sum of my life experience, of what I read and heard and thought of...

As for the grain of sand or spec of dust - for some reason I got an impression that you said several times here that you don't think anything "spiritual" is left after we die. I might get it wrong of course

As for your debate with Zarm - I too think people are precious. But I long gave up to help some random people on the other side of the globe, or to try to help those who don't accept my help. I think it is a waste of effort. I help those I know personally, mostly when they ask for help - and I think this is the best way to approach the issue. And I'm trying to make my help available to anybody who dares to ask for it  - in a form of my web presence

Misha wrote:

Love ya, too :-*

I have to say loving you or Mark is much easier for me than loving, say, SirDent or ColdWarBaby - but I am trying hard

Actually, I think this pretty much answers the original question. I think my current assignment here in this world is to learn to love. Everybody and everything that comes my way.

I do think we come here to learn. I do think we are not limited to this world, and in a sense we do not disappear after we leave it. I don't know which exactly part of us and to which degree, though. And no Mark, I don't think it is about our bodies' decomposition and elements becoming parts of ground, grass, etc. I think there is something else to it

I do think we where created, and the whole world was created, too. And I think we are the method our creator uses to explore the creation - like we collectively are his senses - in a sense

That's pretty much the basis I operate off

Misha, way to share your beliefs!  Props to you for being so bold as to type out what you believe here...it's admirable.

Misha wrote:

Mark Knowles wrote:

LOL At last!

I think learning to love people we find offensive is a challenge we have all faced.

I must have been unclear with the whole sand thing.

I think we are no more important than a grain of sand. Not that we become a grain of sand.   Although we may do. We may also become a fossil or an oil deposit.

One more question though.

What makes you believe this?

I did not say I believe this, Mark
I intentionally used the word think to show that this is not set in stone belief, but just working assumption. I can't point out specifically what exactly made me thinking like that - this is a sum of my life experience, of what I read and heard and thought of...

As for the grain of sand or spec of dust - for some reason I got an impression that you said several times here that you don't think anything "spiritual" is left after we die. I might get it wrong of course

As for your debate with Zarm - I too think people are precious. But I long gave up to help some random people on the other side of the globe, or to try to help those who don't accept my help. I think it is a waste of effort. I help those I know personally, mostly when they ask for help - and I think this is the best way to approach the issue. And I'm trying to make my help available to anybody who dares to ask for it  - in a form of my web presence

Trying to help those who do not accept your help is a bad thing as you already know, because it wastes your time.

For me it is bad, not only because it wastes my time but because it is not respectful of other people's <<boundaries>>.  If people do not want help then trying to give it to them is going against what one is trying to accomplish by definition.

As far as helping people I do not know, globalization as it currently exists imo lends more credence than ever to the idea we are in this thing together as a race.  If I have the time to help people I do not know after already taking the normal time out to help those that I do know and love, then such is my choice and such will I do.

Everyone has a take on something, and is not that the beauty of life?  That we can all have different ideas and opinions and governments that allow that to happen?  Perhaps this is idealism at it's worst, perhaps its just a sugar coated optimism, but I am an optimist at the core of who I am.

I am an optimist because pessimism has no vision other than acceptance and subsequent surrender.

And for me surrender is not an option.  Never say quit, stick it to the man, that's the only way one gets respect in this world.  That is my take on things.

I came to an understanding for myself last night, that the thing the greeks believed in the thing the french believed in during their construction of their society and the thing that the americans believed in back during the revolutionary war all have striking similiarities and represent the same essential ideal.

The ideal for people to exist with variances in opinion and belief and even different takes on what constitutes knowledge, and to exist in peace and prosperity and pass this on to their children.  To avoid war, to avoid 100% certainty on any one thing if that negatively affects another person's right to have their own opinion.

Simply existing without waging war or committing violent acts and instead verbally communicating with each other will be a tremendous achievement for humans.  I hope that I live to see that day when people no longer hurt each other through lies, deception and violence and just simply BE with agreed upon roles that respect their boundaries.

There are so many people who are seriously hurt that I wonder sometimes why people cannot love without expectations, why people cannot just simply help each other without having the proportions be off so much as far as what is expected in return.

Why when people go and get help from a minister that minister has to tell them about "god", or why when people goto get help from a social worker that social worker attempts to pressure them into a "pill mentaliy", or why when people are hurt or broken or dying even other people just pass them by as if they do not have the time of day to give them aid even though the person who is doing the passer by lives in the same town as the person in question.  I just do not understand disregard and indifference to the plight of others and I probably never will understand it enough to agree with it.  I also do not understand how people have to expect something in return for their help that is disproportionate to the help they gave, (i,e a minister helps me and expects me to believe in god, or a social worker helps me and expects me to believe a pill will solve my problems).  Is it not good enough that the feeling of helping a person and the money received (or some other form of reciprocation for time and effort that is socially acceptable), is enough?

Why is it that people cannot just simply be? 

It is like we are all playing pretend and make believe and if questioned we play pretend about that even.

In any case these are my thoughts.

Yeah Zarm,

I can relate on much of what you are saying As for surrender - read here http://hubpages.com/hub/Surrender---Exc … f-Creation

Zarm Nefilin wrote:

Bah, that is so one sided mark.  Just because the war has not ended yet does not mean those protests did not make a difference.

Protesters all over the world are protesting the Chinese treatment of the Tibetan people and China is in a real political tight spot.  Does that mean that the olympic games won't still happen in China?  No, probably not, it will most likely still happen.  However China is going to get hurt pretty bad in the area of foreign relations for the way they are bungling the whole affair, which might force them to rethink down the line the way they handle their relations to the Tibetan people, and possibly, somewhere down the line change that.

I give up man, seriously I do.  Protests are designed to show dissatisfaction with things, so if Obama gets elected or Hillary get elected and the war in Iraq comes to an end then perhaps I could claim that I was correct? In regards to this (with you) I doubt so.  Protests make a difference even if they do not bring about the thing they primarily seek.

Just look at Bush's approval ratings and what the American people think of the Iraq war.  Surely all those protests all around the world made a difference in opinion?  If I see my co worker protesting it makes me stop and think about what it is their protesting.  That is a difference.  Even if the war doesn't end there are people who will protest it.  There are others out there who are prepared to take even greater measures than that and they want Ron Paul in power.

Just because you cannot see a difference does not mean there is not one being made.  The war ending is not the only difference protesting a war can make.  If enough popular support is garnered for the idea that the war should end, then someone gets elected who does not support that war and the war ends.  So until we see who is the next president I am afraid I will just have to say "I give up".

LOL - You sound just like the christians.

"Just because you cannot see god, doesn't mean he's not there."

Seriously, I asked you to show me what difference it made to the people of Iraq.

Bush's approval rating. That should make a massive difference to the dead ones. So, who gets elected determines whether or not the protests made a difference?

I will leave you with an analogy. As you have given up proving it made a difference, and I have chosen to ignore all the evidence you have shown me.

Let us say you are 10 years old again. You are outside bouncing a ball.

You decide you are going to bounce that ball 100 times.

Your Mother calls you and tells you to stop bouncing the ball because it is time for dinner.

You call back, "coming," and keep bouncing the ball. 25

She shouts again. 30

You shout back, "OK, I'm coming." 40

She shouts again. 50

You shout back, "All right, I am coming." And keep bouncing the ball. 60

"This is the last time I'm telling you." 70

"Coming now." 80

"Zarm if you don't come in this second, there is no dessert for you." 90

"All right, no need to get angry." 100

Stop bouncing the ball and go in.

Misha wrote:

I did not say I believe this, Mark

I intentionally used the word "think" to stress that this is not set in stone belief, but just a working assumption. I can't point out specifically what exactly made me thinking like that - this is a sum of my life experience, of what I read and heard and thought of...

As for the grain of sand or spec of dust - for some reason I got an impression that you said several times here that you don't think anything "spiritual" is left after we die. I might get it wrong of course

As for your debate with Zarm - I too think people are precious. But I long gave up to help some random people on the other side of the globe, or to try to help those who don't accept my help. I think it is a waste of effort. I help those I know personally, mostly when they ask for help - and I think this is the best way to approach the issue. And I'm trying to make my help available to anybody who dares to ask for it  - in a form of my web presence

OK.

What I have said is I have no idea what is left after we die. No one does. Lots of people have beliefs, and my own belief is there is nothing. I don't know for sure though, and prefer to live my life as though this is it rather than based on the fact that there is a reward later If someone comes back and proves otherwise, I am open to persuasion.

I too think people are precious. But not in the sort of global, "everyone is precious." If everyone is precious, no one is.

That is too much like the christian, "love everyone." approach. And just as hippocritical. I know plenty of christians who claim to love everyone yet at the same time believe their god will condemn those people to an eternity in hellfire.

Plus, I know plenty of people that to offer them your love is to end up with your throat slit down a back alley somewhere.

I, like you, offer my help and support to those around me. And I am very choosy whom I "love."