Creationism/Evolution Debate

Discuss literature (e.g. books, newspapers), educational studies (getting help or opinions on homework or an essay), and philosophy.

Unread postby Phlegyas » Wed Sep 25, 2002 2:32 am

Vegetabcool wrote:Is 'The end justifies the means' in 'The Prince'? I had to read it for History, and I don't remember that being in there...
Anyway, I thought 'the end justifies the means' meant that whatever you do to get something, the end result is what you get according to the effort you put into it......or something like that. Say,
Sally wanted an A on her midterm in Chemistry. So, Sally had to find a way to pass. Sally sat next to Jessica (heh) in her Chemistry class, in order to look of her test. Sally cheated, and she got an A. What Sally wanted, was an A. Sally got an A. But that doesn't necessarily justify what happend. :shock:


It is in the Prince.

Yeah that is what it means, but like I said, Machiavelli did not intend for future rulers to use it in such a manner.
"Woe unto you, ye souls depraved
Hope nevermore to look upon the heavens;
I come to lead you to the other shore,
To the eternal shades in heat and frost.
And thou, that yonder standest, living soul,
Withdraw thee from these people, the dead"
Phlegyas
Langzhong
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:14 pm
Location: The dark catacombs of my mind. Longing for love, but getting lost in the labyrinth.

Unread postby Shi Jing Xu » Thu Sep 26, 2002 1:04 am

I agree! People such as Saddam for one! People take some things too seriously sometimes.
"As if you could kill time without injuring eternity." ~ Henry David Thoreau
User avatar
Shi Jing Xu
Hermione G
 
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 6:05 pm
Location: The Middle Way

Unread postby Wang Gui » Fri Dec 06, 2002 6:57 pm

What is interesting about Machiavelli's point of view is that it sumrize the pragmatism of political scientists and analysts today and clearly shows the difference between the "raison d'état" and personnal justification. The prince is the ruler of the land and as such will not tolerate crime or unlawful actions. However, if the actions become POLITICAL for one reason or another, then he can take any action claiming the "raison d'état" or in simpler terms "state interest" or "state security". Of course, with Machiavelli you mostly get justification for the statesman's violence and not the reason for the state's violence itself. That comes with Hobbes and his leviathan. Machiavelli's book his not about how to create a state, but mainly how to win one and manage one for as long as possible with or without th populace's consent. Machiavelli doesn't rule out any type of action, the first and foremost aim of the pricne should be to keep and consolidate his power. His book is about sducceding as a politician in a cuthroat "survirvor-type" environnement as was Italy in the 15th century. Machiavelli doesn't propose a political "system" but rather propose a "political method" of pragamatism. Now, in my view a good state needs a good set of values, a system to guard against all-out anarchy and fractionism, so we can say that I'm agaisnt Machiavell in a way, but I think he is great at revealing the thruth about politics aand ambitions and mainly about success at politics. I don't mean to say that a politician has to kill to succed, but that compromises are needed most of the time to succed in that though "roguish" world.
"Forever thine whilst this machine beckons him"
Wang Gui
Apprentice
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2002 5:52 pm
Location: burnt Luo Yang

Unread postby Tianshan Zi » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:02 pm

Wang Gui, you seem to be describing the motivations and methods of Cao Cao (whom I appreciate more and more daily). :)
User avatar
Tianshan Zi
Headless Thompson Gunner
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 3:18 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA, Earth, etc.

Unread postby AbsentM » Mon Feb 10, 2003 3:16 pm

As I'm not sure what the question was...

There really is no sure fire way to set up a government, you can't make everyone happy. Not just that but for order to be established with laws a principle is usually set that most agree on. Many different nations and cultures have different principles and morals. What we may see as wrong on our shores, may be completely acceptable somewhere else. Unfortunately some nations are kept in order by a Religeous principle. As we have seen this is difficult for nations with more then one religeon. Truly the only law people seem widely concurrent is murder. But then again a good war can "justify" that.

You also must remember that our own opinions are based on fact written by biased authors. I don't remeber who said it but, history is written by the winners. Hates, Loves, Desires, Morals are based on your interpretation of what is printed. My opinions are the influence of biase from what i've read, and if you look closely I'm positive you can pick some out. And what is printed as laws are accepted because people before us accepted them. An Example would be that many countries were founded on the eddict that the person sitting on the throne was the relative (usually an offspring) of some god. Why was it accepted? because people before them accepted it. With society the way it is today, how many countries still proclaim their leader the son/daughter of an entity lesser and lesser people believe in.

Until recently in history, facts weren't interpreted by 3rd, 4th,...100th parties. Atleast in regards to proper recording. Even now whats printed isn't eniterly true. Allways one spin or another. I'll bet you 1/3 maybe even half of what I read in my social studies book when I was younger didn't actually happen or didn't happen that way. I'm sure that holds true all over the world.

Can some one tell me, whats the average going rate on the lifespan of a countries government now adays? Usually about the same lifespan of their rulers, exceptions withstanding.

I in know way intended to stereotype anyones religeous beliefs, or fanatic worship. If I have offended someone, I apologize.
User avatar
AbsentM
Student
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Wallowing in self imposed hypocrisy and contradiction...

Unread postby Fen Dian » Tue May 20, 2003 7:04 pm

I am apologising in advance for any christians I may offend during this post.
Scientists have proved that man evolved from apes, but Christians have said that God made man in his own image, so does that meen God is a monkey?
'You sir are drunk...'
'and you madame are ugly...
but tommorow I shall be sober
ain't that a beauty'
Polite exchange between Sir Winston Churchill and a woman at a party.
User avatar
Fen Dian
Academic
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:43 pm
Location: In a nice white padded room wearing the styleish Jacket with long sleeves

A.I.

Unread postby Skyeye Amon Ra » Mon Jun 02, 2003 1:41 am

I would like to hear everyone's feelings about artificial intelligence.
A true test of destiny is Power. - Me

"Is it the sea you hear in me, its dissatisfactions? Or the voice of nothing, that was your madness?" - Sylvia Plath

"These fragments I have shored against my ruins." - T.S. Eliot
User avatar
Skyeye Amon Ra
Assistant
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 1:29 am
Location: Fighting through the wastelands of Natu

Unread postby Jiang Xun » Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:11 pm

VERY dangerous, it can be good, but the Matirx is a perfect example of how it can all go wrong, and lead to more probs then answers
Jiang Xun
Langzhong
 
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 12:40 am

Unread postby timon » Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:29 pm

Taishi Ziyi wrote:I am apologising in advance for any christians I may offend during this post.
Scientists have proved that man evolved from apes, but Christians have said that God made man in his own image, so does that meen God is a monkey?


No need to apologise ... because of the fact that evolution has never been proven yet. That is why until now it is still a "theory". They always say the missing link ... the missing link ... until now it is still missing. There are too many scientific facts that disproves the theory of evolution ... for one, the law of biogenesis ... simply said as like begets like ... second is the second law of thermodynamics ... or simply entropy ... any matter through time would tend to worsen it's state rather than become better.

as they say ... ignorance is bliss :lol:
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will sit in a boat drinking beer all day.
User avatar
timon
Changshi
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 2:58 pm
Location: in the great expanse of darkness called space

Unread postby Fen Dian » Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:30 pm

perze wrote:No need to apologise ... because of the fact that evolution has never been proven yet. That is why until now it is still a "theory". They always say the missing link ... the missing link ... until now it is still missing. There are too many scientific facts that disproves the theory of evolution ... for one, the law of biogenesis ... simply said as like begets like ... second is the second law of thermodynamics ... or simply entropy ... any matter through time would tend to worsen it's state rather than become better.

as they say ... ignorance is bliss :lol:


A very true and accurate point that you have put across here and I will remember that.

You mentioned the missing link and I think I have found it... P.E teachers. Have a look at these two small photos and tell me if you can see the difference?

Image and Image

Mods I can promise you this isn't spamming... it is another one and probably the last of my odd theorys I dare to put forward. :D
'You sir are drunk...'
'and you madame are ugly...
but tommorow I shall be sober
ain't that a beauty'
Polite exchange between Sir Winston Churchill and a woman at a party.
User avatar
Fen Dian
Academic
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:43 pm
Location: In a nice white padded room wearing the styleish Jacket with long sleeves

PreviousNext

Return to Literature, Academics, and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved