Arts degrees.

I'm doing a double degree - Bachelor Arts/Bachelor of Commerce (business) and so i have to do some arts subjects at uni.

A lot of people just try philosophy for a semester or two to see what it's like - especially at University of Sydney

has anyone read anything on or by George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff?

in a nutshell:
"Gurdjieff taught that four states of consciousness are possible for man: ordinary sleep at night; the habitual hypnotized state in which people live when they get up and go about their daily lives (which Gurdjieff called ``waking sleep''); self-consciousness, in which a man is awake to the whole of himself and sees himself as he is; and objective consciousness, in which he sees the reality behind the way the world appears."
except alot more complex

i've also heard 'waking sleep' termed 'consensus trance' in transpersonal psychology books

but objective conscioussness vs subjective morality is one of hte major themes in his books and books written on him and his ideology.

ps. good post renegade and artic

quote:

Originally posted by emander Great stuff here. What about Islamic Jihad and the morals of the terrrorists? They seem to do everything in the cause of their religious beliefs, even beheading people without a trial. They have to believe what they are doing is right though, but the logic escapes me.

indeed, indeed.
but you forgot to list one guy, who abuses his religion in a very similiar way. guess who it is... george bush.



back to topic
imo our ethical values have been formded during the human evolution. religion came from men, not the other way around. consequentialy the ten commandments are rather an adoption of values that have its origin much earlier.

Last edited by soundrush on Jul-06-2004 at 08:13

lol...

drug_tito is on the ball. the theory of evolution has the most logical explanation for why we have morality.

___________________
The father made fetuses with flesh licking ladies / While you and your mother were asleep in the trailer park / Thunderous sparks from the dark of the stadiums / The music and medicine you needed for comforting / So make all your fat, fleshy fingers fingers to moving / And pluck all your silly strings and / Bend all your notes for me and / Soft silly music is meaningful, magical / The movements were beautiful / All in your ovaries / All of them milking with green fleshy flowers / While powerful pistons were sugary sweet machines, / Smelling of semen all under the garden / Was all you were needing when you still believed in me.

I happen to agree with Arbiter's post. There is no one definitive set of morals. Each individual carries a set of their own. Certain people are more apt to point a finger at religion, a diety, or even the "law" of a land when attempting to find the answers about morals or the way they view life. As Sri Ramana Maharshi once said : "Know your self before you seek to decide about the nature of God and the world".

Trying to answer such questions as "Where exactly did our morals come from?" can lead a person to find themselves amidst a large argument, because one has to be prepared to look "outside the bun" (figure of speech) and take in another individuals theories. Keep in mind, there were people who had no concept of religion on earth at one point and time. And yet, somehow they could not have all been mass murderers, because in that case, none of us would be here today to debate this fine concept. Somehow, the concept of not murdering a fellow human was accepted. But not by law, and certainly not by religion. It is one thing that should be kept in mind when debating this subject.

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

very much a chicken or the egg question. Did we all as a society get our morals form religion, or did religions pick up moral standards from the societies in which they formed?
note how many religions adapt to changing society, which suggests that religion is not the basis of morality.
Whichever was the origin of current standards, you certainly do not need to believe any religious ideals now to get decent morals. it seems the original argument itself was confused. One side argued that you need religious belief to have good morals, then said that government set laws based on original religious standards. Thus you can take your standards from government and also from your social circles without having to refer back to the religion (whether that is the origin of the standard or not)