the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Hmn posted 14 Apr 2004, 05:04 by Norsirai, Commoner

Loathe as I am to speak for Cu'jara, I think one thing he's trying to tease out is that morality is [i:2ko3mrmv]not[/i:2ko3mrmv] an illusion, nor meaningless. The reductionist stances he posed out for us a few posts earlier, indeed, are [i:2ko3mrmv]ripe[/i:2ko3mrmv] with implications. Of which, the first and foremost to my mind is that they lack logical follow-through. It's easy to think, and perhaps it may even be right (though I do not agree with this) that the pleasure of sex is an illusion merely wrought to heighten fecundity-- that love, might very well be nothing more than the proverbial weaving of straw into gold, to deepen the luster and hue of successful child rearing. The thoughts of evolutionary psychology that he's briefly related seem to shortsightedly ignore something, as if the [i:2ko3mrmv]purpose[/i:2ko3mrmv] behind the drive to propagate is merely to sow the seed, rather than an ordered latticework that frames up the forms of life itself. The two might seem the same, but they only seem that way. It appears to me, that such stoppered streams of thought only observe that the clothes are being mended by the fact that we must wear them, that the dishes and floors are being washed simply because they must be cleansed... while ultimately failing to note the diligent and beautiful stepsister behind all the work, if you will. That being, that whether the joy of sex is real or a red herring of the psyche, whether love is a fancy bred in the heart or in the head, what seems to be overlooked is that beneath the reality or the unreality, there is an implication of underlying purpose, irregardless of either. I believe it is this, which he is alluding to, however I'm sure he'll speak on it shortly. Whether I'm right, or wrong. :wink: view post

  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown.