The base of life/beliefs/actions, in mental terms-philosophy Options

[LordAwesome]

It all comes down to a few things. The base is desire. then perception, followed by justification and acceptence. Before any given action, there exists a desire, and this desire is shaped by how the person percieves things. Then they have to justify these actions to themselves, and maybe others. They must then also accept what they have done. Also, it is then decided as good or bad. basicly that's what it comes down to.

I'd like to post a sound clip of Bertrand Russell speaking shortly about desire, i find it interesting.

i'll also touch on the MEANING od life itself here soon, i'm rather tired right now, so i think this will be all i have to say for awhile. though you should see how i connect this ideal with most other beliefs i will present.

[sadolakced acid]

what motivates desire?

[LordAwesome]

i think perception is a big determination of what we as people desire, as well as environment, and personal experiences. actually, i think i will host and link the sound file on desire. but as far as the implications for what we as people desire, it is heavily influences by our upbringing in must cases. what we are taught is right and wrong, stuff like that.

[sadolakced acid]

we can percieve that there is a lion about to eat us, but unless there is something to motivate us to desire to not be eaten, we won't desire to not be eaten, and therefore will willingly be eaten by the lion.

[LordAwesome]

well, one could say we percieve life as being precious, and we desire to preserve said life. so one would escape from said lion ^^

desire is really the base. man desires, for the most part, to live, so that would shape his perception of the situation as a dangerous, and undesireable one, it works both ways

[illumineering]

well, one could say we percieve life as being precious, and we desire to preserve said life. so one would escape from said lion ^^

desire is really the base. man desires, for the most part, to live, so that would shape his perception of the situation as a dangerous, and undesireable one, it works both ways

Desire is to wish for something. A wish cannot be perceived prior to some type of observation/analysis. Desire cannot be the base of life.

well, one could say we percieve life as being precious, and we desire to preserve said life.

This is a generalization based on your desire, therefore it is not necessarily valid. You are also forgetting the extremely critical variable of time. Time is necessary for this whole scenario to exist. As a result, I would argue that it is of a more fundamental importance to life than any component of your abstraction. Without enough of it available, your theory is not only impossible, it yields to randomness or even chaos.

[LordAwesome]

"All human activity is prompted by desire. There is a wholy fallacious theory that it is possible to resist desire in the interest of duty and moral priciple. I say this is fallacious, not because no man acts from a sense of duty, but, because duty has no hold on him, unless he desires to be dutifull. If you wish to know what men do, you must know not only or pricipaly their material circumstances, but rather the whole system of their desires with their relative strengths" bertrand russell

time? time is but a variable defined by man...

also, i'd like to explain more why you think my theory yields to randomness or even chaos. this intersts me, please further explore that notion so i can understand where you are comming from.

[illumineering]

^^^ Why did you place this quote here? Duty does not serve to define the content or scope of my last post. I don't see the point you are making with the placement of this.

Life and death are a function of time not only for mankind, but every other organic entity existing in this universe as well. If this does not place time as a base determinant of the nature of existence in this universe, nothing does. The cycles of time reflected in days, seasons, etc. serve to show time as a function of more than mane-made phenomena. The presentation of your philosophical view, or any other for that matter, is only possible with time. As a result, it only comes down to one thing - time. Without it, no thing can exist.

How about sharing some of your thoughts instead of quoting someone else's. A debate is predicated on the assertion of an opinion. Being stimulated by reading/listening to the views of someone else hardly qualifies as a debate. You cannot consider this a debate when you are simply copying/pasting text from another source.

[*RiC3xBoy*]

How about sharing some of your thoughts instead of quoting someone else's.  A debate is predicated on the assertion of an opinion.  Being stimulated by reading/listening to the views of someone else hardly qualifies as a debate.  You cannot consider this a debate when you are simply copying/pasting text from another source.

Alrite, Ill share one of mine. Instinct is what motivates all organic beings. Though knowledge, beliefs, justice, and morals are important, they branch off of instincts.

[LordAwesome]

i had stated previousely that i would share that quote.

Time isn't really something that physicly effects us. It is just a measure. As far as desire being the reason for life itself, that wasn't what i was driving for, more that it dictates human action. Also, quoting another source with a similar idea is perfectly fine. You act as if i have not myself presented any ideas of my own. Agian, your over critical analasys of my stance irritates me. But, that is ierrelevant. I was simply questioning the basis to your oposition in your previous post, if you have a problem with further explaining yourself, i appologize.

[*RiC3xBoy*]

Time isn't really something that physicly effects us.

Then what would you call old age?

[illumineering]

i had stated previousely that i would share that quote.

Time isn't really something that physicly effects us. It is just a measure. As far as desire being the reason for life itself, that wasn't what i was driving for, more that it dictates human action. Also, quoting another source with a similar  idea is perfectly fine. You act as if i have not myself presented any ideas of my own. Agian, your over critical analasys of my stance irritates me. But, that is ierrelevant. I was simply questioning the basis to your oposition in your previous post, if you have a problem with further explaining yourself, i appologize.

If time doesn't effect us, how do you account for birth and death? As a plausable theory desire can possibly motivate action, but not necessarily. There are many other theories that address motivation that include randomness and chaos as I previously stated. Just because you like the notion that desire dictates human action, does not promote it beyond the level of theory.

The nature of debate is the exchange of opinions. Quotes can help, but should not be the basis of your position. Debating also allows for the consideration of different views. I'm not being overly critical, just pointing out inherent flaws in your presentation and supporting alternative theories. Don't take it personally. If you want wholesale support of your idea, don't post it in debate.

I did explain myself in further detail. Read my response. I thought you suggested that you previously won a debate with a teacher. That suggests an understanding of the protocol for debate.

[LordAwesome]

as i said, time is simply a measure. time is not a force that causes these events to happen. Birth occurs as a result of desire, a couple desires to have sex, or desires a child. Death ocurs, not due to time, but use. The use of our organs, our bodies. Time is not a force that widles away at a person, events that take place IN time, whcih is a measurement, effect things. And i never stated i was basing my entire argument of of that quote. Also, i never suggested that my ideas were anything more than theory. now then, let us continue this debate

[*disco infiltrator*]

He was using the quote to justify his opinions. You can do that ya know. Mr. Illumineering, I never saw you mention anything about quotes when people quoted the Bible in other threads..or any other sort of quote. Why mention it now?

[illumineering]

He was using the quote to justify his opinions. You can do that ya know. Mr. Illumineering, I never saw you mention anything about quotes when people quoted the Bible in other threads..or any other sort of quote. Why mention it now?

I already explained that in my posts. Read them thoroughly.