Equality

[ancient_paztriot]

Of coarse, money is the basis of equality now. I mean you have to be able to afford justice. Actually, that means there is no justice. There is no law. It's just 'artificial' power. But that's about to get a whole lot harder to manage. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

..............................

 

Guest: I think there is more than empirical.

 

Hridy: Yes. Let’s say (never mind God) we’re not going to do certain things and then everyone agrees. Ok, we’ll agree. Now there are situations where a group of people can successfully agree we’re going to respect each other apart from any other religious consideration and actually carry it out. But unfortunately, in the world at the present time, no such agreements appear possible. If you just want agreement for practical purposes, that’s one thing.

 

But you see, beyond that, we actuallymean to say – like Apartheid– we do say in South Africa or Central America something wrong is being done. I’m questioning whether the statement something wrong is being done is a real statement. Is that true? Or is it just emotion? Is there such a thing as justice and injustice?

 

Now talking about equality under law, if we perform any type of empirical test will get different scores – sometimes you’ll win, sometimes I’ll win. But it will always come out different. It is the same for everyone in this room. So that’s why you made your statement. On what basis is there equality under the law? Is it just imagination? Is it just foolishness? Why are we equal?

 

So like you said, I also say we are equal spiritually. It is a fact we are equal in the most fundamental sense. It is a fact that if I harm you, I’m really harming myself. I accept that to be true. But it’s not true from a materialist viewpoint. That’s my point. What I’m actually getting at is, if you examine the feelings and convictions we have, they imply the existence of certain spiritual truths. If you are honest enough to examine the implications of your own convictions, you’ll find your convictions imply some spiritual truths. Why should we therefore cling to these ethical convictions and cut them off artificially from the spiritual truths which actually support and explain them?

 

But that’s exactly what goes on in America. You find a climate in which it’s very fashionable for an intellectual to be an agnostic or not accept the soul. You’re suppose to do that. Many big scientists… of course there are exceptions, I know it’s not an absolute rule. But a general climate has been created there. If you really do believe we are equal – which I also accept – then why not accept the implication that the equality is spiritual, not material?

 

..............................

Ironic how the people most ignorant of themselves are so quick to speak of absolute atheistic standards for others.

 

Sidenote: The 36th chapter in the Nectar of Devotion is called "Transcendental Affection (Servitude)." I think it's interesting how servitude is included in that title.

[theist]

 

Sidenote: The 36th chapter in the Nectar of Devotion is called "Transcendental Affection (Servitude)." I think it's interesting how servitude is included in that title.

 

 

Yes, how can there be genuine affection without the desire to please the object of one's affection?

 

Even in this world if my friend is hot from the sunny day I will naturally want to offer him some lemonade or something. If I don't have that desire then where is the affection.