Re: Mind's Eye Moral compass

Yes, Neil, you can't get to the unity from the separation without the paradox, that each is inherent in the other. You have your own wonderful way of railing against that with example after example of horrible historical accounts, whether textbook or personal. I learn from it. thanks.

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 8:10:35 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote:

Molly - we've been friends too long for you to think I mean this in any nasty sense - but this is also the fascist credo.  Quite obviously not what you mean and something I'm sure you stand against.  Once you have the light, not grounded in Reason, it excuses anything.  Reason itself is even problematic once one becomes so sure you have it.  Candy rots teeth.

We might get round the problems with love.  It didn't help Moses any with the Midianites and seems a rather vain hope.  I had a friend who wished she had been born good.  Temptation to the directive light is obvious.  Yet this and other 'inner subjective' claims are the easiest to lie about.  Of course, the only enlivening part of the Bible for me was Doubting Thomas.  I suppose number one for me is wondering whether the preacher is any different from a double-glazing salesman.

Heidegger argues that, in the present crisis, we are waiting for a god who will reawaken us to the poetic, and thereby enable us to dwell in the fourfold. This task certainly seems to be a noble one. Unfortunately, however, it plunges us into the murkiest and most controversial region of the Heideggerian intellectual landscape, his infamous involvement with Nazism. Heidegger sometimes seems to use the term 'god' or 'divinity' to refer to a heroic figure (a cultural template) who may initiate (or help to initiate) a transformational event in the history of Being by opening up an alternative clearing. These heroic figures are the grounders of the abyss, the restorers of sacredness (Allan's avatars, perhaps).

Which brings me to my second.  I want to know from real history, not text rendered holy.  This may be because I'm Protestant and don't like priests telling me where to learn from.

Molly always get me going!

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 12:09:48 PM UTC, Molly wrote:

At some point, we give up all the do nots and live according to a guiding light (is it a principle?) that needs no words, but includes all creation in love. (sacred heart of Christ? Am sure each form of faith has a symbol for it) Until we know this (and have to feel it first) creeds and moral compasses, affirmations and mantras, candy in many forms sweetens the pot we sit on.

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 6:55:20 AM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote:

The objective is a social experiment..  starting with a moral guideline. Or as RP put it creed which is probably Is better word to use..

I have cut and pasted the different moral guides members use in day to day life.. they are submitted for easier study.

Love the Allfather with my whole Soul & being...
Love my neighbor as myself
As I judge other so too will I be judge
Do No Harm
Avoid murder, rape or enslavement of others
Avoid being enslaved by possessions

Molly :-)
It's a Sufi saying: Before you speak, let your words pass through three gates. At the first gate, ask yourself 'Is is true.' At the second gate ask, 'Is it necessary.' At the third gate ask, 'Is it kind.

RP :-)
My moral compass
Don't fear anything , but use your reasoning faculty to do the right thing.
do not covet but earn and save for the needs of yourself and family.
Do not be lustful but be happy with your spouse.
Do not be arrogant but respect yourself and others.
Don't be angry but take care to do your duties.

Chris:
 If it harms none, do as you will.  :-)

Neil:
I don't really do creed Allan.  Found too many people who talk them and mean none.

Molly made a comment about the end of my own submission which I thought was valid so I chopped it..  only because it was my own submission I felt free to modify  without group input.

All of the submissions I found fascinating. The award for the most original goes to RP. The difference in cultures shows up well. His submission is extremely honest.. Molly's is an excellent way of handing the events of day to day basis. Chris's guide is another of wicca in general (a poor attempt humor)  ☆ "burning at the stake is not allowed" . Neil's no guideline and reasons given are very valid, showing effort not to fall into te next category.

This category can maybe  best described as a cork (being nice) floating in the ocean of humanity being tossed around by whichever direction the wind is blowing or the current flowing caught within the gyres of greed and  selfishness fostered by the news, games and entertainment.

To have a successful experiment we need to design a common moral guidelines for the experiment. So gentle people start your shredders.
 





تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين
Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.