JEWS AND YOU AND JEWS

[moralist]

That's a simple one, Baal.

There is no morality on that island because morality can only apply when there are other people with whom to interact.

My position, precisely

That's because you define morality as a set of principles governing one's behavior toward others, instead of defining morality as a set of principles guiding one's efforts toward attaining one's own happiness.

Ellen

Our happiness depends on our behavior towards others.

Elaboration would be helpful. If true it can't be the only thing. The most important?

--Brant

That's right... "depends"... and even "largely depends"... but not "solely depends".

There's a genuine inner delight in doing right by others. It's like tasting the sweetness of a ripe piece of fruit, which when swallowed feels good inside.

Keep going; the more you say the better you sound. But you're still coming up short on this one, so keep going. For instance, I question "largely" (but prefer to let you do the work).

--Brant

Well, Brandt... that already just about summed it all up.

There can be no morality without others, and doing right by them is a selfish act because it's done for my own personal happiness as well as theirs.

Doing good = Happiness

Joan of Arc!

--Brant

(you just got 4th-down sacked on your own goal line)

I'm ok with that, Brandt. You can even do a victory dance.

In your example from the dead past, no one really knows how Joan felt inside except Joan. This is why my view isn't based on assumptions about people who were dead long before I ever existed. Rather, it is based on my own present day real world personal experience right here in America.

If, in your own personal experience, doing what's morally right is making you miserable, either you have a very good case that what I said does not apply to your life even if it applies to mine... or there is a flaw in what you regard as doing what's morally right.

Greg

The historical Joan--never mind the real Joan--thought she was doing right for France and the King of France (God talked to her), which made hers an altruistic endeavor. Objectivism bifurcates self interest and altruism while you, and she, don't. I mean, all it amounted to was, let's go fight the English. Today, let's go fight for oil in the name of fighting terrorism. (God talked to Bush.)

--Brant

the past ain't dead, only people, and your evidence of you is a pretty small sample example: she burned and you hummed--are you just lucky?

Since I have no direct personal experience of either dead Joan, or retired Bush, and so can't speak on their behalf... you'll have to take up your political complaint directly with him yourself as that has absolutely nothing to do with me.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the dead past, as in my own experience the only place things can actually happen is here and now in the present. Past and future are only intellectual constructs with which to deal with understanding causes and consequences.

The evidence in my own life, as well as my observations of others, is sufficient proof for me that doing what's right is essential for personal happiness. From the nature of your comments, your own life is obviously different in that doing good causes you to suffer. Sorry, I can't do anything about that so you'll just have to work it out on your own.

Greg

Now you've reduced the whole thing to an argument about you and one about me. I'm not aware of personally suffering, btw, from doing good.

--Brant

to the man?

There's no argument here, Brant.

I'm not certain why you were trying to bring politics into the discussion as is had nothing to do with the subject. Although that may have made sense to you as your political view must be an integral part of your view on morality and happiness for you to use it as your reference. Whereas mine isn't, which is why I didn't.

I've only defined the differences between our two views:

My view that doing what's morally right is essential to personal happiness... and your view that it is not.

Since these two views are irreconcilable, it is sufficient for us to each state their own view and to describe how it contrasts to the other view. And that has already been done. Each of our two views was derived from our own life experience and from our personal observations of this world.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

No, Greg. I'm trying to find common ground on what is and isn't morally right. Doing good for others assumes you are actually doing good for others, which can be quite problematical.

--Brant

[moralist]

No, Greg. I'm trying to find common ground on what is and isn't morally right. Doing good for others assumes you are actually doing good for others, which can be quite problematical.

--Brant

Well, that's what reality is for.

It renders the final impartial verdict by the just and deserved consequences of our actions to let everyone know whether they're actually doing good for others... or whether they only think they are.

[Ellen Stuttle]

First, restoring context, which by now is way up the thread:

That's a simple one, Baal.

There is no morality on that island because morality can only apply when there are other people with whom to interact.

My position, precisely

That's because you define morality as a set of principles governing one's behavior toward others, instead of defining morality as a set of principles guiding one's efforts toward attaining one's own happiness.

Ellen

Bob responds:

That is the definition I have always used, ever since I was a kid. It never occurred to me there would be another definition.

Since the other meaning is coined by Objectivists perhaps they should be written $morality and $ethics.

Ba'al Chatzaf

If it never occurred to you that there might be any definition of "morality" besides yours, I think that you weren't paying much attention to the panorama of ethical systems.

You have read some Greek philosophy, yes? Did you ever notice the idea of "eudaemonia"?

Although "happiness" is an inadequate translation, the idea that the goal is personal fulfillment is similar to the Objectivist approach to ethics.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/194966/eudaimonia

eudaemonism, also spelled eudaimonism, or eudemonism, in ethics, a self-realization theory that makes happiness or personal well-being the chief good for man. The Greek word eudaimonia means literally the state of having a good indwelling spirit, a good genius; and happiness is not at all an adequate translation of this word. Happiness, indeed, is usually thought of as a state of mind that results from or accompanies some actions. But Aristotles answers to the question What is eudaimonia? (namely, that which is activity in accordance with virtue; or that which is contemplation) show that for ... (100 of 249 words)

In Christianity, although one's behavior toward others is an important area for the display of virtue, the goal is salvation of the individual moral agent's soul with the reward of eternal bliss in Heaven.

In mystical meditative traditions of all types, the achievement of a particular inner state is the goal, and there are persons considered very holy who go off into solitary retreat meditative quests.

Even in Judaism there are ethical principles which don't pertain to behavior to others. Keeping the Sabbath holy, for instance, or honoring the dietary laws.

I can tell a funny little tale regarding honoring the Sabbath, a real-life story with a similar though not as drastic a setting as the desert island example.

Many years ago, in the '70s, a friend of mine, someone fom a Jewish background but not observant, went on a canoe trip in Canada with a couple Orthodox Jewish friends.

They were paddling and not finding a good place to pitch tents for the night. The two Orthodox Jews were becoming anxious with sundown approaching and the need to honor the "no work" proscription regarding the Sabbath. So the group pulled into the next clearing they found and set up camp. Sunlight had nearly fled when they noticed an unpleasant odor and, venturing in the direction from which the odor came, saw a bear doing guess what in the woods.

"The next scene," my friend said, telling the story, "was me and two Orthodox Jews working like hell on the Sabbath to break up camp and get out of there."

So, question: Were the two who believed that they shouldn't work on the Sabbath being immoral by their own standards? They asked themselves this after they'd managed to find someplace else to camp, and they concluded, no, because of the provision for exceptions.

Yes or no, their deliberation had nothing to do with their behavior toward other people. It had to do with their honoring or not honoring a principle which they thought they were supposed to honor whether anyone else was around or not. I assume the same question would obtain if one of them was in a solitary situation on a desert island (and could manage to figure out when the Sabbath was).

I think that were you to stretch your definition by classifying God (or "G-D," the spelling I've noticed you use) as "another person" in order to include such an example, this would be sophistry.

Ellen

[Brant Gaede]

No, Greg. I'm trying to find common ground on what is and isn't morally right. Doing good for others assumes you are actually doing good for others, which can be quite problematical.

--Brant

Well, that's what reality is for.

It renders the final impartial verdict by the just and deserved consequences of our actions to let everyone know whether they're actually doing good for others... or whether they only think they are.

The human race has been bumping into things and going "ouch" long enough to deserve some real philosophical reasoning so as to not bump into things so much. I see your position as an adjunct to that, not any primary. There are too many cultural mores that I'd find repellant that make people--some people--feel good about themselves, which contradict basic human needs. So you get Muslim theocratic states that retard progress and subjugate women, etc.

--Brant

[moralist]

No, Greg. I'm trying to find common ground on what is and isn't morally right. Doing good for others assumes you are actually doing good for others, which can be quite problematical.

--Brant

Well, that's what reality is for.

It renders the final impartial verdict by the just and deserved consequences of our actions to let everyone know whether they're actually doing good for others... or whether they only think they are.

The human race has been bumping into things and going "ouch" long enough to deserve some real philosophical reasoning so as to not bump into things so much. I see your position as an adjunct to that, not any primary. There are too many cultural mores that I'd find repellant that make people--some people--feel good about themselves, which contradict basic human needs. So you get Muslim theocratic states that retard progress and subjugate women, etc.

--Brant

It doesn't take a whole lot of philosophical reasoning to learn from the self inflicted pain of doing wrong. All it really takes is some self awareness coupled with a willingness to learn from our own life experiences as well as the ability to impassively observe others. For some a gentle tap on the shoulder is enough, while for others it takes a two by four over the head.

Reality provides both.

Rotten "cultural mores" only exist where people fantasize themselves to be victims, and angrily blame (unjustly accuse) others for the just and deserved consequences of their own failure to do what's morally right. Everyone is subject to that law. The only difference between the decent and the indecent is that the decent love the law, while the indecent hate it.

Every evil act arises from offended angry blaming victims of their own self inflicted pain..

[Brant Gaede]

And where did Western values come from--the ideas that founded this nation? All so easy?

--Brant

[moralist]

And where did Western values come from--the ideas that founded this nation? All so easy?

--Brant

That's another topic entirely and rather than following your lead into a political discussion, I'd rather reference values in a more universal context than just one point on a compass. Perhaps a thread in the political section might be a better setting.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

And where did Western values come from--the ideas that founded this nation? All so easy?

--Brant

That's another topic entirely and rather than following your lead into a political discussion, I'd rather reference values in a more universal context than just one point on a compass. Perhaps a thread in the political section might be a better setting.

Greg

My thread. Taking Jews out of politics is taking fish out of water. Regardless, go where you want why you want. It does raise the question of one's small ethnic-religious group existing within a much bigger and dominant one and how one is thus personally affected. Being in the present-day dominant group, I have the luxury of hardly thinking about this if my wont is not to respecting my day to day life and go tip-toeing through the tulips smelling the roses. You took the high road and I took the low road--or vice versa--but hopefully we'll both get to Scotland, whatever Scotland is. ~Shudder.~

--Brant

[moralist]

It does raise the question of one's small ethnic-religious group existing within a much bigger and dominant one and how one is thus personally affected.

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg,

Or, unlike other cultures over the centuries, Jewish people valued and fostered education in practical matters, creativity and production more than power.

This, to me, is available to anyone. And notice when people have done that, the blessings flow. (Look at the USA, for example.)

I don't believe in God (at least not in any form, rhetorical or metaphysical, I think you would relate to), but if I did, I would say we are all God's chosen people. We just get to choose what we want to do about it.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

It does raise the question of one's small ethnic-religious group existing within a much bigger and dominant one and how one is thus personally affected.

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg

The ChosenPeople meme is one of the most dangerous memes. The Nazis had their version, the fanatical Muslims have their version. The crazies of the world want to be God's special pet.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Serapis Bey]

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg,

Or, unlike other cultures over the centuries, Jewish people valued and fostered education in practical matters,

Do you really think European gentiles did not value and foster education in practical matters? To the extent that they are vastly outcompeted by Jews? Are European gentiles really dunderheads at the end of the day?

creativity and production more than power.

Are you serious? Power-lusting is a common human failing, but it strains credulity to think Jews are uniquely innocent in this regard.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

SB,

Boy, did you miss the point.

I ain't playing your game of either-or. I said what I said, not what you spite-filled mind thinks I said.

Your hatred of Jews and homosexuals and your other bigoted manifestations twists your perception.

There's no way to rationally discuss anything with a mind like yours, so I'm not going to bother appealing to reason.

Are you a Neo-Nazi Skinhead or something? You sound exactly like one in the crap you have been trying to post.

Snap out of it, dude. You don't have to be a bigot. There's a person in there, I glimpse him at times, but you're killing him.

Just a suggestion.

It's your life, so do as you please. But you won't see very much of the garbage you have been sending me get through.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Are you serious? Power-lusting is a common human failing, but it strains credulity to think Jews are uniquely innocent in this regard.

Oh, Jews with brains tend to stay behind the scenes or be appointed to important positions. Dumb Jews are smart enough to know they're dumb and tend not to embarrass themselves by running for public office except, generally speaking, in NY State. Dumb goys, however, are all over the political space including the U.S. Presidency. Controlling goydom is very important to Jewdom. Is this power-lusting for power's sake or power-lusting for Jews' sake? Mix and match? (Think of the Brits controlling the Americans in the last century for the model.)

--Brant

more Jews, less goys!

smart goys should convert to Judaism and take over Israel and The New York Times and subvert these entities to goydom for the sake of peace on earth

smart Jews should convert to the Muslim religion so . . . oh, wait--that'd be 1500 years too late--Damn!

(smart goys shouldn't write stupid trash)

where is Barry Goldwater when we need him?--50% Jewish was perfect and right (as in "Right-Wing")

[BaalChatzaf]

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg,

Or, unlike other cultures over the centuries, Jewish people valued and fostered education in practical matters, creativity and production more than power.

This, to me, is available to anyone. And notice when people have done that, the blessings flow. (Look at the USA, for example.)

I don't believe in God (at least not in any form, rhetorical or metaphysical, I think you would relate to), but if I did, I would say we are all God's chosen people. We just get to choose what we want to do about it.

Michael

Among marginal people, the only way to get ahead is to be so good at some useful trade that the others can't afford not to hire them to do the job.

In our society women have to be better than men in a line of work in order to advance. Ditto for Jews, Blacks and other marginal folk.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

That's innocent the way you make it sound as compared to what I have been seeing backstage.

I'm not hiding anything. I just don't want to pollute the forum. But so you won't feel left out, here's a link to a YouTube video this dude tried to post in the humor section. I'm putting it in code so it doesn't embed.

Warning.

Watch this only if you have a strong stomach for anti-homosexual and anti-Jewish bigotry. The real deal, not any nudging.

First you nudge. Then you push. Then you shove real hard. Then you start shooting and rounding up folks. That's the sequence propaganda is made to serve. It's to soften people up before pounding the target, especially if the target is among them.

This video falls into "shove real hard" category, at a point not too far removed from when the shooting starts.

Putting this crap in a comedy venue didn't make it less vile.

But it gets worse. Many of the comments on YouTube are just as vile. And some of them are saying the equivalent of, "He didn't mean it. He was just goofing on the audience."

That's how you feed it to the culture at first. Say later you don't believe it and snigger a bit (just look at the crap in the video description) after you preach your hatred with full heart and soul.

This is propaganda without any subtly. I want to say the lack of subtly, especially the sniggering nastiness throughout everything, is more offensive than the bigotry, but I can't get myself to feel that. The bigotry is more offensive.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Michael, I can't watch over 20 minutes of what seems to be faux performance art mostly of one hard to understand guy talking who might be a gay (self-hating?) Jew for all I know. If SB keeps trying to shovel this crap off on you, the dis-courtesy should be dealt with by banning him. Why waste any more of your time on him by vetting his material save to confirm your first impressions?

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

You may be right.

It's hard for me to accept lost causes, but this dude seems to be there.

Still plodding along, though...

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

On a more positive note, here is another theory about Jews from Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Here is the blurb from YouTube and then the video:

The 2009 Lou Church Memorial Lecture in Religion and Economics, presented by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Recorded at the annual Austrian Scholars Conference, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 12 March 2009. Includes a Welcome and Introduction by Joseph T. Salerno.

The introduction is a bit too long, it's over 7 minutes, so you might want to skip to the part where Rabbi Lapin starts.

Don't worry about the length of the video. Rabbi Lapin speaks well and intelligently, is entertaining, gives clever examples and gets quite funny.

I didn't listen to the whole thing yet (but I will) since I have listened to several Lapin videos, but I did listen enough to hear his shout-outs to Llew Rockwell, Walter Block, Murray Rothbard, and so on, and to hear him dig into a discussion about why Jews are better with money as a tendency than others.

He elaborated on all this in his book, Thou Shall Prosper: Ten Commandments for Making Money, which I am currently reading. It's a great book, too. This lecture seems to be around the time the book was going to market.

In short, the issue is not about race or Chosen People or Zionism or anything like that to the good Rabbi. It's a matter of principles anyone can learn. And he teaches them.

This is so much better than bigotry as explanation for differences...

I learned about Rabbi Lapin from Glenn Beck, but I have since concluded that I would have come across him one way or the other. I really, really like the way this guy thinks.

If anyone likes this video, too, and wants more, just search for Daniel Lapin on YouTube and there are tons of videos.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

This sounds a bit like Francisco's Money Speech.

Death to the Zero Sum Lie!

[moralist]

The totally out of proportion blessings that such a tiny group of people as the Jews have brought to the whole world is no mystery to me.

They're God's chosen people.

Greg,

Or, unlike other cultures over the centuries, Jewish people valued and fostered education in practical matters, creativity and production more than power.

This, to me, is available to anyone. And notice when people have done that, the blessings flow. (Look at the USA, for example.)

I don't believe in God (at least not in any form, rhetorical or metaphysical, I think you would relate to), but if I did, I would say we are all God's chosen people. We just get to choose what we want to do about it.

Michael

What I like most about the Jews is their moral values are behavioral rather than doctrinal. They were the original conduit through which moral law entered this world. America's secular government was built upon the foundation of Judeo/Christian values, and was specifically designed to work only for decent people who uphold those values. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson's design for the Great Seal of the United States was a depiction of the Jews leaving the slavery of Egypt.

These words from the Torah are cast into the Liberty Bell.

Proclaim Liberty throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof Lev. XXV X

This is why America has such a strong spiritual bond with Israel. It is the bond of shared moral values.

[moralist]

On a more positive note, here is another theory about Jews from Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Here is the blurb from YouTube and then the video:

The 2009 Lou Church Memorial Lecture in Religion and Economics, presented by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Recorded at the annual Austrian Scholars Conference, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 12 March 2009. Includes a Welcome and Introduction by Joseph T. Salerno.

The introduction is a bit too long, it's over 7 minutes, so you might want to skip to the part where Rabbi Lapin starts.

Don't worry about the length of the video. Rabbi Lapin speaks well and intelligently, is entertaining, gives clever examples and gets quite funny.

I didn't listen to the whole thing yet (but I will) since I have listened to several Lapin videos, but I did listen enough to hear his shout-outs to Llew Rockwell, Walter Block, Murray Rothbard, and so on, and to hear him dig into a discussion about why Jews are better with money as a tendency than others.

He elaborated on all this in his book, Thou Shall Prosper: Ten Commandments for Making Money, which I am currently reading. It's a great book, too. This lecture seems to be around the time the book was going to market.

In short, the issue is not about race or Chosen People or Zionism or anything like that to the good Rabbi. It's a matter of principles anyone can learn. And he teaches them.

This is so much better than bigotry as explanation for differences...

I learned about Rabbi Lapin from Glenn Beck, but I have since concluded that I would have come across him one way or the other. I really, really like the way this guy thinks.

If anyone likes this video, too, and wants more, just search for Daniel Lapin on YouTube and there are tons of videos.

Michael

I love Rabbi Lapin...

...and am currently reading his fascinating book "Buried Treasure". In it he describes how the wisdom of moral values has literally been embedded into the Hebrew language.

Greg

[Peter]

Michael wrote:

(I'm beginning to like WSS's spelling of Joos.) end quote

It cant be wrong if *we* are doing it; we are the good ones! Margrat Garlic, Witches Abroad, by Terry Pratchett

I like Mel Gibsons pronunciation: Say Mate, are you Juice?

Peter Taylor

[Peter]

Robert wrote: It doesn't particularly matter whether you are speaking about All Jews, Most Jews, or even Some Jews - qualify it however you want. What you are attempting to establish is a trend where "Jewishness" is the overriding (and troublingly convenient) problem . . . end quote

Do other ethnicities cultivate their heritage? Italians, Irish, Cajuns, Poles, Swedes (up in Minny Sota,) and most others who have had a member of their family immigrate to America surely cherish their heritage. So are Jews any different? Are Jews more organized than The Sons of Italy marching at the Saint Paddys Day parade? Do Jews stick to themselves? It would be evidence if they never intermarried with non-Jews. Ask Adam Sandler, he knows.

I once read an article about how everyone will be gray in a couple of centuries due to intermarriage between all the races. Are the odds greater that Jews will still exist in 2400? Will the Amish still survive? I notice that more and more people are having their DNA examined. Zero to one percent of blacks have Neanderthal DNA while other races have two to five percent Neanderthal DNA. No wonder whites are so hairy.

Peter