Well I think we're agreed here. What happens now? Do we do some kind of special handshake? It's very rare this happens on message boards.Vigormortis said:Science is a process, not a conclusion.
Well I think we're agreed here. What happens now? Do we do some kind of special handshake? It's very rare this happens on message boards.Vigormortis said:Science is a process, not a conclusion.
I would love to say yes, just because porn is a horrible and exploitative industry with virtually no regulation or oversight except that which it self-chooses and that further seems horribly likely to attract victims of sexual abuse to join its ranks...but ultimately, no, I can't. An adult, barring some sort of mental disease, is responsible for her own frame of mind and her own emotional responses to situations. If a porn star feels ashamed of her choices, that is ultimately her responsibility to make peace with.theboombody said:Does the viewer bear any responsibility whatsoever for the porn star's pain?
Living things strive to survive because the ones that didn't died out billions of years ago, they were outcompeted. Feel free to philosophise about the questions that are currently out of the reach of science, I know I like to, my only objection to your earlier post was to your claim that according to biology and physics emotional or spiritual pain shouldn't happen at-all. I demonstrated in my post why that assertion is inaccurate, once you leave the bounds of science on the other hand you're free to think whatever you like.theboombody said:So everything spiritual and everything physical has its only goal as being survival of the individual and/or the species. That's the ultimate answer. Why do living things strive to survive though? Why has DNA evolved the way it has to promote survival? What difference does it make if every planet in the universe is lifeless or if some planets have life? Scientifically, absolutely no difference. Philosophically, there's a lot. Do you want philosophy to pick up where science ends, or do you just want to leave the non-scientific questions unexamined?JoJo said:Actually, emotional pain is easily explainable by physics and biology. All pain is just a certain pattern of neurons in the brain firing in response to an external stimulus, so it makes sense that the stimuli doesn't have to be a physical injury. As for why you experience pain when a loved one dies, biology has that. Humans are social animals, we depend on being in a group for long-term survival. Hence people within our group dying, and especially family who share a large proportion of our genes, lowers our own survival prospects and thus our species has adapted over time to feel pain when someone we know and like dies, to encourage us to avoid deaths whenever possible.
Right, there is no point. All is vanity. Either give up living, or pick a vain thing to pursue. I arbitrarily picked philosophy debates.Vigormortis said:If "everything is dust" and everything is meaningless why waste your incredibly finite time starting threads online asking for others opinions on a topic? (or rather, proselytizing your own views under a thin veil of asking for others opinions) For that matter, why even bother responding to comments and replies to your thread? Isn't that effort pointless in the end? I mean, from your point of view, what's the point of anything?
I agree with much more science than what you believe. I pretty much agree with all science there is. I'm like a modern day Descartes. I just am not open to the idea that science is all there is and there's nothing else. I believe wholeheartedly that there is a ghost in the machine. I believe in the machine, but I believe in the ghost too. Where I disagree with the physicist is when they say they know for sure there is a machine only and no ghost. I'm not even saying the ghost is eternal or goes somewhere after death. I'm just saying there are things out there that are out of our logical grasp.Vigormortis said:Look, you've every right to ignore the truth, to ignore science, and to believe in whatever thing you want to make up. That's fine. You're more than welcome to do so and I'll even defend that right should someone want to take that right from you.
I'm glad you've chosen to appreciate temporary beauty. You're right, that does have some meaning. However, it would be a mistake to call the appreciation of temporary beauty "truth" and the non-appreciation of it falsehood. Those perspectives are just feelings, not facts. However, I agree with your analysis that the non-appreciation of temporary beauty is indeed dark. Personally, I have learned to enjoy the dark.Vigormortis said:However, I like to live in the real world. I like to live my life based on truth. And yes, I'm well aware of the predicted fate of the universe; with the heat death being the more prominent currently. However, I don't take that to mean that everything is pointless. I don't take that to mean we're all irrelevant. Quite the opposite. I take it to mean that it's all more important. It means everyday should be cherished, that everything and every moment should be appreciated in some form or another, as we'll never see those moments again.
A fair objection. I usually steer conversations that way to end up in a stalemate. I have no reason to though, since win, lose, or draw nothing makes any difference. But hey, if I don't spend my time doing vain things, what else am I going to do? Something productive? Yuck.JoJo said:Living things strive to survive because the ones that didn't died out billions of years ago, they were outcompeted. Feel free to philosophise about the questions that are currently out of the reach of science, I know I like to, my only objection to your earlier post was to your claim that according to biology and physics emotional or spiritual pain shouldn't happen at-all. I demonstrated in my post why that assertion is inaccurate, once you leave the bounds of science on the other hand you're free to think whatever you like.
I'm...not sure. Um...BloatedGuppy said:Well I think we're agreed here. What happens now? Do we do some kind of special handshake? It's very rare this happens on message boards.
Well when you put it that way. No.theboombody said:Even if the pain is brought upon themselves where no one forced the pornstars to choose the path they chose? Does the viewer bear any responsibility whatsoever for the pornstar's pain?
I find that to be silly. Not that I don't believe that exists or anything.Comocat said:For example, there is a story every few years about a teacher losing their job because some kid found their teacher in an old porn vid.
In many ways the porn industry is little different to any other, look at the exploitive abuses that take place to bring us our consumer goods and dispose of the items we are finished with.JoJo said:Interesting question. I'm leaning towards the response that if the pornstar willingly gave their consent, without any coercion or lack of other options, then they're responsible for their own career choice and any negative consequences that may come of it.
It becomes greyer though if they chose that option to avoid otherwise crushing poverty, similar to Fantine's choice to become a prostitute in Les Miserables to keep her young daughter from starvation, in that case arguably the consumers hold some responsibility. But then again, if those consumers didn't exist then she might have no options at-all and have died much earlier... it's complicated.