When will the BBC be held accountable for their lack of patriotism

Claig - What I can't see is how your paranoid conspiracy theories co-exist with your essential goodness ones.

As a (very last aside) I do find it interesting that when I engage upon a discussion that develops into something with the feeling of slippery lemon mousse about it, it invariably turns out that the debatees are Christian. Strange, that.

I'm not surprised you are off. It's tough sometimes at the coalface of debate.

Appletrees - "Coalition.possibly you, as you seem to agree with coalition."

IS one of those names wrong or am I mis-reading the thread?

I am a Christian but you don't need that to establish the moral imperative of society. Whether good is handed down to us, or we have defined good to be the best way to organise ourselves to minimise suffering, it is still there.

"I believe in God, it doesn't have to be a Christian God, any God, and I believe that goodness in nature comes from that God. I think there is a battle between that good and the evil on the earth. But I don't have any evidence-based research to back it up."

I can't leave without saying that is quite possibly one of my favourite paras ever.

Appletress - that's very defeatist. You probably can't benefit everyone equally, but I HOPE you can benefit everyone. This often isn't the case.

Natural according to whom though? Slave holding societies wouldn't agree. Patriarchal societies don't want to benefit women.

Societies probably generally act to the general benefit of society as a whole. That can be pretty shitty for some members of it and pretty sweet for others.

That might mean it's 'natural' in an economic/social science sense. It doesn't mean it is a biologically determined. It's an emergent behaviour of the system of people just getting on with shit.

Ah. "Human nature."

Okay, I must bow out at this point as I feel the points of difference are too great.

I leave you with love.

Coalition.possibly you, as you seem to agree with coalition.

'Claig - you have a touching faith in humanities natural goodness'

I believe that most people are good. The people who get power often aren't good and do evil things. The devil tempted Jesus Christ and offered him soveriegnty over the world, which he turned down, and was crucified instead. He was for the poor, the downtrodden and the good.

I believe in God, it doesn't have to be a Christian God, any God, and I believe that goodness in nature comes from that God. I think there is a battle between that good and the evil on the earth. But I don't have any evidence-based research to back it up.

I believe in absolutes, like Plato. I believe in truth and justice and good, above and beyond this world, and this world is only a fraction of the absolute, and the absolute is God.

And yes, I have read Bentham. Aren't we both awfully clever.

Says human nature. Whereas you seem to think the moral imperative was invented by the previous generation. Perhaps they received the information from alien astronauts.

every time I come back to have a look at this thread, you are some totally different topic lol

You must then believe in the merits of benevolent dictatorship. I believe Singapore was much admired by Margaret thatcher.

who must?

Told to them since birth, hully? so who invented them? God?

Oh come now. Once we began to live together in groups we discovered the necessity of co-operation. The large the groups - all the way up to mega cities - the greater the need for an agreed framework within which to operate.

You must then believe in the merits of benevolent dictatorship. I believe Singapore was much admired by Margaret thatcher.

that is a natural goal

Sez who? Jeremy Bentham? the Lord?

Told to them since birth, hully? so who invented them? God?

Appletrees - Many of those things ARE normal in some societies - maybe only when those outside a particular society are the victim but not always.

Coalition - yes, I would have thought that all the evidence pointed to the remarkable nature of the small amount of goodness to be found worldwide rather than the opposite.

"Goodness" is a luxury.

It is impossible to benefit the whole of society. The optimum is achieved with the maximum benefit. that is a natural goal.

'Or had they perhaps all read the Thoughts of Chairman Mao?'

quite possibly. It wouldn't take them long to read his thoughts, and the thieving scumbags would probably agree with them

Claig - you have a touching faith in humanities natural goodness which is tragically constantly challenged.

I wonder if the billion people suffering from starvation now, the millions who have died from famine SINCE the green revolution, and the populations of Afghnaistan, Iraq, Columbia, Mexico, South Africa, Chechnya, Somalia and former Yugoslavia would agree with that.

They acknowledge what they know cultural mores and rules, told them since birth, to be.

Plenty of peolpe don't. Plenty of redistributionists out there.

The breakdown of society does not mean society is unnatural. Perhaps you are Mrs thatcher? Or perhaps you believe in the merits of benevolent ahem dictatorship?