i inferred from your posts that you were arguing for the existence of a god because you believe that a higher source of morality in man is self evident. but now it seems you are saying "if god exists, then he is the source of morality", not saying "our morals are evidence for his existence.' if the former is what you mean, then you have no argument from me on something so obvious, so obvious a point that i missed it perhaps because i am surprised that you would feel the need to make it. to this i would say... no sh*t. oh, very creative cut & paste flaming ..i am impressed with your intellect. :-/ ps cesko, you are an idiot.
I got my answer, some very good answers. However, one person e-m'ed me about career changing, which would have been a good way for the thread to go if he had posted it on the board but instead he just said the thread had taken a weird turn. I'm sure he could have gotten much better responses from others about career changing than I was able to give him if he had posted it. For me personally, the number of posting notifications filled up my e-mail box and I still look at each one I get, and it's getting to be a nuisance. I truly and sincerely appreciate the responses to my original post. But it would be nice if one of you would start your own thread, maybe you can call it GOD AND TRADING or something, and then you would get all of the notices. Actually I just saw the email notifcation box can be unchecked, which I will do immediately, but that doesn't change what I said above. And philosophically, I guess I'm glad I was able to simulate such deep thinking with such a humble question. So keep the thread if you want. (LOL)
nl, you are right, so we are now officially finished here (especially since i got the last word in ;-) we return your thread to you, a little tattered but essentially intact.
FasterPussycat Thank you for compliment. You are a person who thinks there is nothing beyond reason and logic. What should I discuss with you? You are so simple that it's impossible to even touch the surface of the problem previously discussed.
Darkhorse: I must say that I disagree with the assertion that atheists are hypocrites if they believe in any ethical principals other than moral relativism. Couldn't morals be at leat partly innate in us, the product of such things as empathy, which in turn were developed through evolution to protect our species from destroying itself? Thus, anyone who doesn't recognize this innate "right and wrong" is the outcast. Or perhaps our ability to reason like no other creature on earth has allowed us to figure out in a logical manner what should be right and wrong if we are to live in society, and hence if we should violate the golden rule (or Kant's Categorical Imperative, which is slightly different), we are betraying the principles of society, and hence we are outcast (and often feel guilty). Again, this is NOT an argument against the existence of God, only against the notion that God MUST HAVE created our moral principles (and an argument against calling atheists who believe in ethics other than moral relativism as hypocrites). NJ, I must concur with Fasterpussycat. Just trade or open a new thread for crying out loud. It's not hard. Just as it is the law that if you have custody of something for long enough it eventually becomes yours, even if the original owner claims it again. Probalby a better example is trademark law. If another company or companies uses your copyright/trademark enough times or for long enough time, you lose your rights on it, because eventually it is wrong to make these companies pull what they may have innocently thought was theirs. We have innocently commandeered this thread, and if you had a problem with it, you should have said something sooner, not after several days of discussion. This thread ceased to be about age and trading awhile ago. It only takes a couple clicks to create a new such thread. Sorry, but with all due respect, those are the facts my friend. Darkhorse: BTW, you forgot the following: I saw your mother walking down the street the other day kicking a can. I asked her what she was doing. She said, "MOVING."
i missed boat, thank you for bringing up again this notion of a natural moralism, i mentioned it some time ago but dark conveniently ignored it. what is interesting is that african apes live their lives as social animals and cooperate without the benefits of clergy or the commandments of a god. (their genes are 99% identical to ours). often aged males past their reproductive stage have been seen to linger at the rear of an escaping troop attacked by leopards in what is essentially a suicidal fight. the females and younger males escape as the old male delays the attacking leopard with his very life. interesting altruistic behaviour emerging without the necessity of a god's morality. furthermore, do young chimpanzees need a god to tell them to refrain from killing their mother, brothers or sisters? of course not, their morality arises from natural mechanisms, not blind supernatural belief systems. :-/
You have raised an interesting point. The "altruistic behavior" of the older chimp sacrificing himself can be viewed from a different lens. Perhaps it is selfish selfish behavior, as this elder chimp's gene line can only now be extended by his child, whom he is protecting through his self-sacrifice. The notion of altruistic behavior is under question by evolutionary biologists. They see morality is concept invented by our species and considered it absent in other animal's behavior, no matter how noble an animal's behavior may seem. (I know there are dog owners out there who would shoot me for saying that) Genes are selfish. Traders are self interested. Trading is the one profession where there is no backstop or safety net.