philosophy
 

is there a destiny?

nope.

David

the right action because of the wrong reasons?
or
the wrong action because of the right reasons?

hmmm that's a good one...
let me think that over for one night....

The right action of course. I mean, wouldn't you be more concerned with the results? (and logicaly if it's the "right action" then the results must also be the right ones. Like, I foil a secret plan to destroy the world because I don't want to die with it; that's the wrong reason to do it (being concerned about only me and noone else) but the action was the right one, and in the end everyone benefits from it (except whoever wanted to destroy it to begin with, but majority wins).
On the other hand if I do something bad for a good reason it might not turn out to be fine in the end. I mean, we can argue what a "right reason". For example, brutaly murdering a another male could be a good reason, mother nature says so. But since we are smarter than that (or are we? :p) we see murder as a bad thing, so then we could say it wasn't a good reason to begin with.
But then, I'm thinking... how can we know what a "right action" is? Nothing is true or false anymore, AHAAARGH....
You know what? I probably misunderstood you question anyway :p

@murdering:
we just see murdering as something bad, because we ourselfs are afraid of beeing murdered ... that´s the only way why so many people start murdering as soons as they don´t see themselfs in danger ... compare it with "murdering" animals ...

@thread:
destiny: nope (unprooven ;) ) ...

eternal afterlife, afterlife with entropy or just plain entropy?
ie to try be more clear or at least to try to be more precise: the "soul" or emergent property from your collection of mollecules that makes you a human being instead of a piece of meat is:
a)separate from the body and eternal, an inmutable thing apart.
b)separate from the body but able to be destroyed and cerainly subject to entropy.
c)inherent to the hardware, a manifestation and emergent property of the information patterns coded by the neurons inside your skull.
why?

time is digital("frames") or analogic("continuous")?
-at human level, in our brain/soul
Subjetively is obviously analogic but i would say the brain just an awesomely complex evolved analogical(inside the neurons) digitally controled(on the synapses) processor... so i would bet for digital, but then: on what "frame" does a tought arises?

-at a phisical level
(ive heared there is a quantum equation that gives the minimum possible time steps, it is called the plank time: 10E-43seconds)

bearing in mind that in most of its implications having more of one means restricting the other more or less on the same quantity... what is more important Freedom or Justice?

after struggling with my poor philosophical english to word questions...

language as primary definer of symbols conditions the abilty to form toughts?

I mean... skimos have 40 words for "snow" and i just cant tanslate/express the concepts associated with justice and freedom in any other language than my own... and english phylologes have always a good thesis theme on the subtleness the use of the spanish verbs "ser/estar" when both translate (loosing a lot of hues and implications) to "to be"

I believe in destiny, but I refuse to go into the depths of it all myself mainly because I raised a thread a long while back here at SM about choice and debated about similar things endlessly. Anyone remember that one? Anyway... simply put I believe in causality which basically is action/reaction. If there is an action, there will always be a predictable reaction (not predictable by humans because billions of variables come into play and we cannot accurately calculate such things) so destiny is inevitable. You might argue that humans have choice which invalidates this theory, but meh... we could debate that forever and still not convince opposing sides that choice either exists or doesn't. Secondly, there are two views of what choice really is... tue choice where humans do actually make a decision on there own reguardless of causality and logic and then the view that choice does exist, however it's just an illusion and people don't ReAlLy have choice if you think about it. ahh... it's complex from there on... I'm stopping here.

LOL thats very insightfull davey :p

In fact it was:)

in fact someone didnt noticed... there is a pattern in my questions:
THEY HAVE NO UNIVERSAL ANSWER
to YOU they may have(or not) but there are no ANSWERS
and of you have a new irrefutable answer (or just strong and explicative enough to be considered valid) you probably will get a nobel...

that being said i would like to hear more questions with no answer... and ponts of view about those questions...
you know that kind of questions... from "whats the secret of telepizza?" to "what will a Gödel Truth machine say to that famous question?"

to darkware: you firmly believe universe is determinist... it could very well not be the case... in fact lately there is a trend to define the properties of the universe in a "to an observer that has/can...the universe may behave like... with a probability of..." fashion instead of "the universe is and behaves like this, always, no exception"

causality, logic... we humans havent even defined time in a rigurous enough way (we do know intuitively, and there are some logical/mathematical properties of it defined scientifically(not all and maybe not rightly done but each good for their explicative properties)) but i got really amazed when i knew that we havent managed to make a rigorous general definition of time itself but that we are still discusing about its properties...