Posted by Biteback on September 20, 1998 at 01:56:32:
In Reply to: moral judgement posted by Spratley on September 20, 1998 at 01:33:36:
Of course I was leading up to moral judgement. That is why I persisted with using the cat instead of the rock. But for the argument the rock can still be used, and I did try to use it with him a few times during the night. The problem is, is that I set the argument up into his lap, and he didn't want to commit. Most people don't. None of the opinions were mine; if they were, then he would have said, "well,thats your opinion".
I would say, "if this is this, then isn't this this." And it was left up to him. And if he strayed from the point, I would say, "but what about the point, you haven't answered it, yet." I have never tried "socratic mumbo" before, it was quite an experience.
Seeing his frustration, I finally took it away from him and said, "Okay, lets not use you. If "I" damage the cat, am I damaging "myself"? He still felt defensive, --- even after he made the argument about killing the cat for food.
Any argument is defensive naturally, because it is a type of verbal war. But why have guilt in the first place? Even after he told me that he believed that when he died, his energy returned to the earth, but his conscience just died (or sort of evaporated into nothingness). If he believed that, then why have guilt about anything?
But at anyrate, it was an interesting conversation, and I am sure you would have had a good time there, and would have most certainly kept me on my toes.