Parents murder kid (discussion on death penalty)

[overtyped]

There is nothing wrong with questioning everything.

How can, a questioning, be of some use if the one that is questioning knows NOTHING of what is questioning?
And how can you convince someone to STUDY, if he can question you and say that study is of no use?

Do you really think that every single mouth of the world should start to question everything just because "is good to questioning"?

HOW can you teach to someone, when he have the full right to just shut you up and question what you've studied?
You could neither say to them that the fire burns. They HAVE to test it by themselves and so... every meaning of books, history, licterature and memories is gone.

No.
Is ok to say "We should learn to think more" but the only way usefull to think is "We really should feel the happyness of KNOW MORE, do research and STUDY" so that we can think.
Questioning randomly everything with paranoia have nothing to do with "learn to think".

That isn't what questioning everything means. It means to not take things you learn as doctrine and examine why things are the way they are. I made an analogy about it to clarify, but it looks like you failed to read it.

[Flame]

Well then we are saying the same thing but still i'm not sure how to force people to no sit and go out to verify theyr knowledge.
Because basically is this. Questioning needs time and fatigue.
It should be incentivated more than stopped but don't expect that then everybody will have the will to do it.

I'm a little pessimistic about this, because i think that people are ok with theyr lazyness and is not so easy convince them otherwise.

...is a little late for me, here, so i may have wrote reeeally bad.
Mehh... braaain.

[MagicManICT]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Socrates You should of done a quick wiki search before talking about the trial of Socrates. He was put to death because his methods were deemed too radical, and because he didn't properly honor the gods in his teachings, the first and the second reason are really the same.

You should read the entire thing (Plato's writings on Socrates, that is). Much like Al Capone, he was finally caught on technicalities, and not for what they wanted to remove him for in the first place. You shouldn't rely solely on Wikipedia. The Athenian government had attempted to put Socrates on trial several times for various "crimes against the state. He was chastised many times for his teachings, even if there was no conviction, and they finally were able to convince a tribunal of charges of godlessness.

How in the hell could this possibly mean the end of civilization?

Some old farts can't stand change. They'd rather see the world go up in flames rather than lose their tenuous grasp of reality. Push hard enough, and they'll burn civilization down before they let the hippies take over. See the various Inquisitions, Jihads, etc.

If we did reach to this idealized world where all man could question authority, authority would slowly crumble. This leads to an inevitable decentralization of everything, meaning there would no longer be any authorities. Civilization would start lowly decaying to entropy because little to no knowledge is shared, destroying any remaining civilization. Note I will say this is based on the assumption of "authority" meaning any centralized knowledge, leadership, or power, and questioning meaning that one questions without truly seeking answers. However, to truly question means one is actually seeking answers, otherwise it's just laziness and excuses to not study. Pretty much, the questioning is just recreating an inquisition where people may or may not be killed for "untruthful" answers.

How can, a questioning, be of some use if the one that is questioning knows NOTHING of what is questioning?
And how can you convince someone to STUDY, if he can question you and say that study is of no use?

These are strong philosophical arguments in logic and reasoning, and the basis of more than a few college essays. While we don't have to limit our questioning, does it really add anything to the argument, though? The evidence and answer is obvious, and this is often chalked up to being rhetorical. (The obvious, short answer is: without study, one will not learn and expand consciousness, so why should the teacher bother teaching a lazy student?

That isn't what questioning everything means. It means to not take things you learn as doctrine and examine why things are the way they are.

When my philosophy professor said to question everything, he literally meant it. There was no metaphor there. If one does not question, one cannot find the answer to the question, even if someone else already answered it.

While the Nag Hammadi codices are not even close to being considered cannon in Christianity, they do contain some interesting passages attributed to Jesus (many of which can already be found in Ancient Greek philosophy or other Middle Eastern philosophies and religions). One of my favorites is about questioning. "Jesus said, 'Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over the All.' " --Gospel of Thomas, Nag Hammadi codices. Whether you believe in heaven and hell, are agnostic, or athiest, it rings of truth in that some of the strongest questions are often the most disturbing and result in the most astonishing answers.

I'm a little pessimistic about this, because i think that people are ok with theyr lazyness and is not so easy convince them otherwise.

too many people are ok with laziness. however, more than enough people are scornful of being lazy that civilization won't wither and die. You're right. It's not easy to convince them. Most are too lazy to even pay attention to such arguments.

[Flame]

Anyway this is the first time that someone make me think a world where everybody can questioning.
No, wait, to be more precise we "can questioning", right now.
We just don't, because is a common think that too many questioning is just polemic. Or that studied people have more authority than you.

My nature is to question a lot, really, and i'm pretty annoying.
(some of you may have noticed it. My questioning is a research of the meaning of everything, but often it's just the same as polemic.) So i can't say that questioning is "bad". I do it, every time.
But also, i feel RESPECT for who have studied more than me.
If a man says to me "This thing is made in this way" and i know that he's well into it, i'll trust him. I have to. His knowledge is, with high probability, higher than mine. My "questioning" turns into many many questions to know more and more.
BUT
Not to fight his authority. I find of no use question his authority, because he have my respect.

The only way he can lost it is when he proof me that he don't deserve it. I had no problem on show my disrespectfull towards theachers that was really dickhead.
Theyr knowledge was true, probably, but not theyr teaching.

Or also, i had no problem on write a really Non-Politically-Correct test text about the Shoa, to point out to the Teacher and the school system how bad and damaging was they'r way to teach us it. They made me HATE something that, for my nature, i should really understand. Due they'r terrorism and they'r horrorifing videos when i was too young to sustain it, forcing me to hate something that i could not fully understand.

Ok. So i'm cool. But what's the point?
Dunno! Lost it! And i'm late D: !!
BYE.

[overtyped]

Some old farts can't stand change. They'd rather see the world go up in flames rather than lose their tenuous grasp of reality. Push hard enough, and they'll burn civilization down before they let the hippies take over. See the various Inquisitions, Jihads, etc.

If we did reach to this idealized world where all man could question authority, authority would slowly crumble. This leads to an inevitable decentralization of everything, meaning there would no longer be any authorities. Civilization would start lowly decaying to entropy because little to no knowledge is shared, destroying any remaining civilization. Note I will say this is based on the assumption of "authority" meaning any centralized knowledge, leadership, or power, and questioning meaning that one questions without truly seeking answers. However, to truly question means one is actually seeking answers, otherwise it's just laziness and excuses to not study. Pretty much, the questioning is just recreating an inquisition where people may or may not be killed for "untruthful" answers.

What the actual fuck are you talking about. You are beating up a dystopic future strawman...? You could of made that exact same argument for not questioning anything, and say that would lead to another hitler controlling us into world domination, and genocide.

[Flame]

Hitler is here!!!! \o/

*He writes a +1 in a personal book called "In every topic, Hitler will pop up".*

[overtyped]

Hitler is here!!!! \o/

*He writes a +1 in a personal book called "In every topic, Hitler will pop up".*

Go write another comic of hafen please, your last one was a masterpiece but your fans crave more. Your fans insatiable hunger will force them into the streets in search for more flame comics. They will set fire, pillage, and burn all in their wake. Only you flame can save us from your fans, by curing them of their hunger for flame comics with more comics. At least one comic a month should be enough.

[Flame]

Lol i whould but i can't. I've no idea. You know... i don't play H&H anymore. XD

[Tonkyhonk]

That isn't what questioning everything means. It means to not take things you learn as doctrine and examine why things are the way they are.

seriously, overtyped, have you actually questioned what you are saying? have you actually realized what you are questioning about?

to question something, you have to have a question.
to have a question, you have to see a certain way of something.
to see something and to see it has a certain way, you have to learn this something exists and see it has a certain way.

to not take things you learn as doctrine, you have to first learn things to take whatever it is you think and people think.
to examine why things are the way they are, you have to first learn the way the things are.

you really should learn zen to see the heart of questioning, but your thinking/questioning ability is too immature.
you reminded me of this koan.

WHEN Yamaoka was a brash young student, he visited the master
Dokuon. Wanting to impress the master, he said:

"There is no mind, there is no body, there is no Buddha. There is
no better, there is no worse. There is no master and there is no
student; there is no giving, there is no receiving. What we think
we see and feel is not real. All that is real is Emptiness. None
of these seeming things really exists."

Dokuon had been sitting quietly smoking his pipe, and saying
nothing. Now he picked up his staff, and without warning gave
Yamaoka a terrible whack. Yamaoka jumped up in anger.

"Since none of these things really exists," said Dokuon, "and all
is Emptiness, where does your anger come from? Think about it."

of course you would first have to learn what buddha taught to actually understand what this means.

[overtyped]

That isn't what questioning everything means. It means to not take things you learn as doctrine and examine why things are the way they are.

seriously, overtyped, have you actually questioned what you are saying? have you actually realized what you are questioning about?

to question something, you have to have a question.
to have a question, you have to see a certain way of something.
to see something and to see it has a certain way, you have to learn this something exists and see it has a certain way.

to not take things you learn as doctrine, you have to first learn things to take whatever it is you think and people think.
to examine why things are the way they are, you have to first learn the way the things are.

you really should learn zen to see the heart of questioning, but your thinking/questioning ability is too immature.
you reminded me of this koan.

WHEN Yamaoka was a brash young student, he visited the master
Dokuon. Wanting to impress the master, he said:

"There is no mind, there is no body, there is no Buddha. There is
no better, there is no worse. There is no master and there is no
student; there is no giving, there is no receiving. What we think
we see and feel is not real. All that is real is Emptiness. None
of these seeming things really exists."

Dokuon had been sitting quietly smoking his pipe, and saying
nothing. Now he picked up his staff, and without warning gave
Yamaoka a terrible whack. Yamaoka jumped up in anger.

"Since none of these things really exists," said Dokuon, "and all
is Emptiness, where does your anger come from? Think about it."

of course you would first have to learn what buddha taught to actually understand what this means.

Yamada seems to be talking of the brain in the vat theory, that everything is just one big simulation. The only response I can give to the brain in the vat, is that there is no way to tell if we are a brain in the vat, because the world behaves as if it's real, so we behave as if it's real.