universal law..

friday evening me and my friend had some lsd and we got stuck talking about universal law for hours..

What do you guys think?
Does it exist?

Can you as a human ingnore it ?

Is there more than one universal law? if yes is it still universal law?

Are we programmed with it and can ignore it but not change the universall law within ourselfes, i mean in deep we still know what is right and wrong even if we ignore it?

Can we reprogram ourselfes/or others with another universal law?

:hippy:

Love and Light!

 

Very interesting stuff, but it lends itself better to conversations in real life.

There are tendencies we have evolved into, which will affect most humans, and many more we have been raised into, which will affect many, but in the sense of "law", not really... there is right and wrong, which we can sense, and which is totally different from "morals"... But this right and wrong is very basic, and encompasses such things as when killing or violence is ok, and sexual bonds and possession and when it may be ok to break them.

 

Universal law, as in should? I don't believe in should.

 

bohr coat of arms.. think about it..

 

What exactly are you talking about? The general theory of relativity or gravity could potentially be considered universal laws, but there are no moral absolutes. Nothing's "right" or "wrong" universally.

 

Is that right?

 

It's an interesting question. I'm of the opinion that the idea of "right" is fundamentally wrong unless you believe in a god. Unless there is something greater than man telling us what is right and wrong, then it is a little ethnocentric for a person, or a group of people to ever think they have the right to say what is wrong, when someone else might disagree with it. That said, I think humans are born with an innate moral consciousness, and many people tend to agree on what is right and wrong, but this is entirely subjective.

 

ok, let me be a bit clearer. With universal law i mean basic things like RooRshack said
, not a book full of laws. Like we dont kill other person, we dont do something against some other persons will. maybe we are just simply raised/trained to know what "wrong" and "right" is..

I don´t really know anymore, this question came up while talking about all the stupid laws we have.. and if we had this universal law that is programmed into us from beginning we might not need any other laws.. because we would simply not do wrong things, unless some certain situation made us to (its like this even today i belive).. but i guess this is just a dream or a bubble to live in... :S


icecreampheonix i think what you mean by innate moral consciousness i what i think unversal law is.

 

^ lmao.

i believe there is a sense of universal law. i see things in the way that all humans are essentially creators, creating the reality that they live in. in this way our actions and decisions have a direct impact on the enviroment around us. the sense of morality comes in when we measure up how our reality and our actions pair up against that of the world around us and other people's realities. consensus reality is in a constant state of ebb and flow based on the friction caused between individual's realities. right and wrong is a judgement based on the effects of our actions. the greater the gravity of our actions the greater the impact and the harsher the judgement. but then again, that is all from a third dimensional finite perspective.

once you start throwing in the idea of eternal life a final judgement is when things start to get really messy. if there is life beyond this life then how are we to create it? how are we to enact one destiny over the other? well, i guess that would be a matter of universal truth. there is certain truth that is held no matter the circumstance. this is the basis for reality, and the rest is just fluctuations of the same oneness. the fluctuations are the individual ego within a third dimensional perspective which will eventually come back to the source that created it, and be brought to harmony. this is where the gravity of our actions has the greatest significance, as to whether it is within harmony.

really, there are hundreds and hundreds of spiritual documents on the subject that date from the dawn of time to the present. it's like the plight of mankind.

 

Humans are the most adaptable species on the planet.

Take a child from birth and you can mold their minds to any reality you please. People, if they have the right manipulation behind them can be made to beleive the sky is green or the moon is made of cheese.

 

in terms of all sentient beings, i would say that what we all share universally is a fundamental desire to move away from suffering. we all have an ultimately good intent to move towards pleasure, we just vary in how wisely we attempt to achieve this end. many people most would consider evil simply do not understand that their personal happiness exists in a feedlack loop with the happiness of others. if you really understand the nits and grits of this feedback, you are able to see that truly, there is no seperation between true selfishness and true altruism... two different camera angles of the same waveform.

in terms of absolute good and evil... well its not so much about exact physical actions, but the overall type of effect these actions have on everyones mind. actions that ultimately lead to the most suffering are closest to evil, and actions that alleviate the most suffering are closest to good. calculating the actually effects of actions and objectively measuring suffering is a whole another ballpark, and probably impossible. i guess thats where intuition comes in (though sometimes i think these might just be information with some sort of logical basis assembled in your mind subconciously).

the whole concept of good and evil is based on the fact that we do suffer, so doesn't it make sense that it would be most objective to define it in terms of suffering rather than views based on typical human conventions which have been proven to create very detrimental effects on a whole hoard of other concious beings.

people freak out about drug dealers harming the youth and such but then go and turn a blind eye to people responsible for mass environmental destruction and oil companies who then go to church and contributes to our wonderful capitalistic system. true definitions of morality needs to be related the part of our experience shared by all rather than definitions that only apply to us personally.

 

I disagree, while it may be true for most it's definitaley not true for all. Some people are inherently psychopathic in nature. A predator mindset, they will be cut throat to get to the top of the ladder. Most people, even though they may be fundamentaly different wish for love and happiness. But a few are born without any feeling of empathy at all.

 

Universal Law: keep breathing b*tch!

 

thus ends any bullocks argument about universal "right" and "wrong."

 

but we still all fall under the archetypes which are inherent in this reality. this is what universal law is. it doesn't matter how your reality is shaped, we are still all subject to the human condition.

people who argue that there is no objective right and wrong are merely searching for a way to justify their own ego. granted, right and wrong are fickle terms to be using, but like catacylsmic cognition said, the root is held in suffering. although, often, the path to eliminating suffering might not always be so straight forward.

 

born without empathy perhaps, but the fundamental desire for happiness always exists in sentient beings or they wouldn't have sentience.

 

contentment would be a much better term then happiness.

 

everything will remain fleeting and temporary whether there's a universal law or not

 

Perhaps even a psychopathic person will seek contentment, but it will not resemble the same contentment as you or I. It can fundamentaly different to each person what they dictate as right and wrong actions.