Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

800

Assume there is a universal goal that is better sought than any known to human. The duty to this universal good would be more important than a person's duty to himself or his species or his planet. By what means should a human try to learn what this universal good is?

edit: just hashing things out here:

By the laws of nature one should take whatever action gives the highest chance to pass on one's genes. This leads to a direct ethical duty to one's species. So to take that one step further one has a duty to uphold the stability of the universe, right? But that's shortsighted too: it assumes that replicating one's genes actually is the ethically correct thing to do. So a search for transcendent ethics may start at a higher* level than life. It may involve duties beyond one's own universe.

But how can an entity have a duty beyond what that entity is able to influence? That's a red herring. Whatever my actual ethical duty it's best to understand that duty from the highest* possible perspective. Even if I have no higher duty than is in regard to those things I can influence, knowing what that duty is requires a higher* level of understanding.

*as in high level vs low level programming, where assembly is low level code and java is high level code

Assume there is a universal goal that is better sought than any known to human. The duty to this universal good would be more important than a person's duty to himself or his species or his planet. By what means should a human try to learn what this universal good is? edit: just hashing things out here: By the laws of nature one should take whatever action gives the highest chance to pass on one's genes. This leads to a direct ethical duty to one's species. So to take that one step further one has a duty to uphold the stability of the universe, right? But that's shortsighted too: it assumes that replicating one's genes actually is the ethically correct thing to do. So a search for transcendent ethics may start at a higher* level than life. It may involve duties beyond one's own universe. But how can an entity have a duty beyond what that entity is able to influence? That's a red herring. Whatever my actual ethical duty it's best to understand that duty from the highest* possible perspective. Even if I have no higher duty than is in regard to those things I can influence, knowing what that duty is requires a higher* level of understanding. *as in high level vs low level programming, where assembly is low level code and java is high level code

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

Have you read books? The Metu Neter? The Secret Doctrine? The Secret Teachings of All Ages?

You can NOT ignore God and live a meaningful life. You may enjoy this life, but with the knowledge of God comes knowledge of eternity.

Everyone chooses their own god to follow. I imagine someone has gotten it right.

[–] • 0 pt

Everyone chooses their own god to follow. I imagine someone has gotten it right.

With that you simply rename the unknown transcendent to God. It doesn't bring one closer.

[–] • 1 pt

If we are honest we are all doing that. Most religions, well known or not, have some sort of unexplainable experiential aspect that give people a sense of having found the "truth".

I believe the Bible is the main source of truth, but it is an eastern religious text that has been heavily corrupted in western interpretations.

The only things I am dogmatic about are the existence of a God who loves me and has a name, and the fact that His son is the only qualified mediator available to humans. I have changed my mind about practically everything else that I believe over the past 11 years.

[–] • 1 pt

Without God, there is no compulsion to do good. There is also no stable, immutable definition of what "good" is. The concept of "good" is meaningless without God to define and enforce it. Your good? My good? The good of the moment?

Unless we acknowledge that the good comes from a source that is higher and greater than our common sense of self, it is merely a made-up term that can be changed or denied at will. Only when the good is transcendent and eternal does it become a thing we must follow. The same applies to truth and justice.

[–] • 0 pt

Your logic is bad. Indeed ethics must be subjective without a transcendent, objective definition. But there's no reason that definition has to include a god.

[–] • 1 pt

Only ever being true, seeking the truth and confirming the truth.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt (edited )

Assume there is an actual God that created the universe and yourself, your duty to him would be incalculable. Even the chance of his existence radically alters your life.

OP: Well - ignoring God, is there some other principle I can live by?

No, there isn't.

Read about the life of Padre Pio. God isn't staying hid or out of sight, people don't want to find him. The purpose and only use of this life is to fall in love with God. Everything else is just a distraction from that goal.

[–] • 0 pt

ignoring God, is there some other principle I can live by?

That's not what I said at all.

God isn't staying hid or out of sight

Really? What does he look like and where can I meet him? Does he do appointments?

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Read the life of Padre Pio

[–] • 0 pt

Okay, I read this page: https://www.padrepiodapietrelcina.com/en/life-padre-pio-biography/#Young_Padre_Pio

Now what does God look like and where can I meet him? Does he do appointments?

[–] • 0 pt

Yes its called gnosis and its a grave sin.

[–] • 0 pt

gnosis : esoteric knowledge of spiritual truth held by the ancient Gnostics to be essential to salvation Also: 'gnosis' in greek means 'knowledge', is 'knowledge' a grave sin or are you talking about something else?

[–] • 0 pt

Trying to assert there is truth outside God is a sin. Gnosis on theological terms assumes there is an universal truth that can be acquired with several religions, all ascribing to this same "truth" in different ways.

[–] • 0 pt

How can striving to understand more universal truths be a sin? Why would God want his children to be ignorant? There's nothing about it in the bible that I know of, aside from Adam and Eve being forbidden to eat from the tree of knowledge

[–] • 0 pt

God is the truth. Eve wanted to find the truth for her own without God. Truth as an universal concept that can be archieved elsewhere is the source of Original Sin.

[–] • 0 pt

To be a human who learns his/her weaknesses and strengths and to find good (or great ways) to help others.

[–] • 0 pt

I've spent years considering this. My conclusion is fuck you.

[–] • 0 pt

There isn't any bright future as long as you live in these delusions about some supreme being. How arrogant one has to be to think that some being who made whole universe and beyond, gives any single fuck about some monkey's made up morality. All this talk about finding god is just bullshit to make self feel better about meaningless life.

[–] • 0 pt

There may not be a higher ethics, but I don't know. What I'm looking for is a search pattern.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt
[–] • 0 pt

A sick man found religion? What a !

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Hey, maybe you can help me. How can I ask pointless questions and then insult everyone that actually tries to help.

You seem to be doing a good job at that.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

The question is important, and I'm sorry you feel insulted. But you're answering a question that started with "aside from religions" with a specific religion. It's like if you say "So besides pizza what's on the menu?" and I start talking up the sausage pizza. I get that you think Catholicism is the bee's knees. But not only are you ignoring the actual question, you're doing so with unproven conjecture. There's really no way to address this that wouldn't either be patronizing or insulting.