Cliff: I was pretty sure I explained how I actually did use the definition correctly, several times in fact, and honestly I'm pretty tired so I give up. And I think you'd be surprised how easy it is for a "stable" person such as yourself to be driven over the edge. And you know what, I really don't think that makes you a bad person or any of us bad people. People do things while insane all the time, yet we excuse them because they are unbalanced. But anyone who does something such as kill or rape someone is unbalanced, or deviated from what we call the norm yet we then call them evil, thought there were circumstances that were out of his control that got him there. You may not realize it, but whatever happens in your mind could be considered a very complex chain reaction that started at birth and ends at death. This is also affected by your enviroment, and you really have no control of either. So I don't understand why christianity says your "soul" is responsible for what the mind does. Besides, in helping that homeless man to lunch you could unknowingly ruin someone elses day. Maybe someone else wanted to give him lunch and you beat him too it and now he doesn't get the satisfaction and he has a horrible day because of it. You just never know what will be the effect of your actions. And when I say universal scheme of things it is undefined because there simply is no universal way of things, it's all in our freakin minds! ANd that is the point I am trying to get across. And I'm confused as to why you think I have a sad outlook on life. I have found this outlook much more fulfilling than anything Christianity had to offer me. Besides, even if I was "sad" because of my outlook, it is foolish to determine i am wrong simply on that factor. Let's say there is a fire in the house. I am going nuts yelling and screaming because of the fire. You say, well Cahlen's gone balistic therefore him saying there is a fire must be incorrect. Your reasoning is that obsurd.

Tim: You ask me whether rocks think. No, why does that matter? Does the ability to think make us more valuable than things that don't. I'm sorry maybe I missed something. I am asking you what scale you have devised to come to the conclusion that human life is more valuable than anything else, and so far you haven't come up with one that you can give any reason for being valid. And that was the way I was trying to get my point across that there is no scale.

Kev: I would accept Tim's scale of feeling, action, energy, and so forth if he could tell me why that scale is valid. He just seems to think that this is something that is universally accepted by everyone and thus is valid. Now yes, it may be, but WHY!? And saying that there are just some things we can't understand is a cop-out. If you are going to resort to that one everytime you're in a debate you might as well not have shown up.