Supergrunch

I'm ever so slightly long sighted, so when I was younger I had to wear glasses for a week or something... However, it turns out I can correct it with my eye muscles (meaning I am able to blur everything if I want to). Neverthess, when I get older I won't be able to do this, so I'll have to wear glasses.

As I have said before, (almost) nobody is completely deaf... pretty much everyone has some hearing, unless they actually don't have cochlears or have brain damage.

I think I should point out that I can't remember not understanding the dialogues in a game, so I don't need subtitles, but if other people need them, then they should be there. To be honest, I think they shold leave the spoken language as whatever it was originally, then add subtitles in whatever language.

Option 3 seems to be what the majority (including me) wants.

That's exactly the point I'm getting at- just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you're a psychopath.

Providing people are sane, the only reason they kill someone is when the benefit of killing the person outweighs how they will feel bad doing so.

Well the main problem is that there is no such thing as an evolutionary ladder... Humans are undeniably more advanced than amoebae, but they are (arguably) no better at surviving... because evolution isn't trying to do anything, if you are judging things on evolution, things cannot be "better" or "worse". But keep up the imagery... :wink:

I see your point... no, a definitive answer cannot be reached, but situations such as this nevetheless provide fertile ground for a debate. However, if you do constrain things such as consciences, the debate does become fairly pointless, but Haden isn't quite doing that. Actually, I take issue with your assumption that humans are "a step up the evolutionary ladder"... evolution is a blind process, and has no goals, so you can't say that a human is a "better example" of evolution than an amoeba.

Aimless, I don't see what's wrong with discussing a hypothetical situation...

I still think the same holds true. If atheists follow a moral code, they follow it because they are not psychopaths. Now, if a psychopath was religious, that gives them an additional reason for following a moral code. Yet you seem to be assuming that all people are psychopaths. 1

What has following a moral code got to do with being an atheist? I think bringing atheism into this part of the discussion is meaningless. 2

But where does this assumption of no conscience come from? 3

Ah, I see, I misunderstood your original question.. I was thinking that it was "if you were an atheist, why would it be bad to kill someone?" I think it ultimately depends on the nature of your conscience (or, indeed, if you have one). Killing someone is almost always going to be "bad" for someone, even if it is only the person you are killing. Even if you were an atheist, the person was unable to be happy ever again, and nobody cared about the person, then it would still be pointless destruction of life. But that brings us onto euthanasia... 4

I think you're confusing not believing in an afterlife (ie. being an atheist) and not caring about other peoples feelings. Contary to some people's belief, atheists are not necessarily heartless bastards. Making someone else suffer (such as the relatives of the dead person) is being cruel, and lack of belief in a God does not give you justification to cause such suffering. The whole "depriving someone of life" thing is a bit more complicated, but I think it revolves around removing that persons potential to enjoy the rest of their life (of which there will be none if the person is dead). As for my religion, I'm sort of an agnostic... However, I think that if there is a God or afterlife etc., then I don't see why it should be that proposed in any of today's dogmatic doctrines. 5

If I were an atheist (which I am not, although I find the mindset very easy to get into), then killing someone and getting away with it would be bad for two reasons... 1- it seems to be unfair to deprive the person of life which they may enjoy, 2- it might upset other people, such as relatives etc. Remove these two factors, and it is then equal to destroying something inanimate, which is still generally considered bad. 6

All these problems arise because the human mind cannot comprehend it's own non-existence... you get the same thinking about before you were born. That doesn't mean that I think that there is definitely no afterlife... 8

Hmm... not quite- it's a little bit gloomy right now, and it's after 4:30pm. (the new one) 10

It says "…that was an unpleasant incident. …they still haven’t found one arm, right?"... at least, that's my translation. your sig gets 7/10.

Well, I mean a picture or something... although that might mean you have to change stuff around a lot. killthenet, you have no sig to rate...

Right, your sig now gets 8.5/10. Sorry if I haven't upgraded the score much, but I think it needs some kind of focus in addition to text. (the blue effect around the nintendo logo is, however, very nice)

Right... ever17, that visual novel I mentioned earlier, (it's translated into English) has arrived, and it's bloody amazing. I recommend it to everyone. I've just got the good ending for Tsugumi, and god knows how they're allowed to call it good... Edit: Here's a link to an auction for it, for anyone who's interested... it's the same guy I bought it from.

Right, having got the tsugumi good ending in ever17, I think a change in wallpaper is in order... but this might depress me too much...

That is very nice... Here is my desktop, as posted in the anime thread:

Hmm... I'm going to go with Mai HiME... I thought it was really cool how there were 13 different HiMEs, each with a different attitude to their powers.