Intergalactic Summit

To use the same unproper analogies, I never said that the glowing liquid inside the seringe would no doubt be as beautiful as a shimmering spring of water under the sun, primal beauty of tangible genetics and science.

What is so hard to understand between general theories and mere weapon applications ? Are you going to blame the person that discovered the truth behind nuclear fusion just because someone else used that knowledge to create weapons ? Are you willing to blame the one that discovered how to make fire to get warm just because someone else thought it might be a good idea to put his/her enemies on fire ? That is utter nonsense.

You are responsible of what you do with knowledge. As I said above, go ahead, blame all scientists that made major progress in science just because some other scientists decided to use that knowledge to create something unethical.

This discussion is starting to sound like a broken tape. You are so blind that I pity you.


Edit : I feel that people are spiting all that nonsense for the only reason they think that I am defending Vitoc or something, which I am definitly not. If you want to criticize Vitoc about its ethical/unethical side, please do so and stop mixing it with the theories above.

None really as Vitoc came along long after the scriptures were put to print, so any "evidence" you can garnish from them would be sceptical at best.

It would be better to ask the question "Is slavery righteous?" as it is considered a path to enlightenment by the theology council.

I personally don't use Vitoc if I can help it much less support it. There is more to scripture however then just taking a passage and saying it means thus. There is the duty of someone who reads it to take what it says and apply it as best you can with both wisdom and practical knowledge to a given articular.

So for example lets say a passage says to not kill others unless in your own defense. One could argue that attacking your enemy before he attacks you is proactive defense. Other people would call that excessive force.

I call it a worthy debate of our time and we must if the it ever comes do what our hearts tell us.

Scripture can not cover everything otherwise I'm quite sure there would be an impossible amount of books to read which at current there already is a cargo bay load of. What is ultimately is important is to be in-tuned with God's grace so that after reading scripture it is instilled in your heart, so that when the hard questions come up you can move in accordance to divine will.

All that said I feel there is no need for me to use Vitoc in my house.

Gottii implied that the fault of the scientists who created Vitoc was an amoral dedication to the principle of scientific advance, without thought for the consequences of their creation. This is not the case. The scientists who created Vitoc knew precisely what they were doing, and they knew that it was morally and ethically reprehensible. They just didn't care. The fault of Vitoc's creators was not moral apathy - it was active moral repugnance.

This is the same story as with most Amarrian loyalists - they know in their hearts that their actions are wrong, that they hurt, maim and kill, but they just don't care.

If you need regular supply of vitoc Mr Momaki let me know. I should be able to help

Oh, I apparently missed that part of what you said.

Please be relieved for that I definitly do not endorse people that "focus on mechanical intricacies and not on ethical consequences". When it comes to pure knowledge and science, this is irrelevant, but when we start to dig into applied science, ethics are definitly to be taken in account.

Greetings,

I'm a bit sorry to say this, but honestly that's the kind of theology I come to expect of heretics. If you want to give a good theological analysis of the situation, you can't just simply first list the passages you feel to be in favor of the thesis you wish to eliminate, then give the passages you feel that are against and then conclude that the thesis has to be eliminated.

First: One would have at least to show how the passages given first are still coherent with the passages given second. It's an important part to consider the interrelations of passages one works with.

Second: Then, even if Vitoc alters the perception of the universe, one still has to show that this alteration is of the kind that makes the perception of the Light, the hearing of the message, and therefore the embrace of God's Love impossible. This is just postulated in the given analysis of the situation. I think this is something we can doubt.

Third: One could easily argue that all this has not to be achieved within one generation or that only a few are actually destined to achieve what is spoken of in the latter passages you give. Many people who use the Vitoc method argue that the Scripture promises the embrace of God's Love to a select few only. You fail to address these issues at all.

Therefore, your argument, as much as it might resonate with you and others, isn't really a good argument at all. As it stands, it might as well be true that Vitoc is just one method to control people who'd otherwise fail even more miserably to realize the Lord's plan through the course of their whole life. If the method is effective, then the method is justified in such a context.

So, while I appreciate your attempt to give scriptural evidence that Vitoc isn't to be used by the faithful, you fail to really accomplish for what you started out. The passages you gave can be read in a way that allows for Vitoc use as well as not. Your exposition lacks the rigor necessary to make a strong case for either side.

Also, it goes without saying, that your recourse to heretical texts doesn't make it a bit better.

Faithfully,
N. Mithra

And yet it is. You stated that it might only be unrighteous heresy or hypocrisy if some Amarrians go against the use of Vitoc. Again, there is nothing endorsing the use of Vitoc to my knowledge in the Amarrian culture. It is only used for various reasons, depending on the individual, but eventually, it can not be heresy as there is no rule punishing Holders that do not use Vitoc, and it can also not be hypocrisy if one strongly believes that Vitoc is unrighteous despite of a majority of his culture believing otherwise. It would only be hypocrisy if that person was either using Vitoc himself/herself or telling that no Amarrian endorse the use of Vitoc.



Well unless you wanted to say the exact contrary of your last message or have changed your mind since then, I highly doubt that we agree.

To quote your own words, you said "Vitoxin a work of art? A marvel of genetic engineering? You surely can't be serious."
I never said that, or I believe so.

You also said "I'm sorry but, you can't just divorce the theoretical from the practical applications of a scientific work like that, in particular one that has no other application beyond turning healthy humans into mindless addicts who will literally do anything in order to avoid the excruciating pain of drug withdrawal. "
I explained above countless times why general theories ARE separated to their technological applications. I also cited a lot of examples of "other applications" that are "beyond turning healthy humans into mindless addicts who will literally do anything in order to avoid the excruciating pain of drug withdrawal."

So no, again, I do not think we agree unless you have changed your mind since then. Or maybe are we experiencing a little communication issue.

OK, so you still (wrongly, IMO) think that the two can be separated but, at least you agree that when it comes to the application of science that it should be looked at from a moral/ethical perspective. Fine. That's the major part of what concerns me.

There's an old saying that goes, "Just because we CAN do a thing it does not necessarily follow that we SHOULD". That's what I'm calling for; the examination of how science impacts society in addition to studying the pure science behind a discovery.

I could equally ask if there is any sign yet of an interpretation of Scripture that isn't in favour of Vitoc, but the question is not whether or not Scripture is in favour of Vitoc.

Rather, the questions are:

Does Scripture permit or encourage the use of slavery in order to Reclaim lost souls?

Does the use of Vitoc (when used appropriately) facilitate successful outcomes vis a vis the use of slavery to Reclaim lost souls?

And the answer to both of those questions is yes.