Gendy: Damnit! I want to watch that movie so bad now. I really should get it on DVD. Push down the urge. Settle. Settle. Ok. Ok, I see that you've changed wordling to worldling. Worldling: One who is absorbed by worldly pursuits and pleasures. Pretty much. Not necessarily pleasures, but the world is what we have so... Are you not a worldling? Do you seek bliss in heaven with Southstar? Odd. I had you pegged for a realist. Should I reconsider? Oh, missed this edit too. If I use it in the regular way then why did you paste in the definition? I feel that I was using it differently, myself. I think I've been using it in a way that details... social dynamics. Not right, not wrong, not ethics, not good, not evil, just what works for the group. A binding principle for the group. The mechanics of this binding principle are up for grabs. In the simple non-abstract minds of the feral children it is a pleasure/pain response. It feels good to be accepted by the group, it feels bad to not be accepted. There are also other factors such as in obtaining high standing within the group, finding a mate within the group, etc... All these can be based on simple pleasure/pain responses. In this essence they would be much like the narcisissm that we were speaking of earlier. Perhaps not the literal definition of the word, but I feel that since we are speaking english, an ambiguous language, we can use the terms ambiguously, can we not? Is this not our right? In higher animals, animals that are able to deal in more abstract things, us, this pleasure/pain response becomes buried amidst all the abstractions. But, at the root of the matter is still the same thing as a simple pack of social animals. We have heaped meaning and hyperbole on top of it, but it's still a simple thing at it's base. This is what I mean by looking at the small. At the root of the matter. This certainly adds another dimension to it. A further layer of abstraction. But, I say that ethics is a fiction based on the earlier motivations. If it were covered with enough abstraction and hyperbole, I probably would. And ask for seconds while I was at it. What you mean genius saw none? Genius clearly saw. My genius. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!