Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why do we need them?

Page 4 of 5 [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jul 2011, 5:14 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
hmmmm, probably when we developed writing.

Which genes in which chromosomes do you think flipped from the discovery of writing? Would the deaf and blind who can't learn a language be less human than those who can?


It didn't change our genetics but it changed the way we thought, and that includes having ethical codes. Pre-literate people did not have a sense of private property.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,522
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 Jul 2011, 5:19 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
What makes you think I am the type of person who just wants everyone to do what I think they should without question?

I'm not claiming that at all - really if anything just throwing out the idea that, if you are a good person and want the world to be a better place, your will and power over other people and their choice to either do that or do nothing of the sort is extremely limited.

Sweetleaf wrote:
I think its horrible that everyone is part of a damn machine that really only feeds the pigs on top while leaving the rest of us to cling to the illusion that things are the way they should be as they do not want to see the truth.

Who would want that to be the truth? The pigs? How many pigs are there to the amount of good people? To believe that people want that at the expense of the truth is an odd choice of interpretation.

I think what this really goes back to - good people generally want to live their lives to the fullest and be left alone. The greedy and sick are thirsting for power - hence they get it. Evil and crud rising to the top is an artifact of good people not having the same ambitions.

Sweetleaf wrote:
that is what I am expressing I know chances are nothing will change in my life time......does not make it in easier to deal with how messed up things are but I do acknowledge that I am really only one person and my thoughts don't really matter.

Its not wrong to examine it either.

The only reason I'm grilling this topic is this - I hate the human genetics system, I hate social darwinism, I want to see the human condition much better. On the other hand half-baked answers feed right into the hands of this system and make the world significantly worse.


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,522
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 Jul 2011, 5:22 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
hmmmm, probably when we developed writing.

Which genes in which chromosomes do you think flipped from the discovery of writing? Would the deaf and blind who can't learn a language be less human than those who can?


It didn't change our genetics but it changed the way we thought, and that includes having ethical codes. Pre-literate people did not have a sense of private property.

Which does nothing to our fundamental desires. We're still animals and, sadly, all too many people just use these ethical codes as tools of manipulation for that reason - whatever we define as 'human', a great many in our society only fit it in form not heart.


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,924
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Jul 2011, 5:24 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
What makes you think I am the type of person who just wants everyone to do what I think they should without question?

I'm not claiming that at all - really if anything just throwing out the idea that, if you are a good person and want the world to be a better place, your will and power over other people and their choice to either do that or do nothing of the sort is extremely limited.

Sweetleaf wrote:
I think its horrible that everyone is part of a damn machine that really only feeds the pigs on top while leaving the rest of us to cling to the illusion that things are the way they should be as they do not want to see the truth.

Who would want that to be the truth? The pigs? How many pigs are there to the amount of good people? To believe that people want that at the expense of the truth is an odd choice of interpretation.

I think what this really goes back to - good people generally want to live their lives to the fullest and be left alone. The greedy and sick are thirsting for power - hence they get it. Evil and crud rising to the top is an artifact of good people not having the same ambitions.

Sweetleaf wrote:
that is what I am expressing I know chances are nothing will change in my life time......does not make it in easier to deal with how messed up things are but I do acknowledge that I am really only one person and my thoughts don't really matter.

Its not wrong to examine it either.

The only reason I'm grilling this topic is this - I hate the human genetics system, I hate social darwinism, I want to see the human condition much better. On the other hand half-baked answers feed right into the hands of this system and make the world significantly worse.


Yeah and it bothers me that these greedy as*hole pigs are the ones who make it to the top...and then many people good, bad whatever but all sheep more or less who are happy to avoid the truth and go along with their supposedly happy little lives.......but that is what its about, yes even in my family it was all about appearances and hiding from the truth and it turns out this is exactly the way the world operates........put on a happy smile while keeping all those undesirable thoughts and feelings deep inside.

I am not sure what you mean by half baked answers, I am trying to be as specific as I can and word this right...but it is a lot to even comprehend let alone describe very well.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jul 2011, 5:30 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Which does nothing to our fundamental desires. We're still animals and, sadly, all too many people just use these ethical codes as tools of manipulation for that reason - whatever we define as 'human', a great many in our society only fit it in form not heart.


The difference is unlike animals we are intelligent enough (supposedly) to abandon the system of social darwinism. So we should because it is not right, it is a cold and heartless system to have.



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

30 Jul 2011, 5:39 pm

Emiration is an interesting option. We certainly have the technology to cheaply colonize Mars but this would require exploding hydrogen bombs to propel the ships. Remember if Christopher Columbus had to use a rowboat powered by slaves to get to America he would not keep going back.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,924
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Jul 2011, 5:40 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Which does nothing to our fundamental desires. We're still animals and, sadly, all too many people just use these ethical codes as tools of manipulation for that reason - whatever we define as 'human', a great many in our society only fit it in form not heart.


The difference is unlike animals we are intelligent enough (supposedly) to abandon the system of social darwinism. So we should because it is not right, it is a cold and heartless system to have.


Especially when human emotions and thoughts are much more complex......I mean in nature survival depends on being able to live within the elements. sometimes animals with a physical problem for instance might be killed but when you really think about it the way they live that is the decent thing to do. I mean an animal is not going to have any quality of life if they cannot function on their own. I certainly do not think animals are stupid or inferior to people......but its just different



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

30 Jul 2011, 5:41 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Which does nothing to our fundamental desires. We're still animals and, sadly, all too many people just use these ethical codes as tools of manipulation for that reason - whatever we define as 'human', a great many in our society only fit it in form not heart.


The difference is unlike animals we are intelligent enough (supposedly) to abandon the system of social darwinism. So we should because it is not right, it is a cold and heartless system to have.
It's important not to confuse social darwinism and evolutionary theory. Social darwinism is just a garbage interpretation of it and evolution theory in fact shows evidence of altruism contributing to our survival. But you are right for the wrong reasons when it comes to abandoning our more primal ways of thinking and acting. Not necessarily because we used to be violent brutes, but because we have primal scripts from thousands of years of evolution that are great for functioning under the circumstances our ancestors lived in but can be detrimental to functioning in modern society:

Quote:
The Misconception: With the advent of mass media, you understand how the world works based on statistics and facts culled from many examples.

The Truth: You are far more likely to believe something is commonplace if you can find just one example of it, and you are far less likely to believe in something you’ve never seen or heard of.
Quote:
The human mind is generated by a brain which was formed under far different circumstances than the modern world offers up on a daily basis. Over the last few million years, much of our time was spent with less than 150 people, and what you knew about the world was based on examples from your daily life.
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2009/10/28/availability-heuristic/



Last edited by AceOfSpades on 30 Jul 2011, 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jul 2011, 5:42 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Especially when human emotions and thoughts are much more complex......I mean in nature survival depends on being able to live within the elements. sometimes animals with a physical problem for instance might be killed but when you really think about it the way they live that is the decent thing to do. I mean an animal is not going to have any quality of life if they cannot function on their own. I certainly do not think animals are stupid or inferior to people......but its just different


they're just simpler beings ... which doesn't make them any less good of course. the argument that beings that aren't as complex fails for a couple reasons. first of all, if animals are less important than us since they're less smart, does that mean the mentally ret*d are less good as well?

My favorite argument though is, if aliens were way more complex and smart than us, would they have the right to eat us?



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,522
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 Jul 2011, 5:48 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Which does nothing to our fundamental desires. We're still animals and, sadly, all too many people just use these ethical codes as tools of manipulation for that reason - whatever we define as 'human', a great many in our society only fit it in form not heart.


The difference is unlike animals we are intelligent enough (supposedly) to abandon the system of social darwinism. So we should because it is not right, it is a cold and heartless system to have.

It asserts itself with or without our approval. Asserting that we simply know better and therefore are doing better - then great! We're talking about a fictitious problem!


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,924
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Jul 2011, 5:54 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Especially when human emotions and thoughts are much more complex......I mean in nature survival depends on being able to live within the elements. sometimes animals with a physical problem for instance might be killed but when you really think about it the way they live that is the decent thing to do. I mean an animal is not going to have any quality of life if they cannot function on their own. I certainly do not think animals are stupid or inferior to people......but its just different


they're just simpler beings ... which doesn't make them any less good of course. the argument that beings that aren't as complex fails for a couple reasons. first of all, if animals are less important than us since they're less smart, does that mean the mentally ret*d are less good as well?

My favorite argument though is, if aliens were way more complex and smart than us, would they have the right to eat us?


Well my point was that people are more evolved than that, not that animals are less good or whatever just that the way they live cannot perfectly be applied to humans because we have more complex thoughts and emotions....so what works for animals does not work for humans.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,924
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Jul 2011, 5:56 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Especially when human emotions and thoughts are much more complex......I mean in nature survival depends on being able to live within the elements. sometimes animals with a physical problem for instance might be killed but when you really think about it the way they live that is the decent thing to do. I mean an animal is not going to have any quality of life if they cannot function on their own. I certainly do not think animals are stupid or inferior to people......but its just different


they're just simpler beings ... which doesn't make them any less good of course. the argument that beings that aren't as complex fails for a couple reasons. first of all, if animals are less important than us since they're less smart, does that mean the mentally ret*d are less good as well?

My favorite argument though is, if aliens were way more complex and smart than us, would they have the right to eat us?


Well my point was that people are more evolved than that, not that animals are less good or whatever just that the way they live cannot perfectly be applied to humans because we have more complex thoughts and emotions....so what works for animals does not work for humans.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,522
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 Jul 2011, 5:57 pm

Hence social Darwinism in lieu of proper evolution.


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

30 Jul 2011, 6:20 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
Emiration is an interesting option. We certainly have the technology to cheaply colonize Mars


We do not have the technology. And even if we can fly men there it does not follow that men can live their for extended periods of time. Mars has no magnetic field to protect the planet from the highly charged particles that the sun emits. Mars also has little, if any water that is available for human use. Also our propulsion technology is such that after a year long trip to Mars the the crew of the vessel would be highly debilitated.

On top of that we do not have the technology for terraforming Mars.

It is a bad place to go to and a worse place to live on.

ruveyn



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

30 Jul 2011, 8:20 pm

Nuclear propulsion can get us to Mars in 30 days.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

30 Jul 2011, 9:56 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
Nuclear propulsion can get us to Mars in 30 days.


Fine. Write us when a nuclear propelled vessel is man-ready.

And what will the crew live off of or live on when it gets there. Where is the water?

And will the crew be able to protect itself from solar radiation. Mars does not have a Van Allen belt.

ruveyn