[Split] A discussion about evolution and relationships etc.

Post Reply New Topic

It is not the most accurate way, I agree.



Fine. Since when the world in your mind started to change as only in black and white? Who said that it would be zero to you if.....? I have never say so. But you did. Or should I complain and then criticise about that before you?

I definitely prefer Jean-Jacques Rousseau than Grimm or Diderot. Despite that the last two may more wealthy than Rousseau. Many capitalists can lack of romantic thoughts, have no interest in literature, do not think to much in facsinating philosophy... I would not even mention any more obscure things like linguistics, bibliographile, etc, because I would hardly imagine that they can do so. Especially typical US capitalists. I may feel a little bit cloyed when I trying to imagine such things. Although many experts can criticise Rousseau and we can state that he has many defects also, but he is always my favourite one.

But the conflict between idealism and reality then comes. It is not easy for me also. I have had such opinion before. But now I can see no harm to accept some universal value. I think the human nature, somehow,could apply to all.

Human being are all able to enjoy high thinking. Therefore, I can hardly state that all wealthy people must have lack of all these above. I would not accept merely 'a billionare industrialist' except that he would spiritually love me first. However, I can imagine that wealthy people may have not got too much emotions to spend, for all their attentions may on their job and they may not share attentions in thinking in-depth, concentrating on details, meditating, etc..
Wealth and social status can prove many things. It is a universal value which I cannot deny. Most things that we find simple now were great inventions in human history. Including Capitalism. I have never say that it is admirable. But I hope that we would be able to see it in different ways...

I have never want to have a debate with you. Debate itself is merely futile.

Anyway, I said my heart should be first in my concern. But everybody seems ignored it.

The last essential thing, to clear your opinion, I have never beg anybody and I will never beg for things. I would just let them go, to things that I cannot control. Or find a solution for things that I am willing to achieve. Beg itself is always useless in my opinion.

And I have not see the light of thinking from you yet. Emotion, Enthusiasm...Where has mutual understanding gone? Therefore, it is not my pity.

I can understand it is too fast and unreal, so such thing would hardly apply..I would not say more on this point, although I have many many more opinions. It should be private, but I cannot see the point to speak to you in private either.

I have much more to say then these. But I would not say anymore. It is already too long for anybody's patience. I think.

Adieu.

Last edited by metaphysics on 17 Jun 2011, 5:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

This is the thing I really want to have a debate about.

You are making one of those kind of judgements while you are saying so. But in a different form.

Shallowness also depends.

I think the world would be a better place if people would like to try to take less those kind of prejudices.

I am not pro-Capitalist, etc. I am just trying to explain my opinion.

Thank you for the split, Moog.

Now make me a sandwich.

You're welcome



go face yourself

I think that's the first split I've not botched

Gawd, I am struggling to understand your posts, you have a weird way of phrasing.

For me what interests me is intelligence, humour and kindness, wanting a commited relationship, family and a love of travel. Would help if they were also vegetarian, or at least fond of animals.

Wealth- I once was set up with this rich guy but I was bored with him. All he seemed to care about was trying to get me back to his place. Ugh. He had a porsche and he drove it too fast which I dont like, I like safe drivers.

He also wouldnt let me eat or drink in the porsche, I would prefer a guy who had a car that was less flash but I could be comfortable in.

So it is not so fun with rich people, they can be really uptight and in love with their cars.

Height- is ok but I dont need it and am better off with someone under 6 foot I think as I am short. I think my ideal height in a guy is about 5' 8. But it is not really an important thing. I think I would rather they were on the shorter side than the taller side anyway.

Financially speaking people can get emotional attached to money both positivity and negativity.
Both the very well off and the very poor money wise do share the same emotions to cash.

I understand that you defined rich as financially rich, please be aware that there are other riches and wealth than money, health, love, friendship, etc.

Money help in live tho the issue here is the healthy relationship to money. As money is not the only thing that makes the world go around! The unhealthy love of money is a dangerous thing, as at the end of the day money not buy happiness and love as both of them are a free treasures of all of us only if we change to having them now in our lifes & stop hunting for happiness and love from what money can do for us.

Your theory doesn't explain why so many people living in poverty have so many children. Also it seems a lot of these "scientific" theories contradict much of what I was raised with. Most of the women in my family were the bread winners. However a lot of women in my family were coedependent, taking care of guys who could not even care for themselves let alone kids. These theories makes sense in maybe a cultural setting but not so much from an instinctive POV. Usually women are going to do the same thing a guy does and notice his appearance, this however doesn't mean that is what women in general will want from a guy. Anyway without going into deep generalizations which I think does more harm than good, I believe sexuality is much more flexible than you theorize. I've seen these stereotypes of attraction and they are way out of league for me. I think they are more cultural than they are scientific. Up until now we've been living in patriarchal societies where the social rules were the norms and homosexuality was and still is to a great degree thought of as abnormal. Heck in some societies there are people who strongly believe homosexuals deserve as much death as women who cheat on their spouses. I think we need to be careful when using this word "scientific".

Last edited by MissConstrue on 17 Jun 2011, 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, most women are attracted to wealth and such because they are a big indicator of security and high status. Women are very attracted to this. It's called woman psychology 101.

However, even among women, there are psychological differences due to genetic differences and education background and different environments, so slight deviations from the norm do occur just as homosexuality, a deviation from the evolutionary norm, does occur.

Then I must be part of this slight "deviation" from the "evolutionary" norm as well as the women in my family...

You're a special specimen =p.

Can I extract your brain for further study?

You probably are. Not an insult.

Pop psychology, MCalavera.

No but you and moog can go make me that special sammich with hummus.

Same here.