I believe the pen in front of me exists.
I believe it’s the duty of the strong to protect the weak.
If you can’t protect the weak, then you’re not really strong.
I agree, and well put.
- Water is wet
- The sky is blue
- Women have secrets
The sky isn’t blue.
- Humans are inherently lazy and mentally unflexible
- Humans are inherently evil and the veil of civilisation is really really thin.
- Humans are greedy in every aspect
- There are some exceptions,but the above applies generally
If humans are inherently evil, why is evil not the dominant force in the world? One would assume that if everyone were indeed evil, greedy, and out for themselves our existence could only be anarchy.
hy is evil not the dominant force in the world?
It is tho, capitalistic cruelty literally runs on the blood and sweat of the lower classes, if that isn’t evil I don’t know what is
Who says it is not the dominant force? End stage capitalism is pretty close to anarchy and we will see what happens next.
After 25 years in healthcare and humanitarian work you get a grim perspective.
If you were correct society as a whole would already exist as true anarchy, therefore humans are not inherently evil, greedy, or out for themselves. We could not coexist in any meaningful way if that were true.
I really don’t know where you get your assumptions from but they are terrible
The only reason society exists is because of a fucktonne of rules going back several thousand years about how you are supposed to behave in a society
If you want to see what barebones humans without societal rules, read up on feral children
I really don’t know where you get your assumptions from but they are terrible
I simply followed the logic from “The human population of over 8 billion is inherently evil, and greedy”, then determined that if that were true society couldn’t exist in the state it does now.
The only reason society exists is because of a fucktonne of rules going back several thousand years about how you are supposed to behave in a society
If everyone were as you claimed them to be (Inherently Evil, Greedy, etc) they would not abide by those rules and society would exist in anarchy. This is the logical conclusion of your assertion regarding general human behavior. This means that humans cannot be inherently evil because we currently do not exist in anarchy where everyone is doing and taking what they want.
If you want to see what barebones humans without societal rules, read up on feral children
If you want to see any animal at their worst, put them in a life or death survival situation.
The human population of over 8 billion is inherently evil, and greedy”, then determined that if that were true society couldn’t exist in the state it does now
That is a baseless assumption, not a foundation for a logical argument. You have to change it into a question in order for it to be a hypothesis
Otherwise you are just making stuff up and justifying it to sound good
If you want to see any animal at their worst, put them in a life or death survival situation.
Incorrect, and based of of feelings of what sounds good instead of truth.
Humans at their worst is when they have power over other humans and consider them subhuman. This is not a baseless assumption like yours, but rather based off of history and psychology. A desperate person in a life or death situation may kill a few, but out of desperation not cruelty. A person with power over others he considers subhuman can kill MILLIONS
Whatever you say bud.
Am religious so one God?
Which God?
You’re one up on me there.
I Believe in the Power of American Native
The power of friendship (I have no friends)
What is stopping you from having friends?
I’m nitpicky about the word “believe”. So let me rephrase: I do not believe. Either I know, or I don’t know. Everything else are more or less informed speculations, assumptions or hypotheses at best.
I do not believe. Either I know, or I don’t know.
You know things but do not accept them to be true or real?
how do you know you know?
Cogito ergo sum.
Accepting a common framework of provable, i.e., measurable, repeatable, falsifiable phenomena, as a concept of “reality,” seems to be a pragmatic approach, given my sensory inputs and the processing results of my brain. This is then “knowledge.”
But ultimately, this is subordinated to the possibility of an illusion – be it like in The Matrix, or as a Boltzmann brain, or whatever. Unless there is evidence for that, it appears most practical to me to go with the above, as I don’t gain anything from racking my brain about such possible illusions of reality (even though it’s fun thinking about it).
It took me longer than I’d like to think of an answer.
Maths.
Maths is good.
These are some more lighthearted things, but here goes:
• Sonic the Hedgehog ( Sonic '06 ) wouldn’t be as fun of a game if all the bugs and glitches were gone. I live for a good glitch or six sometimes. Same without the highly difficult and janky super speed sections.
• Sonic Unleashed is an amazing game ( but the xbox/ps3 versions are the superior versions, as someone who has beat it on ps2 and xbox360 ).
• Due to the janky turn left/right movements on Sonic Lost World and just general movement jank, I am absolutely glad they have the run button to occasionally slow me down and stop me from dying.
• Also an extreme believer that the special stages ( on the 3DS version of Lost World ) are absolute cancer.
• Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl was nowhere near as good as The Wrong Trousers. I absolutely hated how they made Wallace absolutely incompetent and idiotic when it comes to normal things ( like how to use a non-electric tea pot ) when he didn’t have any technology.
• Xbox style controllers with BAXY ( right, down, left, up ) button layout are the way to go. The only exception to that belief right now is my 3rd party wired switch controller because it has a headphone jack.
I haven’t played any of the Sonic games since Sonic and Knuckles so I am going to have to take your word on all of that. haha
I am partial to how the Joycon is set up myself, but I think it is just because of how much I play it compared to alternate styled consoles.
Sonic and Knuckles special stages are so much better, in my opinion. Maybe I’m just not good at the Lost World special stages on 3DS, but I somehow struggle because they use motion controls ( moving myself and the whole system to move in a 3D environment ). Moving along in a straight line to collect balls is so much easier, in my opinion.
Also, joycons are an alright enough setup, but I personally don’t like how small they are. My hands were not made for extended unattached usage of those things.
Everything is objective. Our ability to quantity things is where we consider things to be subjective.
The world is made of magic, it just differentiated into so many forms, that one of them is science and that’s what many people believe is all there is.
I feel in the mood to explain more about this:
Similar to european school’s history classes tend to be focused on european history (we call that “eurocentrism”), our worldview is focused on humans, i think that’s called “anthropocentrism”. While humans are important, it’s not everything there is. There’s also plants and other living beings, and in fact there’s many more of them than of us. I try to consider that.
I’m calling the unity of all life “magic”, i came up with that and it’s supposed to be a play-on-words on the german word “Magen” (stomach) (representing that plants and animals are connected through an important relationship that is food). Also the stomach is the organ most physiologically/spatially central in the human body, in my opinion. So i imagine that everything’s in the human is built around that “central” organ that is the stomach. That makes sense as the intake of food is the root of all animal existence, that enables animal’s existence in the first place. Thus “everything is created from the stomach outwards”, as supportive organs to help the stomach collect and digest food.
This is an interesting take.
I like to think of Science as magic, because it really is.
Ancient peoples played with “Alchemy,” and modern chemistry is simply that. They would lose it if they knew we could “grow” diamonds, or that we have created an entirely new element.
Or that we’ve turned lead into gold, though not very cost-effectively to say the least.
Morals are objective.
Can you elaborate?
Sure!
Argument is that you can’t just call something objectively evil or good. “Murder isn’t evil, what if it was in self-defense.”
That’s overcomplicating it. If you weren’t missing any context you could get around “what if” situations.
Now I don’t think we can tell right from wrong at all times. Everything from personal experience, current position in history, and traits like greed make it hard for us. But still, there should be a right answer.
In practice this just means if I feel a topic is controversial to me, I will keep thinking or researching about it until I have a pretty stable stand. As opposed to “it’s confusing so I don’t want to think about.”
I could at least get closer to right answer this way.
Hope this helps!
I was talking about this with a coworker recently and I don’t believe they are.
I believe in social democracy, I believe that it is the best political ideology.
It combines a free society with a government provided safety net.
I see communism as being too restrictive, and unregulated capitalism as being way too out of control.
A progressive social democratic country with a strong government seems to me as combining new ideas with a stable foundation.
What Economic structure would you use in your ideal society?
I am not well versed in the theory if economics.
In general terms and speaking purely in an ideal world, I would expect that a regulated market economy would allow the society to exploit the free market and the greed of humans, while providing a solid foundation of government services for it’s citizens to rely on.
- The universe and everything in it was made for a reason.
- The message of Jesus, while deformed and deeply mixed with Western nonsense by Rome (polytheism, pagan rites and an immature disregard for self restraint, to name a few), will serve as a basis to unite the West to the rest of the world (up until now it’s behaved either as an armed landlord, a mob boss or a deranged killer, and that includes the European colonial project called Israel).
- People are fundamentally kind hearted and prosocial, but unexamined trauma, pettiness and immaturity, and an overall disregard for thought before action (a moral obligation, btw), keeps them from being who they were always supposed to be.
- Hard labels don’t/rarely belong in this world, and never apply to people. If you wanna understand the universe and the people in it you’re gonna have to understand them as a collection of spectrums/ranges, not as singular adjectives and nouns that are either meaningless or overly exaggerated.
do you believe that randomness exists?
The universe and everything in it was made for a reason.
I wonder how randomness would fit into this. I believe that randomness does exist and that order/causality has its limits.
Randomness? Or uncertainty? Cause I understand uncertainty (both epistemologically and physically, and more so the former than the latter), but it’s hard for me to understand randomness when everything comes from something that came before, forming a line of causes and effects (knowable and unknowable) from the beginning of the universe until today. Perhaps through quantum physics, idk, but I don’t think I need to understand it as long as I only take into consideration what happens after the collapse of the wave function, lol. I also understand that consciousness is a black box, and free will is evidently real (go diet or be faithful in your teenage yours, you’ll quickly discover your freedom as you’re fighting yourself) but is axiomatic and cannot be properly explained in words (it’s part of the terrain that cannot be represented in the map).
I have read the following very beautiful explanation of randomness:
You may very well assume that the universe is deterministic, i.e. one thing follows after another, but even if that is so, you still end up with infinitely many stars in the night sky, and you cannot predict their patterns and shapes from mere computational-prediction alone. You need to venture out into the night and see the stars for yourself in order to find their arrangement and yourself in the middle of it. That is what randomness is all about: The stars could have any pattern, but they have exactly one. The same applies for humans: Humans could have any character, but they have exactly one. The true human character causes free-will, and that is what you and me experience as the wonder of life.
That is beautiful indeed. 😊❤️
