Humanity

[Woeler]

[quote="Tora"]This world isn't lovely. Not everyone loves everyone. That doesn't mean that I don't. I care for every person that has ever walked this earth. Yes even the most evil of us all. Do I think there should be a death penalty for anyone? No. Do I think what people do on a regular basis is ok? No. Does me hating man for the things they do going to change what they do? No. If I could give my life to change this world once and for all I would do it in a heart beat. I can't change the whole world, but I'll be damned if I'm going to lose a faith in humanity and hate it. Yes terrible terrible things man has done, but from the ashes we shall rise like a Phoenix. Why hate man for what they've done when you can love them for who they are?[/quote]
You don't care because you care. You care because it makes you feel good about yourself. We all do. Nobody cares just because they can. There's an evolutionary imperative why we give a crap about our family and friends. And there's an evolutionary imperative why we don't give a crap about anybody else. If we loved all people indiscriminately, we couldn't function. You do not love everyone because you can't love everyone. People lie, especially if they want to be on the moral highground.

If you love everybody, even Adolf Hitler or Osama bin Laden. Heck lets just say if you love everyone, you're not morally superior or philanthropic. You're suffering from severe Stockholm syndrome.
Loving everybody is a recognized psychological disorder! Welcome to the world. Everyone's different, everyone gets treated different.

There's one thing wrong with your phoenix analogy. A phoenix dies of natural causes. It doesn't commit suicide.

Why would I want to love humanity for what they are and not for what they do? Sure, love Bin Laden, forget what he did, he's a man. Just like you an me.

[Tora]

I don't do it to be on a moral high ground or morally superior. Self righteousness is wrong and always will be. You want to call it a disorder so be it. One dreams of a world where love and happiness follow yet you look someone in the face that has all the qualities necessary for such a world to exist and you scream of all the wrong man has done. You call them a disorder, and you can't stand it because I'm a flaw in your equation of man. You deem all man more evil than good. Yet when a man with more good than evil crosses your path you condemn it and call it sick with a mental disorder.

Osama Bin Laden killed many and deserved punishment of imprisonment not death. If you so believe that death is the end than why give him end and not let him suffer rotting in a jail cell?

[Woeler]

You do not have all the qualities necessary for such a world. Why? Because you are human. There are three reasons why one might believe that humanity is great.

1. As humanity includes every person on this planet they are afraid to judge it because they are part of it. Claiming to not be a human would be ridiculous. Only option? Claiming humanity is great.

2. There must be an ultimate authority who knows everything has good consequences eventually.

3. Stockholms.

Death is the end... so? Dead is dead. Gone, byebye.

If you want to imprison Osama for murder, humanity should be imprisoned for crimes against humanity. Which is a complete paradox that corresponds to my suicide remark on the phoenix analogy.

You do care because you want to be on the high ground. You say it yourself. You claim to the one that crossed my path who is more good and loves everybody. You're only proving that it's because you can feel good about it.

Care is never selfless.

off to work. see ya later.

[Tora]

1. That the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

2. I never said "I" was that man. I said "When a man" on top of that if I was that man I'd be proud of it.

3. Being human has nothing to do with whether you're evil or good. That is a choice man must make individually.

4. Wanting to walk the high ground and saying I'm better than someone else are two different things Woeler.

5. You want to say that it makes one feel better to see the world better; well so what if it does. Should I feel nothing? Should I feel bad that things get better? You argument makes no sense.

6. Want to argue selfless? Well is it not better to be selfish helping others or selfish doing nothing for no one.

[Azdgari]

This is my Woeler metaphor I've been working on, already adjusted for pessimistic human nature view.

[In other news, totally amped to match wits with you, Woeler! Too long since we had a good discussion]


There are 1,000 bad people in the world and 100 good people.

People such as Tora and I will be in the 100 because of our personal convictions. People such as yourself will be neither, or perhaps even in the 1,000 (since I think you're insinuating or have insinuated in the past [correct me if I'm wrong] that being a bystander in a world of evil implicates you of evil as well) because you believe that philanthropy is a waste of time and human nature is inherently evil.

Which brings me to the conclusion: You are consciously part of the problem and make no effort to do otherwise, as far as I can tell. You could be attempting to make a positive change in the world, but you choose not because you believe it's pointless, despite the fact that if there were a thousand people with your viewpoint and they all decided to help -regardless- of their thoughts on its effectiveness, you would in fact make a massive difference.

What do you think of that analysis? Do you deny that apathy like your own is part of the reason humanity struggles?

[Regulus]

Evolution doesn't exactly work that way, Woeler.

It's not necessarily about the strongest being able to survive. The survival of a species relies on diversity, because when the environment changes, a different set of abilities are needed to survive.

In a world populated with only Woelers and Toras, nothing would ever be accomplished. If humanity is to survive for generations to come, we need all kinds of people. We need warriors, hunters, gatherers, artists, engineers, doctors, scientists, etc.

There's no need to go to war with other countries, because, who knows, someday there might be a plague, and that country might be first to find an antidote.

By helping others, we are helping our species as a whole. There is an evolutionary imperative to do so.

[DGFone]

The way the world is currently, even if it was populated by Jesuses, it will still all collapse into anarchy and death. Why?

Because our current technological point is a dead-end. We live on fossil fuels, which will not last for long.

The biggest problem I see with people right now is not that there are good people or bad people, but that everyone assume that someone else will solve all our problems. In short: too many people are lazy.

If you want to save the world, don't preach on the evils of the Hummer and get a Prius (which is even worse). Get off your backside and: Get an engineering degree and invent that green engine that we desperately need.

And to address some other points: There are only 2 primary reasons why technology and society improves: Someone wants to get filthy rich, or someone wants to kill someone else.

The world improved in the last century. Guess what happened in the past 100 years?
WW1, WWII, Cold War, Vietnam, Soviet Afghanistan, First Gulf War, Second Gulf War, US Afghanistan.

Love it or hate it, but the gun is the tool of innovation. After all, for millennia, romantics thought that one day, a weapon would be so powerful, it would prevent war. Some of the smarter ones actually invented weapons to try and do just that (a la Gatling). Finally, we have finally got to that point: Nuclear Weapons.

Try and hate them as you want, but the only reason why we don't have a war on the scale of WWII after it ended was because of nukes.

EDIT: And how's this for morality?

Why do I often feel like I'm the only person who doesn't think it's a bad thing to admit that I'm moral often for selfish reasons.

[Woeler]

[quote="DGFone"]The way the world is currently, even if it was populated by Jesuses, it will still all collapse into anarchy and death. Why?

Because our current technological point is a dead-end. We live on fossil fuels, which will not last for long.

The biggest problem I see with people right now is not that there are good people or bad people, but that everyone assume that someone else will solve all our problems. In short: too many people are lazy.

If you want to save the world, don't preach on the evils of the Hummer and get a Prius (which is even worse). Get off your backside and: Get an engineering degree and invent that green engine that we desperately need.

And to address some other points: There are only 2 primary reasons why technology and society improves: Someone wants to get filthy rich, or someone wants to kill someone else.

The world improved in the last century. Guess what happened in the past 100 years?
WW1, WWII, Cold War, Vietnam, Soviet Afghanistan, First Gulf War, Second Gulf War, US Afghanistan.

Love it or hate it, but the gun is the tool of innovation. After all, for millennia, romantics thought that one day, a weapon would be so powerful, it would prevent war. Some of the smarter ones actually invented weapons to try and do just that (a la Gatling). Finally, we have finally got to that point: Nuclear Weapons.

Try and hate them as you want, but the only reason why we don't have a war on the scale of WWII after it ended was because of nukes.[/quote]

Are you high?

[Tora]

[quote="DGFone"]The way the world is currently, even if it was populated by Jesuses, it will still all collapse into anarchy and death. Why?

Because our current technological point is a dead-end. We live on fossil fuels, which will not last for long.

The biggest problem I see with people right now is not that there are good people or bad people, but that everyone assume that someone else will solve all our problems. In short: too many people are lazy.

If you want to save the world, don't preach on the evils of the Hummer and get a Prius (which is even worse). Get off your backside and: Get an engineering degree and invent that green engine that we desperately need.

And to address some other points: There are only 2 primary reasons why technology and society improves: Someone wants to get filthy rich, or someone wants to kill someone else.

The world improved in the last century. Guess what happened in the past 100 years?
WW1, WWII, Cold War, Vietnam, Soviet Afghanistan, First Gulf War, Second Gulf War, US Afghanistan.

Love it or hate it, but the gun is the tool of innovation. After all, for millennia, romantics thought that one day, a weapon would be so powerful, it would prevent war. Some of the smarter ones actually invented weapons to try and do just that (a la Gatling). Finally, we have finally got to that point: Nuclear Weapons.

Try and hate them as you want, but the only reason why we don't have a war on the scale of WWII after it ended was because of nukes.

EDIT: And how's this for morality?

Why do I often feel like I'm the only person who doesn't think it's a bad thing to admit that I'm moral often for selfish reasons.[/quote]Are you high?

[FlipMode]

[quote="DGFone"]The way the world is currently, even if it was populated by Jesuses, it will still all collapse into anarchy and death. Why?

Because our current technological point is a dead-end. We live on fossil fuels, which will not last for long.

The biggest problem I see with people right now is not that there are good people or bad people, but that everyone assume that someone else will solve all our problems. In short: too many people are lazy.

If you want to save the world, don't preach on the evils of the Hummer and get a Prius (which is even worse). Get off your backside and: Get an engineering degree and invent that green engine that we desperately need.

And to address some other points: There are only 2 primary reasons why technology and society improves: Someone wants to get filthy rich, or someone wants to kill someone else.

The world improved in the last century. Guess what happened in the past 100 years?
WW1, WWII, Cold War, Vietnam, Soviet Afghanistan, First Gulf War, Second Gulf War, US Afghanistan.

Love it or hate it, but the gun is the tool of innovation. After all, for millennia, romantics thought that one day, a weapon would be so powerful, it would prevent war. Some of the smarter ones actually invented weapons to try and do just that (a la Gatling). Finally, we have finally got to that point: Nuclear Weapons.

Try and hate them as you want, but the only reason why we don't have a war on the scale of WWII after it ended was because of nukes.

EDIT: And how's this for morality?

Why do I often feel like I'm the only person who doesn't think it's a bad thing to admit that I'm moral often for selfish reasons.[/quote]

Are you high?