REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

The Irrelevance of (our) Opinion

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, November 30, 2014 16:07
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7365
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, November 25, 2014 10:25 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The Irrelevance of Opinion

Whatever happened to African warlord Joseph Kony?
http://www.news.com.au/world/africa/what-ever-happened-to-african-warl
ord-joseph-kony/story-fnh81gzi-1226951404637


I listened to a StoryCorps segment, it was very engaging, about a young woman who followed her dream and joined an organization in San Diego called Invisible Children. The goal was to have many cities adopting the cause of child soldiers, and our organizer's mission was Chicago. With no experience and no plan, she took on the challenge. But coming towards the end of the campaign, the very holdout was .... Chicago. So our intrepid heroine bent every effort to gain the attention of, and enlist the help of, the most famous Chicagoan, Oprah Winfrey. Our intrepid heroine vaulted over the metaphorical barrier, Oprah took up the cause, and viola – Kony 2012 went viral.

So, what happened?

“Kony 2012” came ... and went. Kony- the actual man- is still out there. Child soldiers are still a feature of African wars. And nobody really remembers the cause anymore.

NYC Climate Demo: Top 5 Massive Rallies that had no Effect
http://www.juancole.com/2014/09/climate-massive-rallies.html

400,000 people showed up to show their support for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. 400,000 people left. Nothing changed.

The ice bucket challenge.
Now THAT'S a meme that lasted no longer than the common cold! It was hot.... or whatever... for about three weeks and then... phfffttt!

Twitter, Facebook, demonstrations.... all about as meaningful as spitting in the wind.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:48 PM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Twitter, Facebook, demonstrations.... all about as meaningful as spitting in the wind.



See, when you finally accept that mankind- whether or not we make it off this rock- will NOT survive the eventual end of the universe, you realize NOTHING really matters anyway. "Good" and "Evil" are simply descriptors of a moment in time that soon passes and is forgotton. Accept and become a force for true neutrality, neither good nor evil, but simply allowing whatever forces that govern the laws of nature to have their way with you because those laws are far more intelligent than any person alive or dead in the future, present, or past can EVER seek to be.

OR you can live a life of frustration when people can't manage the way you want, behave in a way that makes sense, or care about things they probably should.

Up to you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 12:34 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Wish

Some cultures have people who live with meaning. The fact that this culture doesn't is a changeable thing.

Signy

I have always wondered what would happen if people used the power of the vote consistently, to bend the system to benefit the many.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 12:37 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 7:20 AM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Wish

Some cultures have people who live with meaning. The fact that this culture doesn't is a changeable thing.

Signy



The ONLY way this culture will live with meaning is if someone invents a shot that increases the IQ level about 50 pts. But since it would also have to physically rewire the brain, I don't see that happening at ALL before we blow ourselves to bits or run out of resources...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:36 AM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Twitter, Facebook, demonstrations.... all about as meaningful as spitting in the wind.



See, when you finally accept that mankind- whether or not we make it off this rock- will NOT survive the eventual end of the universe, you realize NOTHING really matters anyway. "Good" and "Evil" are simply descriptors of a moment in time that soon passes and is forgotton. Accept and become a force for true neutrality, neither good nor evil, but simply allowing whatever forces that govern the laws of nature to have their way with you because those laws are far more intelligent than any person alive or dead in the future, present, or past can EVER seek to be.

OR you can live a life of frustration when people can't manage the way you want, behave in a way that makes sense, or care about things they probably should.

Up to you.



This is probably the most intelligent and insightful synopsis of human attitude (especially for western cultures) I have ever read.

It is also pretty good advice.

Thanx Wishi!




Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:46 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Hmmm... well, I think WISH'S advice is poor in this instance. The problem is that our opinion- yours, mine, and the guy next door - account for less than nothing, but SOME peoples' opinion (an exceedingly tiny minority) seem to determine most of what happens within human society.

Even though the human species will never survive the death of the universe (if such a thing is indeed in the future) we (most of us) don't need to bow our collective heads to the whims of a few, either, because there is nothing in "the laws of nature" that make our societal situation inevitable. It only occurs because we allow it so.

So I'm distinguishing between what happens "in nature" and what happens "in society", because our society is completely "un-natural" anyway .... we don't accept the inevitability of disease, discomfort, starvation, and even death; the whole collective human effort has been towards more reward and more certainty with less work and less anxiety.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 4:13 PM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hmmm... well, I think WISH'S advice is poor in this instance. The problem is that our opinion- yours, mine, and the guy next door - account for less than nothing, but SOME peoples' opinion (an exceedingly tiny minority) seem to determine most of what happens within human society.

Even though the human species will never survive the death of the universe (if such a thing is indeed in the future) we (most of us) don't need to bow our collective heads to the whims of a few, either, because there is nothing in "the laws of nature" that make our societal situation inevitable. It only occurs because we allow it so.

So I'm distinguishing between what happens "in nature" and what happens "in society", because our society is completely "un-natural" anyway .... we don't accept the inevitability of disease, discomfort, starvation, and even death; the whole collective human effort has been towards more reward and more certainty with less work and less anxiety.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.



All thoughts I suppose, but what does it have to do with what Wishi advised?

I don’t see a problem with some people’s (even if an exceedingly tiny minority) opinions influencing society or determining most of what happens in society. Obviously, society has judged those opinions and determined they are worth following or they wouldn’t be following them.
As for accepting the whims of a few or the inevitable, that wasn’t suggested in the advice either.
She simply suggested that one can live a life of frustration because things don’t go the way one wants or one can stop judging everyone else and just accept life will flow along as it will, and probably for the better.

Sort of a zen-like philosophy - one can be in harmony and accepting of reality or one can be in conflict and attempt to grasp illusion.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:08 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Or one can understand the basis of the current reality and attempt to improve on the future.

Understanding doesn't mean you assume inevitability - it means you grasp the processes enough to manipulate them.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:58 AM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Or one can understand the basis of the current reality and attempt to improve on the future.

Understanding doesn't mean you assume inevitability - it means you grasp the processes enough to manipulate them.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.


Again, nice thoughts but what does that have to do with the advice?

Understanding the basis of the current reality is no different than an opinion. How is your understanding of the basis of the current reality better than mine or anyone else's?

No one suggested that one should not attempt to improve the future. But, if no one is interested in your opinion on how to improve the future, then what? It was not suggested one should assume the inevitable either.

As for having sufficient grasp of the process that one can manipulate others or the process, I think that was part of the point made earlier regarding some/certain people having too much influence on society. Obviously, they have a solid grasp of the process and are successful in manipulating others. Just because they are successful doesn't mean they are right.

Of course part of the basis of the advice was to stop judging things as right/wrong or good/evil and understand that things will turn out as they do regardless of what you think or do.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 12:09 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Or one can understand the basis of the current reality and attempt to improve on the future. Understanding doesn't mean you assume inevitability - it means you grasp the processes enough to manipulate them.-KIKI

Again, nice thoughts but what does that have to do with the advice? Understanding the basis of the current reality is no different than an opinion. How is your understanding of the basis of the current reality better than mine or anyone else's? _DEVERSE


Ummm... there's the difference between science and opinion. Some might have an opinion that holy smoke and clean thoughts will cure cancer, but I prefer to try something with a better history of success.

Quote:

No one suggested that one should not attempt to improve the future. But, if no one is interested in your opinion on how to improve the future, then what? -DEVERSE
Then, if you're right and "they're" wrong, they (and you) will suffer the consequences. "Opinions" drive actions and actions drive consequences. "Opinions" are not consequence-free, so (presumably) one should make a point of bending them towards reality.

Quote:

As for having sufficient grasp of the process that one can manipulate others or the process, I think that was part of the point made earlier regarding some/certain people having too much influence on society. Obviously, they have a solid grasp of the process and are successful in manipulating others. Just because they are successful doesn't mean they are right.-DEVERSE
Then those others - if they're interested in bettering their future- should look to their understanding of the world and improve it. Or not. And suffer the consequences.

Quote:

Of course part of the basis of the advice was to stop judging things as right/wrong or good/evil and understand that things will turn out as they do regardless of what you think or do.-DEVERSE
There's a large "lie down and die" element to that thinking. If the rape is inevitable, enjoy it? Is that your advice?

As a sociopathic individual, one CAN manipulate one's fellow humans and the future. And if the rest of humanity is content with being manipulated by sociopaths, then the attempt to broadly educate people to their potential and power is a wasted effort. Hubby is convinced that most people are no more intelligent than termites, or the patients in BF Skinner's mental institution experiment. If a stick comes and stirs the nest, the termites busy themselves fixing the nest and never look at the hand wielding the stick. If the table is set with flowers and a cloth and eating there is your "reward" for being "nice", nobody ever looks at who set the table and made the rules.

Is he right?



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 2:35 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


See, when you finally accept that mankind- whether or not we make it off this rock- will NOT survive the eventual end of the universe, you realize NOTHING really matters anyway.

Will the universe end? It's a matter of conjecture. But one thing will most likely be true - no decision made can ever be undone. What we do now forever alters the universe in some way.


"Good" and "Evil" are simply descriptors of a moment in time that soon passes and is forgotton. Accept and become a force for true neutrality, neither good nor evil ...

Hmmm ... would you feel that way if someone raped you? Raped your child? Killed your child? How accepting and neutral would you be? Because I seem to recall some very graphic things you said you'd do.

... but simply allowing whatever forces that govern the laws of nature to have their way with you because those laws are far more intelligent than any person alive or dead in the future, present, or past can EVER seek to be.

The actions of a very few humans to gratify their desires at our expense are not laws of nature. I hope you understand that.

OR you can live a life of frustration when people can't manage the way you want, behave in a way that makes sense, or care about things they probably should.

I have to say, when what they do negatively impacts ME it will frustrate me - and not in an impersonal sense.

I have no frustration with gravity. Or black holes. Or the space-time continuum, or any other laws of nature. I do have frustration with people who want to use me and my family.

Up to you.

If we follow your advice, "Then we're stupid and we'll die."




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:40 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I think the problem with some of social media protests, particularly about places outside of the West, is that they demand simple solutions to complex problems, and usually the complexities are not particularly understood by those protesting.

I think the other issue with social media, is that people get fired up quickly and then distracted quickly. Change takes time, it takes ongoing concerted efforts. The campaigns that I know have been most successful have been led by people who make a sustained effort to bring about change, and that sometimes means years of lobbying, campaigning, protesting.

I'm a big believer in the droplet in the ocean theory. You can create ripples that lead to bigger change by even the smallest of actions, but you also have to recognise that change can be hard to bring about.

You also need to have clear ideas about what changes you expect and be realistic. Protesting for world peace or against inequality is too broad to be likely to achieve anything. Whereas campaigning to bring US troops home may be something that can be achieved.

So I disagree that our opinion means nothing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:53 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


MAGONS, I agree.

Our opinion DOES make a difference. Unless certain ideas, laws and policies have a very broad level of fundamental agreement ... to the point of being memes... they will never stand.

What I was reacting to was the "instant gratification" view of change. I know so many young people who think that if they can ONLY get something out on Twitter and if goes "viral" then they've accomplished something significant. But really they're just being distracted with shiny baubles... about as meaningful as those viral cat videos, and not viewed anywhere near as often!

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:59 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Magons

I would be really interested to see it put to the test. To date, most people have been propagandized enough that they accept the meager options they're given. As proof of the concept that indeed an entire population can be bent to accept the unthinkable by the powerful few, even mass death, I point to the Aztecs, Inca, and Maya.

But what if a significant portion of the population were to wake up? What if they started voting for THEIR interests rather than the interests of the powerful - consistently, meaningfully and effectively? What if the vote really did threaten TPTB? What would happen? How sturdy is our democratic process?




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 4:31 PM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Or one can understand the basis of the current reality and attempt to improve on the future. Understanding doesn't mean you assume inevitability - it means you grasp the processes enough to manipulate them.-KIKI

Again, nice thoughts but what does that have to do with the advice? Understanding the basis of the current reality is no different than an opinion. How is your understanding of the basis of the current reality better than mine or anyone else's? _DEVERSE


Ummm... there's the difference between science and opinion. Some might have an opinion that holy smoke and clean thoughts will cure cancer, but I prefer to try something with a better history of success.

Quote:

No one suggested that one should not attempt to improve the future. But, if no one is interested in your opinion on how to improve the future, then what? -DEVERSE
Then, if you're right and "they're" wrong, they (and you) will suffer the consequences. "Opinions" drive actions and actions drive consequences. "Opinions" are not consequence-free, so (presumably) one should make a point of bending them towards reality.

Quote:

As for having sufficient grasp of the process that one can manipulate others or the process, I think that was part of the point made earlier regarding some/certain people having too much influence on society. Obviously, they have a solid grasp of the process and are successful in manipulating others. Just because they are successful doesn't mean they are right.-DEVERSE
Then those others - if they're interested in bettering their future- should look to their understanding of the world and improve it. Or not. And suffer the consequences.

Quote:

Of course part of the basis of the advice was to stop judging things as right/wrong or good/evil and understand that things will turn out as they do regardless of what you think or do.-DEVERSE
There's a large "lie down and die" element to that thinking. If the rape is inevitable, enjoy it? Is that your advice?

As a sociopathic individual, one CAN manipulate one's fellow humans and the future. And if the rest of humanity is content with being manipulated by sociopaths, then the attempt to broadly educate people to their potential and power is a wasted effort. Hubby is convinced that most people are no more intelligent than termites, or the patients in BF Skinner's mental institution experiment. If a stick comes and stirs the nest, the termites busy themselves fixing the nest and never look at the hand wielding the stick. If the table is set with flowers and a cloth and eating there is your "reward" for being "nice", nobody ever looks at who set the table and made the rules.

Is he right?



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.



Where and when did this discussion become about science verses opinion? The thread premise was about the irrelevance of opinion and that one can either be frustrated because their opinion lacks influence while other opinions hold greater influence on society or one can accept that the world won’t (always) go the way they want.

Science isn’t always right either and has changed significantly in many areas; including the treatment of cancers (my wife is an oncologist). So what is your point? That science is infallible? Sorry, I don’t care for that opinion, I won't say it is wrong, just that I don't care for it.
I do agree with Wishi though that “good/evil” and “right/wrong” are simply points in time.

If you are upset that people believe that holy smoke and clean thoughts will cure cancer, then please be upset and frustrated because they don’t hold with your opinion and you cannot influence them to follow yours. Additionally, please feel free to judge them in any manner you feel is appropriate and that makes you feel intellectually superior.
As advised by Wishi, and advice I agree with, I prefer not to be frustrated and upset with such an opinion and accept that there will be those who do not agree with my opinion and that they will go their own way based upon their opinion. All the best of luck to them. I learned long ago that no matter how long you beat that dead horse it ain't gonna pull the cart.

Where did I suggest anyone, including me, was right or wrong in my question? The question simply asks if no one is interested in your opinion, then what?
While I agree there are consequences in following an opinion, I am not of the same opinion as you that those who do not follow your (or my) opinion will always suffer negative consequences.

At no time did I suggest that opinions should be unrealistic either. However, there are those who do hold unrealistic opinions and while I do not agree with their opinion, it doesn’t upset me or cause me frustration. If, by your example, someone is of the opinion that holy smoke and clean thoughts will cure cancer, then they are welcome to hold that opinion. If asked, I would offer my opinion, but if they didn’t follow my advice, why would I be upset and frustrated? It’s their opinion, their choice and the consequences will be what they will be. You can hold the opinion that the consequences will be negative, but I don't agree with that opinion. Again, I am not suggesting your opinion is right or wrong, just I don't agree with it.

Simply because someone has the ability to manipulate the opinions of others and influence them does not make them right, nor does it make them wrong. It just means they have a different opinion and can influence others.
Suffer the consequences? Again, if your opinion is that if people do not follow your opinion they will suffer negative consequences, then please feel free to have that opinion.

What I said was one must understand that things will turn out the way they do regardless of what one thinks or does in respect to opinion. I never said one must enjoy or accept the way things turn out either, but to understand that it can and does happen that others have no interest or will not follow your opinion. And further, the comment was certainly not about rape, but in regards to society following someone else’s opinion rather than yours.

Which brings me to my final point that this discussion is so typical of the RWED. Honest, intellectual and civil discussion is way beyond the capabilities of many individuals here.
Yes, one can throw into the discussion ideas that were never addressed (science v. opinion), twist a comment into whatever interpretation one wants (do you really think I have advocated one should lie back and enjoy being raped?) and even take the most obtuse position one can possibly take to justify their opinion.

But what it comes down to is that most opinions one hears are irrelevant and that being unable to accept that life just doesn't go the way we always want demonstrates a level of immaturity that permeates way too much of society, and especially in the privileged 1st world.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 5:42 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Surely there is a limit to what you would accept in the opinions of others, or is everything okay with you? That would make you a very cruisy person, but clearly not someone who is interested in the plight of others.

For example, are you okay with someone believing holy smoke cures cancer if that is the only treatment they will allow their child with cancer to have?

Are you okay if someone lobbies for the re-introduction of slavery? Would you sit back and be all magnanamous about that?

While I am all for tolerance regarding diversity of beliefs, there are limits to what I will tolerate. Especially if those people who hold beliefs are lobbying and influencing changes in laws to support their beliefs. So that's the nature of public debate and that is a good thing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 6:23 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
MAGONS, I agree.

Our opinion DOES make a difference. Unless certain ideas, laws and policies have a very broad level of fundamental agreement ... to the point of being memes... they will never stand.

What I was reacting to was the "instant gratification" view of change. I know so many young people who think that if they can ONLY get something out on Twitter and if goes "viral" then they've accomplished something significant. But really they're just being distracted with shiny baubles... about as meaningful as those viral cat videos, and not viewed anywhere near as often!




Yeah definitely agree that expecting instant change is unrealistic, but I dont want to completely diss those kind of campaigns either, they do lend moral support to those trying to implement change. I guess the frustrating part can be keeping people's attention. Nothing worse than a global social media campaign that prompts people to put themselves in danger only to be forgotten by the time they are in jail or executed. But there are lobby groups that try to keep these issues in the public eye, even if they dont always succeed.

Change is hard. People struggle to change the smallest part of themselves, give up smoking, lose weight, change careers, move house etc, but expect huge systems to respond promptly at their request. Hmmmm, setting up for failure.

when I work with clients, I try to get them to move away from the global catastrophising 'everything is shit' to specific complaints, and then asking them how they would like to see things be, and then what steps are they willing to take to effect change. The same is true for working in larger systems, you need to move away from the whinging, to specific complaints, a vision of how things could be different and then take baby steps to implement them.

The alternative is to keep whinging and personally I have no problems with that, but it isn't going to bring about change.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:36 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


There are all sorts of ways to convince people to do what you want - my examples were about people being told by the priest/ god/ kings that mass human sacrifice was necessary for the greater good - without it the sun god might not come back. Of course no one had ever seen these gods or talked to them ... nevertheless, they believed what they were told by people who said they knew, and so submitted to mass human sacrifice. For the same reason - keeping these functionaries to mediate with the gods for them - they also toiled to sustain a severely parasitic and extensive overclass that took a lot of their work - agricultural, work and warfare tribute.

I think we look at them with a certain amount of horror and disbelief at their practices, and the reasons they did them, and think - how stupid is that!??!

Personally, I think we're told all sorts of hooey that we'll never be able to test out, and that we run our societies on. For example, capitalism is just like Darwin's evolution. And it's based on human nature. You'd be foolish to try to run counter to the natural order of things. The market will balance everything out over time if it's just left to work. It's the best system ever. And so on. And someone is telling us these things - over, and over, and over - in so many ways. They want us to believe it for THEIR benefit, and which we do believe for the most part, and certainly are willing to live by. Even though, if you look at the numbers, we're sacrificing the welfare of vast populations for the benefit of an overclass.

So here we are, running an entire biosphere on a planet into the ground, altering the atmosphere for such a long time scientists can't even calculate how long it will take to get to back normal, subjecting billions to abject poverty and risking nuclear conflagration around the globe with our flimsy reactors ... and the reasons are ... the magical market system?




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 27, 2014 9:20 PM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Hmmm ... would you feel that way if someone raped you? Raped your child? Killed your child? How accepting and neutral would you be? Because I seem to recall some very graphic things you said you'd do.



Wow, I go away for a day and when I come back I've missed Deverse and AND a murder plot Howdy D

Unfortunately I've only got five minutes so I can't address every thing so I'll just get the one thing...

I was mostly saying to ignore the concepts of good and evil and do what you feel you must. Sometimes that means kneecapping people, sometimes it means giving a gift card for groceries when the neighbor is out of work. I wouldn't think myself good or evil, but I do try to remain neutral in most things and can't help but things a lotta things would work better if everyone did more of that, but I don't care if they do or don't because it's on them.

Won't be home tomorrow either, so Peace out and Happy Feasting

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 11:54 AM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Surely there is a limit to what you would accept in the opinions of others, or is everything okay with you? That would make you a very cruisy person, but clearly not someone who is interested in the plight of others.

For example, are you okay with someone believing holy smoke cures cancer if that is the only treatment they will allow their child with cancer to have?

Are you okay if someone lobbies for the re-introduction of slavery? Would you sit back and be all magnanamous about that?

While I am all for tolerance regarding diversity of beliefs, there are limits to what I will tolerate. Especially if those people who hold beliefs are lobbying and influencing changes in laws to support their beliefs. So that's the nature of public debate and that is a good thing.



People can have any opinion they want and that is fine by me, it is just an opinion. I can agree with the opinion, not agree with the opinion or have no opinion about the opinion. But where have I ever stated every opinion or everything is okay or acceptable or agreeable to me?

As I have said, people are free to have any opinion they want and to follow it, there are laws that say they have that right and freedom. If they want to believe cancer can be cured by holy smoke and no one can change their opinion then what is it you suggest be done?

And I don’t care about the plight of others?
Hmmm… lets see, 15 years as a soldier doing peacekeeping in some of the most god awful places you probably have not even heard of let alone been to; seeing the absolutely most horrendous things one human can do to another and placing my life on the line daily to stop it.
~30 years as a firefighter helping people and doing so with respect, kindness and dignity as they suffer probably the worst day of their life and for way too many the last day of their life.
I just got home from Africa where I worked for a month doing security as my wife and daughter worked with AIDS patients and supported the response to the ebola out break. I’d still be there but my wife and I used all our vacation time and besides, my daughter is there for a year and it costs about $600.00 a month for her to be there and live and someone has to pay the bills.
My wife, daughters and I have also raised a significant amount of money to help establish a farm that supports 30 families in Africa and help them become independent. The farm has a medical clinic, a school that teaches 250 kids and feeds them every day, a training center for adults to learn trades and the farm where food is grown.
Since you seem to have such an interest in the plight of others (which I apparently do not) I am still raising funds to finish the farm. I’m looking at $30,000.00 USD to get some additional farming equipment (it is hard work clearing forest by hand to create farm land and planting crops by hand; so a tractor, a disc and harrow would be quite helpful) so show me how much you care and I’ll tell you where to make your generous donation.

I would suggest you may want to stop making judgements about people based on a forum discussion; you are not very good at it.

Parents always base the health care of their children on opinion. What are parents who refuse to have their child immunized basing that opinion on? Science?
Here’s a shocker for you, there are many places and about a billion people or so on this planet where their health care is provided by witch doctors or a village elder. Bring in the heart of a lizard or the tooth of a lion and they can cure just about anything.
So what is your solution to this, to get upset and frustrated because things are not going the way you want and they are not following your opinion?
Maybe you should go out and riot and loot and set things on fire – that seems to be the opinion of some on how to change things.

I never once advocated blind acceptance or enjoyment or agreement of opinion. I said one must understand that things will not always go the way one wants and accept that sometimes no matter what one does, it doesn’t go the way one wants. And besides, who says your opinion is better or more right than someone else’s?

And whatever limit of tolerance you have is entirely irrelevant. No one cares about your opinion or what you think is right or wrong or good or evil. You hold slavery up as an example of something bad, but slavery did a great deal in advancing the USA as a country, so was it a good thing or a bad thing? As was pointed out, such judgements are only valid for a time and opinions can change. Getting all upset and frustrated serves no purpose.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 2:50 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I suggest you stop taking these discussions so damn personally, because this is not about accusing YOU of anything, but trying to point out the flaws in your argument.

eg If you say you don't judge others opinions, is there a limit to that? Does that mean that you would not judge someone who supports slavery."

This statement did not say. "Deverse, you are a slavery loving bastard." (Although it does sound like you find some merit in it.) It's trying to understand, or perhaps pick away at the logic of your argument.

So, is there a limit to the opinions of others that you would tolerate? You didn't answer my question about whether you would be tolerant of parents letting their kid die due to their beliefs.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 6:42 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DEVERSE-

For somebody who advocates accepting that others might have contrary opinions, you sure got all tetchy about MAGON'S!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 7:59 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Because god forbid that people come to a discussion board and get disagreement.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 8:27 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Or disagree with any opinion anyone has ever expressed at any time.

That would just make you a conflict loving bitch.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 8:59 PM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I suggest you stop taking these discussions so damn personally, because this is not about accusing YOU of anything, but trying to point out the flaws in your argument.

eg If you say you don't judge others opinions, is there a limit to that? Does that mean that you would not judge someone who supports slavery."

This statement did not say. "Deverse, you are a slavery loving bastard." (Although it does sound like you find some merit in it.) It's trying to understand, or perhaps pick away at the logic of your argument.

So, is there a limit to the opinions of others that you would tolerate? You didn't answer my question about whether you would be tolerant of parents letting their kid die due to their beliefs.



Again, a judgement. Exactly how did I take something you said personally? Because I responded to your insult to me by stating that I do care about the plight of others and have most of my life?
Again, you should really stop judging people on forums because you are really, really bad at it.

If someone expressed an opinion about supporting slavery I would either agree with it, not agree with it or just ignore it. Depends on the opinion.
While in the Congo and in Brazil (years ago) I ran across a number of slaves and slave owners and there wasn't a darn thing I could do about it. If I had bought their freedom and set them free they would either starve or be killed. Seeing slaves and those who advocate slavery didn't have me upset and it didn't frustrate me. I didn't agree with it and didn't not agree with it and I understood that as much as I wanted a different condition to exist, it wasn't going to happen and there wasn't much I could do to change it.
Since your question offers no context of what the opinion on slavery is, it's difficult to answer, but if the explanation above has you thinking I'm taking things too personally, then you are again making an erroneous judgement and that's too bad for you.

You ask if I would let a child die because their parents held an opinion about health care. Again, no context to the question. However, my wife is an oncologist and I am aware of this happening, so you may want to read this;
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/05/20/girl-11-with-cancer-is-free-to
-refuse-chemotherapy-childrens-aid-officials-rule
/

I do not agree, nor do I disagree with the child or her parents opinion about how they want the child's health care to be provided. I am not upset nor frustrated with what they are doing and I understand there isn't a whole lot I can do to change their opinion. Nor do I judge them, I simply hope for the best for them.



Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 9:05 PM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
DEVERSE-

For somebody who advocates accepting that others might have contrary opinions, you sure got all tetchy about MAGON'S!



Not an opinion I would agree with, and as with most opinions entirely irrelevant.

Maybe next time you can yell neener, neener, neener and call me a poopie head if it makes you feel better.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 9:22 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by DEVERSE:

Again, a judgement. Exactly how did I take something you said personally? Because I responded to your insult to me by stating that I do care about the plight of others and have most of my life?
Again, you should really stop judging people on forums because you are really, really bad at it.



Okay here is what I said

"Surely there is a limit to what you would accept in the opinions of others, or is everything okay with you? That would make you a very cruisy person, but clearly not someone who is interested in the plight of others. "

I'm sorry you took this personally. I did not mean to imply that YOU. Mr Deverse does not care about the plight of others. I was seeking clarity around whether all opnions are equally to be tolerated. In my view, there are some opinions which I cannot tolerate. For example, I cannot tolerate views that accept slavery, child prostitution, torture to name a few. I believe that the kind of person (collective 'you') that tolerates all opinions of others must be impervious to the suffering of others. Eg If you tolerate the view that child prostitution is an acceptable view, you would be willing to tolerate the suffering of children who are prostituted. Again for clarity sake and because you seem quite sensitive, I mean collective 'you'. I feel a bit like the Queen if I use the term 'one'.

Quote:

If someone expressed an opinion about supporting slavery I would either agree with it, not agree with it or just ignore it. Depends on the opinion.


Well I was referring to someone who might say something like 'shame we don't have darkies as slaves any more, they were the good old days'.
To be clear about tolerance, not tolerating a view does not mean you need to be in active dispute with that person. I could easily see myself doing a 'eyes down back away out of the room' response to some strong views like the one above, but it is not a view I could tolerate.

Quote:

While in the Congo and in Brazil (years ago) I ran across a number of slaves and slave owners and there wasn't a darn thing I could do about it. If I had bought their freedom and set them free they would either starve or be killed. Seeing slaves and those who advocate slavery didn't have me upset and it didn't frustrate me. I didn't agree with it and didn't not agree with it and I understood that as much as I wanted a different condition to exist, it wasn't going to happen and there wasn't much I could do to change it.


There are two parts to this statement. Again, 'not tolerating' does not mean you take action. You can silently find a situation intolerable, but not be able to do anything about it, or decide to take no action because it's not something you feel you can involve yourself with.

The second part is about not feeling frustrated or upset, which leads me to be believe that some part of you feels that slavery can be acceptable. You and I would then be in disagreement, because slavery does upset me and I would have felt frustrated not being able to do any thing about. We have a difference of opinion. I wonder if you can show me the same tolerance you show towards slave owners and accept that.

Quote:

Since your question offers no context of what the opinion on slavery is, it's difficult to answer, but if the explanation above has you thinking I'm taking things too personally, then you are again making an erroneous judgement and that's too bad for you.

I'm really not going to lose any sleep over whether you take it personally or not, but that is what you demonstrated by describing what I said as an insult and then going to great lengths to prove that it wasn't true. That would appear to be taking something personally, because you made it about you. In my opinion ;)

Quote:

You ask if I would let a child die because their parents held an opinion about health care. Again, no context to the question. However, my wife is an oncologist and I am aware of this happening, so you may want to read this;
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/05/20/girl-11-with-cancer-is-free-to
-refuse-chemotherapy-childrens-aid-officials-rule
/

I do not agree, nor do I disagree with the child or her parents opinion about how they want the child's health care to be provided. I am not upset nor frustrated with what they are doing and I understand there isn't a whole lot I can do to change their opinion. Nor do I judge them, I simply hope for the best for them.



Of course context is important, I was plucking at examples to see if there was any views you would say you would not be able to tolerate. Is there any example of views you have ever felt that you could not tolerance, or do you feel neutral about everything?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:02 AM

JO753

rezident owtsidr


I disagree with your attitude, Wishy, but you do hav sum good points.

I'v been doing the Nooalf Revolution thing for 15 yirz and believ that we need to go the way uv the Vulcanz. There iz virtually no respect for lojik in our civilization.

We reap the benefits uv teknolojy, wich requirez lojik to advans, but most peepl just believ wut ever they like to believ no matter how baseless.

The danjer uv this iz that we hav stedily increasing power available to individualz. Like the Vulcanz, we may reach a critical point at wich our bad lojik, emotion/superstition based thinking will destroy us.

Evil thrivez wen good men fail to act agenst it. Your 'evil iz only perspectiv, everything iz just dust in the wind' attitude iz great for the bad guyz.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:26 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Magons

I would be really interested to see it put to the test. To date, most people have been propagandized enough that they accept the meager options they're given. As proof of the concept that indeed an entire population can be bent to accept the unthinkable by the powerful few, even mass death, I point to the Aztecs, Inca, and Maya.

But what if a significant portion of the population were to wake up? What if they started voting for THEIR interests rather than the interests of the powerful - consistently, meaningfully and effectively? What if the vote really did threaten TPTB? What would happen? How sturdy is our democratic process?



Oh I don't know about 'to date'. I mean life now is better than it was under a feudal system. Or even 100 years ago. Think of some of the positives that have happened from the Magna Carta to the end of legal slavery (in parts of the world), universal suffrage, rule of law, equal rights for women, end of segredation and aparteid, end to corporal and capital punishment (in my country at least).

That's not to say things are anywhere near perfect or that more change is not needed, but there is some evidence to suggest we're becoming more compassionate, more empathic than any other time in history.

And I gotta say, those changes did not resolve from people being all 'go with the flow' and 'there's no point discussing stuff because we all believe different things' but from people with strong views, who argued, lobbied, protested and took up arms to make things better.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 1:03 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Not an opinion I would agree with, and as with most opinions entirely irrelevant.
Are you including yours as "entirely irrelevant"?

Heck, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something?

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 2:27 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"I mean life now is better than it was under a feudal system. Or even 100 years ago."

I wonder how much is due simply to technology, or to the economic system that exploits the technology and takes all the credit. Or, nowadays, where public funding provides the research while private corporations scoop up the profit.

A while ago Signy had a list of phenomenal and literally species- changing human technologies that all happened without a single profit-motivated capitalist in sight. Wading. Language. Fire. The bowl. Clothes. Counting. Tools and ropes. Husbandry. Agriculture. Writing. --Showing, I think, that technology alone is a transformative phenomenon in the lives we live. (I added a few and probably forgot a few.) And while we might be nicer than the Greeks, Romans, or Medieval peoples, I'd be hard pressed to say we're nicer than the pre-white man San Bushmen, Australian aborigines, or Inuit. And finally, we're doing well because other people are being exploited. (BTW I think our relatively privileged status is already in a decline.)

So, I'm not convinced that capitalism, or even modern democracy, are the causes of the benefits we enjoy.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 10:03 AM

DEVERSE

Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.


Quote:

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Okay here is what I said

"Surely there is a limit to what you would accept in the opinions of others, or is everything okay with you? That would make you a very cruisy person, but clearly not someone who is interested in the plight of others. "

I'm sorry you took this personally. I did not mean to imply that YOU. Mr Deverse does not care about the plight of others. I was seeking clarity around whether all opnions are equally to be tolerated. In my view, there are some opinions which I cannot tolerate. For example, I cannot tolerate views that accept slavery, child prostitution, torture to name a few. I believe that the kind of person (collective 'you') that tolerates all opinions of others must be impervious to the suffering of others. Eg If you tolerate the view that child prostitution is an acceptable view, you would be willing to tolerate the suffering of children who are prostituted. Again for clarity sake and because you seem quite sensitive, I mean collective 'you'. I feel a bit like the Queen if I use the term 'one'.



So your insult about a person who accepts the opinions of others has no interest in the plight of others did not include me either individually or as part of the collective "you" and I am not permitted to address it for myself?
So exactly who were you directing your insult at because I seem to be about the only one here suggesting that others can have any opinion they want?
Just looking for clarification here as I am not sure if you are interested in discussion or just throwing out insults randomly.

And yes you can say I'm sensitive or taking something personal; but all I did was explain my position and view - which apparently is not acceptable. It makes me wonder what response was expected and who you expected to respond if not me?

Since you do not seem interested in discussion with me (the individual), but with the collective "you", I'll leave you (both the personal you and the collective you) to your discussion.


Oh let the sun beat down upon my face;
With stars to fill my dream;
I am a traveler of both time and space;
To be where I have been

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 11:36 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

As I have said, people are free to have any opinion they want and to follow it, there are laws that say they have that right and freedom. If they want to believe cancer can be cured by holy smoke and no one can change their opinion then what is it you suggest be done?
Well, first of all, up until now it's been OK to have any opinion you want, as long as you don't act on it. But if you have the opinion that human sacrifice is necessary to bring back the rains, and you attempt to act on it??? Well, I think you'll find pretty quickly that your free opinions aren't so free after all.

----------------

In general, I think there are perhaps two kinds of "opinion" being talked about... the opinion which focuses on HOW, and the opinion which focuses on WHY.

IF you want to reduce Ebola deaths, eliminating the personal warm rituals which surround death is absolutely essential. Your African friends can have all of the opinions they want on the topic ... there's no such thing as Ebola, Ebola is a western plot, the funerary rituals don't spread it, Ebola can be cured with native medicine .... but the reality is that as long as certain rituals are practiced Ebola will continue to spread. The mechanism HOW to reduce Ebola deaths is pretty straightforward and undeniable, and the penalty for ignoring that process is often immediate and severe.

However, there may be those who - even as they fully understand how Ebola is spread- believe that the rituals and social structure are more important than Ebola.... worth dying for, and worth killing for if it involves spreading the disease to others. To them, the compassion and care that is demonstrated, and the social bonds that are reinforced, are more important than clinical isolation. They question WHY Ebola should be stopped, and have come to a different conclusion.

----------------

It's perfectly possible to understand "how to do something" without agreeing "why it should be done".

But my guess is that most people, in general, believe in the same general "whys" .... they want to have enough food, to be safe, to have more control over their environment and to reduce uncertainty, to see their children grow up ... the same bottom rungs of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. That, in fact, MOST systems are advertised to "the people" as being the way ("how") to fulfill those needs and desires, whether that way actually does what it is advertised/ propagandized to do. How do I know this? Because I have yet to see a broadly applicable system which advertises itself as promising a miserable life for oneself and ones children forever.

There ARE some systems of beliefs (opinions) which promote sacrifice ... the war effort, savings, the production effort, suicide bombing .... but even THOSE have a promised reward: if not in this life, or in this moment, or for the practitioner, then for the future, for the children, for others, or for the afterlife. (These systems are dangerous. Sacrifice is sometimes necessary, but one should always examine a demand for sacrifice carefully, and make sure that it will do what is promised. If that had been broadly done under Mao, for example, millions of people wouldn't have starved.)

So my guess is that once most people see HOW they can live better more comfortable lives, they will adopt it. The trick of the propagandist is to make sure that they never see that pathway clearly.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 11:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

The danjer uv this iz that we hav stedily increasing power available to individualz
Hmmm... I disagree here. As individuals, we are more and more powerless. Once upon a time, an individual could know enough, and do enough, to sustain themselves independently for a time ... a month, a year. They knew how to hunt, how to fletch an arrow or point an arrow and skin a deer, dig for roots or find eggs and shellfish, build a nest or climb a tree. Obviously, you can't sustain the human species individually, but an individual could survive, for a while. As technology advanced and other energy sources were tapped, humans could survive in small groups... it was possible to plow and grind grain using animals, to store and direct water, to spin and weave, to dry food and chop trees for fuel ... maybe a hundred individuals, dividing their labor, could survive.

Today, the individual cannot survive on their own. They can't even make their opinion known without the collective efforts of hundreds of thousands of others .... those who drill oil or gas, run power stations, dig ore and smelt metal for the power-generating turbines and the wires, process lithium ores, make plastic, assemble products, program servers... each one of those nodes represents a dependency and a choke-point on your individual power.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 11:59 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I was mostly saying to ignore the concepts of good and evil and do what you feel you must. Sometimes that means kneecapping people, sometimes it means giving a gift card for groceries when the neighbor is out of work. I wouldn't think myself good or evil, but I do try to remain neutral in most things and can't help but things a lotta things would work better if everyone did more of that, but I don't care if they do or don't because it's on them.
I hope your Tday was a happy one.


In a way, I agree with you that dividing viewpoints between "good" and "evil" is a pointless exercise. I think a person should have very solid reasons for doing whatever it is that they do, and "good" and "evil" aren't solid practical reasons.

On the other hand, your scope of action seems to individual, and sometimes you need more than one person, even for survival. So it becomes important what others think.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:05 PM

JO753

rezident owtsidr


I wuz mainly thinking uv destructiv power. An individual can decide he wants to wipe out an entire city. It can possibly be dun now.

The power uv the averaj person to chanje the system we hav created ranjez frum zero to not great, but there are more nonaveraj peepl around than ever. Its a good time in history to be rich!

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:15 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


I was mostly saying to ignore the concepts of good and evil and do what you feel you must. Sometimes that means kneecapping people, sometimes it means giving a gift card for groceries when the neighbor is out of work. I wouldn't think myself good or evil, but I do try to remain neutral in most things and can't help but things a lotta things would work better if everyone did more of that, but I don't care if they do or don't because it's on them.



I find this so contradictory that I literally can't understand it. If you get rid of concepts such as good and evil, pain and pleasure, life and death, hurt and help - why bother kneecapping anyone? It becomes just a random neutral act done for no reason. Similarly, why give a gift card to your neighbor? What is prompting you if not a motivation to do something 'good' in their lives?

So obviously you have not gotten rid of ideas of good and evil, you've merely semi-personalized them (your mileage may vary, if you were a Roman in Roman times your concept of 'goodness' would be entirely different and your personal values also would be different), and you have not obtained neutrality.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:29 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I wuz mainly thinking uv destructiv power. An individual can decide he wants to wipe out an entire city. It can possibly be dun now.
So it's almost impossible to be individually constructive on a large scale, but entirely within our power to bollix the system? Well, interesting point- I agree. Our system is so complex and fragile, requires -if not the active cooperation, at least the acquiescence - of nearly everyone. An individual COULD cause significant havoc in this system, even a relatively "powerless" one. (I'm not going to list the vulnerabilities).

So, since the infrastructure IS so vulnerable, TPTB have a compelling interest in keeping everyone in tight order. No wonder they're spying on everyone!


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:54 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


So, speaking of thoughtcrimes....

Thought Crime? Navy Vet Fired For Posting Images Of DHS Vehicles On Facebook

Quote:

You probably haven’t heard of Mark Paffrath, the 28-year-old Navy veteran, and former employee of the Drury hotel chain, who was fired from his job and called a “terrorist” for taking pictures of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) vehicles and posting them to his personal Facebook page.

The story of his recent job termination is further proof of fascism’s relentless bull market within these United States. What happened to Mr. Paffrath could easily happen to any of us, and it’s imperative that we support him and reject the type of backwards fear-mongering being perpetrated by his control-freak employer.

Just two weeks ago, we saw a 90-year-old vet threatened with jail for feeding homeless people in Florida. Now this.

TechDirt reports that:

Mark says that on Thursday after work he snapped 2 photographs and a short video of several dozen Homeland Security vehicles in the parking garage. He then uploaded them to his Facebook page. In his post he writes “why are all the cop cars here…I wonder if it has anything to do with Ferguson”, he also included the hashtags #Ferguson #NoJusticeNoPeace.

On Friday, shortly after arriving to work at the Drury Plaza Hotel, Mark stated that he was called to the office of Jeff Baker, the General Manager. Upon arriving Mr. Baker advised Mark that he needed to remove the photos and video from Facebook. Mark immediately complied and removed the post. Mark then continued and finished his shift.

That should be the end of it, but of course it’s not…

Saturday, Mark stated after being at work no more than 30 minutes, he was again called to the General Manager’s office. Waiting for him was Jim Bohnert, Director of Security for Drury Hotels Company, LLC. Mark told ASN that Mr. Bohnert advised him that his Facebook posts almost cost the company a $150,000 contract with the Department of Homeland Security and because of this he was being terminated.

Jim Bohnert — formerly of the Secret Service and the St. Louis Police Department — had more to say on the matter. He called the former military member a “terrorist” and told him he had “dishonorably served his country” by posting pictures of vehicles parked in a garage where any guest or employee of the hotel could have seen them. In fact, any member of the public could have seen them simply by entering the garage, which is not secured. Argus Streaming News writers were able to see “over 100? DHS vehicles in the garage while driving through it on their way to speak to the hotel’s manager.

Bohnert also threatened Paffrath with arrest if the photos were reposted (presumably by someone with more power than Director of Security for Drury Hotels, Bohnert’s current position).


Specifically, this is what Bohnert supposedly said:

Mark stated that Mr. Bohnert ended the conversation with “if you repost the photos and video you will have the federal government knocking on your door and you will be incarcerated”.

We must all support Mr. Paffrath, and let Drury Hotels know that it is their behavior that is unacceptable, not Mark Paffrath’s. It’s perfectly representative of the addled, insane society we live in that the hotel’s security director had the nerve to call a U.S. veteran a “terrorist” for posting pictures to Facebook. I think we all know who’s actually behaving like a terrorist in this case. The time for getting outraged has long since passed.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-28/thought-crime-navy-vet-fired-
posting-images-dhs-vehicles-facebook


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns. But by god, DHS is trying!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 29, 2014 6:10 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hmmm... I disagree here. As individuals, we are more and more powerless. Once upon a time, an individual could know enough, and do enough, to sustain themselves independently for a time ... a month, a year. They knew how to hunt, how to fletch an arrow or point an arrow and skin a deer, dig for roots or find eggs and shellfish, build a nest or climb a tree. Obviously, you can't sustain the human species individually, but an individual could survive, for a while. As technology advanced and other energy sources were tapped, humans could survive in small groups... it was possible to plow and grind grain using animals, to store and direct water, to spin and weave, to dry food and chop trees for fuel ... maybe a hundred individuals, dividing their labor, could survive.

Today, the individual cannot survive on their own. They can't even make their opinion known without the collective efforts of hundreds of thousands of others .... those who drill oil or gas, run power stations, dig ore and smelt metal for the power-generating turbines and the wires, process lithium ores, make plastic, assemble products, program servers... each one of those nodes represents a dependency and a choke-point on your individual power.




I'm not sure I agree with you here. I think we've always been part of a system, just that some are more systems that others and some are definitely more complex.

If can again use the feudal system, it had a simple structure but was quite rigid. As a peasant, you had no power, no means of bettering your lot. You lived and died completel at the whim of your lord. Even in largely lhunter/gatherer societies, such as Australian Aboriginals, it may appear that they had great autonomy and power in their life, but they were bound by some incredibly, unbelievably complex relationship structures.


Quote:

See, when you finally accept that mankind- whether or not we make it off this rock- will NOT survive the eventual end of the universe, you realize NOTHING really matters anyway. "Good" and "Evil" are simply descriptors of a moment in time that soon passes and is forgotton. Accept and become a force for true neutrality, neither good nor evil, but simply allowing whatever forces that govern the laws of nature to have their way with you because those laws are far more intelligent than any person alive or dead in the future, present, or past can EVER seek to be.

OR you can live a life of frustration when people can't manage the way you want, behave in a way that makes sense, or care about things they probably should.




An interesting philosophy, sounds a lot like nihilism.

I too have issues with defining things as 'good' or 'evil', I think mainly because they donote defining the world in absolutes which are generally not correct and need to be contextualised to make sense of.

I disagree that we should always just give in to forces of nature, although there are times when that is a useful philosophy, to just 'go with the flow'. But all of us have our moral yardstick, if you like, that would prevent us from just going with the flow. For some, it might be quite high before we act or make judgements. You might have to be under direct threat. For others, they might judge and act early on. I think very few of us could never fail to respond with judgement. Even buddhist monks, whose yardsticks would be quite high, have taken action on occasion.

re Impartiality. A quick scan of the internet reveals the moral conundrums outlined about impartiality, indicating that it can be both desirable and morally reprehensible.

Impartiality is a key concept in the work I do, so this is something I have given a lot of thought to, although clearly did not articulate it well in previous posts. I am required to act in a non judgemental and impartial manner. This does not require me to not hold opinions or judgements, but I must take steps to ensure that they are not communicated to any party. There is a point at which I am no longer able to be impartial, in fact I am mandated to step out of that stance, and that is when harm is being done to another. For example, a child is being abused. I must not be impartial because I must take appropriate steps to ensure the abuse stops. I have to say that even though this sounds like a wonderfully clear boundary, it is not always. However, the point being that impartiality ALL the time, particularly when that impartiality enables abuse to another, is a morally reprehensible stance.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 30, 2014 2:40 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, speaking of thoughtcrimes....

Thought Crime? Navy Vet Fired For Posting Images Of DHS Vehicles On Facebook

Quote:

You probably haven’t heard of Mark Paffrath, the 28-year-old Navy veteran, and former employee of the Drury hotel chain, who was fired from his job and called a “terrorist” for taking pictures of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) vehicles and posting them to his personal Facebook page.

The story of his recent job termination is further proof of fascism’s relentless bull market within these United States. What happened to Mr. Paffrath could easily happen to any of us, and it’s imperative that we support him and reject the type of backwards fear-mongering being perpetrated by his control-freak employer.

Just two weeks ago, we saw a 90-year-old vet threatened with jail for feeding homeless people in Florida. Now this.

TechDirt reports that:

Mark says that on Thursday after work he snapped 2 photographs and a short video of several dozen Homeland Security vehicles in the parking garage. He then uploaded them to his Facebook page. In his post he writes “why are all the cop cars here…I wonder if it has anything to do with Ferguson”, he also included the hashtags #Ferguson #NoJusticeNoPeace.

On Friday, shortly after arriving to work at the Drury Plaza Hotel, Mark stated that he was called to the office of Jeff Baker, the General Manager. Upon arriving Mr. Baker advised Mark that he needed to remove the photos and video from Facebook. Mark immediately complied and removed the post. Mark then continued and finished his shift.

That should be the end of it, but of course it’s not…

Saturday, Mark stated after being at work no more than 30 minutes, he was again called to the General Manager’s office. Waiting for him was Jim Bohnert, Director of Security for Drury Hotels Company, LLC. Mark told ASN that Mr. Bohnert advised him that his Facebook posts almost cost the company a $150,000 contract with the Department of Homeland Security and because of this he was being terminated.

Jim Bohnert — formerly of the Secret Service and the St. Louis Police Department — had more to say on the matter. He called the former military member a “terrorist” and told him he had “dishonorably served his country” by posting pictures of vehicles parked in a garage where any guest or employee of the hotel could have seen them. In fact, any member of the public could have seen them simply by entering the garage, which is not secured. Argus Streaming News writers were able to see “over 100? DHS vehicles in the garage while driving through it on their way to speak to the hotel’s manager.

Bohnert also threatened Paffrath with arrest if the photos were reposted (presumably by someone with more power than Director of Security for Drury Hotels, Bohnert’s current position).


Specifically, this is what Bohnert supposedly said:

Mark stated that Mr. Bohnert ended the conversation with “if you repost the photos and video you will have the federal government knocking on your door and you will be incarcerated”.

We must all support Mr. Paffrath, and let Drury Hotels know that it is their behavior that is unacceptable, not Mark Paffrath’s. It’s perfectly representative of the addled, insane society we live in that the hotel’s security director had the nerve to call a U.S. veteran a “terrorist” for posting pictures to Facebook. I think we all know who’s actually behaving like a terrorist in this case. The time for getting outraged has long since passed.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-28/thought-crime-navy-vet-fired-
posting-images-dhs-vehicles-facebook


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns. But by god, DHS is trying!


Is it too much to quote the post or poster of the text you are quoting from?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 30, 2014 3:44 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



Is it too much to quote the post or poster of the text you are quoting from?



Isn't that whole //line/ sky blue font/ bold// a quote function? and then there's the link that was included. What are you complaining about?




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 30, 2014 4:07 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Oh no, libtard slithering snakiepoos can't do anything right, which you would know, if you weren't yourself a scumbag leftie libretard poopie head.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:47 - 7510 posts
What's wrong with conspiracy theories
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:06 - 21 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:05 - 238 posts
Bald F*ck MAGICALLY "Fixes" Del Rio Migrant Invasion... By Releasing All Of Them Into The U.S.
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:03 - 41 posts
Why does THUGR shit up the board by bumping his pointless threads?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:43 - 32 posts
Joe Rogan: Bro, do I have to sue CNN?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:41 - 7 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:38 - 43 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:36 - 4845 posts
Biden will be replaced
Wed, November 27, 2024 15:06 - 13 posts
Hollywood exposes themselves as the phony whores they are
Wed, November 27, 2024 14:38 - 45 posts
NATO
Wed, November 27, 2024 14:24 - 16 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, November 27, 2024 13:23 - 4773 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL