PDA

View Full Version : Post your thoughts on the world



Mathmatical
March 3rd, 2016, 09:35 AM
Hello everyone, I've noticed the personal forms haven't been very active. So i figured i would post something were you can talk about....well everything! My life recently has been very complicated. Such as going to a new school with academic standards much higher than my old school. so I've been busy.....but enough about that. Feel free to post your thoughts,opinions and stores on this form here.

Yukitaka Oni
March 3rd, 2016, 10:05 AM
As a communist. I care more about equality problem around the world more than a childish political war (bombing syria, vote for Trump....etc...)
Usa use terrorist to fight against the Soviet Union.....and now when the war ended, Terrorist fight Usa, i guess it's Karma...

Mathmatical
March 3rd, 2016, 05:55 PM
The idea of communism could work....the only thing is, its an idea. Most countries are communist art doing to well. China is beginning to have lots of financial problems with the recent stock market crash. Although you can't exactly blame this on communism [or Canada] you can see that communist nations are beginning to revert to a democratic form of government. In my opinion i think in 50-75 years communism may not exist anymore...maybe even less time then 50 years.

SuperJack
March 3rd, 2016, 05:56 PM
I just want a Cuppa Tea.

Sen
March 3rd, 2016, 06:22 PM
Obligatory "those aren't communist countries" comment: If there's private property, social classes, or a state, then it's not communism.

The USSR, for example, was a form of state capitalism. China is as communist as it is a "People's Republic". You name it; it's not communist.

You also seem to think that democracy and communism are mutually exclusive; they aren't. In fact, one could argue that democracy is kind of a requirement, since there's the whole distribution of the means of production thing.

As for the world, it tastes better with a pint of vodka.

Mathmatical
March 3rd, 2016, 06:35 PM
Im still kinda learning about politics.....But from what I've seen in the world the world is slowly leaning towards democracy. Like Thailand [Were i live] Right now there a monarchy. the king is really old though and once he dies there a big chance that Thailand will become a democracy or a Republic. Im not saying is for sure...but I'm confident theres a good chance of it happening

Mathmatical
March 3rd, 2016, 06:43 PM
Although i haven't studied much on politics....Im certain that communism is becoming obsolete

Klingoncelt
March 3rd, 2016, 09:23 PM
I have the flu.

Again.

FYRE
March 4th, 2016, 02:00 AM
As Aristotle said, the greatest form of government is one of a benevolent tyranny. Until the Aryan Savior of Europe arises the refugee crisis will never be resolved, the Red Plague will continue to fester and spread, and the American Empire will rape and pillage as normal. Make no mistake, the world is going to get a lot, lot worse before the people demand the changes that MUST come into effect, else it will be too late. Nuclear warheads, inevitable environmental fluctuations, and overpopulation are already identified as lethal to humanity and every living species, yet still those in power do not agitate for change. I hate to break it to you all, but prepare for the coming revolution of the proletariat. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Mathmatical
March 4th, 2016, 02:14 AM
hmmm...My parents have talked to me about that. How a world war 3 is possible. Fortunately for me Thailand has avoided all the wars that have got on for the past 300 years. Thailand's a peaceful nation...and no one would care to invade it. they have nothing to take. It would be like robbing a man with no money

Mathmatical
March 4th, 2016, 02:16 AM
But hey.....Vlad Putin is kicking some serious ass right now

secondpassing
March 4th, 2016, 08:06 AM
Thoughts on the world = politics
I try not to get my self involved in these things.

I hope you get your tea SuperJack.
Why the check does earl gray tea seem so good? The orange oil totally clashes with milk. Oolong forever.

You should all join RLVG's adventure quest.

I bet people think I'm not easy to follow.

FYRE shut up.

Ash is funny. Can't have too many Ash like people around though.

I can't wait for the M-FM.

Mods need love.

Thanks Sen for a book recommendation. I broke my computer just after you posted. RLVG next time just upgrade the computer, it's more cost efficient.

I hope you all have a wonderful day, and that you get to see blooming flowers everywhere, just like me.

Toadette
March 4th, 2016, 11:09 AM
Im still kinda learning about politics.....But from what I've seen in the world the world is slowly leaning towards democracy. Like Thailand [Were i live] Right now there a monarchy. the king is really old though and once he dies there a big chance that Thailand will become a democracy or a Republic. Im not saying is for sure...but I'm confident theres a good chance of it happening

Communism is an economic system, not a government/political system, noob. Capitalism is the flip side of the coin, not democracy.

Firebringer
March 4th, 2016, 05:04 PM
Communism is an economic system, not a government/political system, noob. Capitalism is the flip side of the coin, not democracy.

The more you know!

Yukitaka Oni
March 4th, 2016, 05:11 PM
Communism is an economic system, not a government/political system, noob. Capitalism is the flip side of the coin, not democracy.
I'm a communist b)o.o)b!

Toadette
March 4th, 2016, 05:14 PM
I'm a communist b)o.o)b!

Yes I know this Yuki

FYRE
March 4th, 2016, 05:22 PM
Like Cassandra, if the truth is unpleasant to hear, those listening will do their best to discredit and censor the speaker. If you want to ignore what's right in front of you, that's your constitutional right. However don't be too surprised when the ground falls out from under your feet...

ThePaladin
March 4th, 2016, 05:39 PM
I personally don't particularly like associating myself with ism's for anymore than a starting point for convo's

Yuki would you define yourself as marxist| marxist-lenist| trostkyiest| or anarcho-| communist?

Apocist
March 4th, 2016, 09:09 PM
Despair

TheDarkestLight
March 4th, 2016, 10:41 PM
As Aristotle said, the greatest form of government is one of a benevolent tyranny. Until the Aryan Savior of Europe arises the refugee crisis will never be resolved, the Red Plague will continue to fester and spread, and the American Empire will rape and pillage as normal. Make no mistake, the world is going to get a lot, lot worse before the people demand the changes that MUST come into effect, else it will be too late. Nuclear warheads, inevitable environmental fluctuations, and overpopulation are already identified as lethal to humanity and every living species, yet still those in power do not agitate for change. I hate to break it to you all, but prepare for the coming revolution of the proletariat. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Human society will always collapse. No matter what we do it will always all fall apart. We can delay it, we can delay it for a very long time... but it is inevitable.

The rich and poor conflict will never go away... the poor will always hate the rich as the poor want to be the rich... and the rich will always take advantage of the poor so that they can both keep their money/power, and gain more. That is how society will always work. True Communism is impossible.

Human greed is what dictates that. People are rarely ever content. They always want more, even if they don't need it. People will often find themselves superior to the rest or think that they are different than the rest of the pack and thus deserve more/different things than them.

A society can delay collapse by going into conflict with another society. Conflict tends to unite the people of a society, despite differences that might reside between the people. It is a time of greatest productivity and social peace within a society. If people have an enemy, then they will be focused on them rather than the other problems around them... that is why nations that close themselves off tend to collapse...

FYRE
March 5th, 2016, 01:57 AM
Human society will always collapse. No matter what we do it will always all fall apart. We can delay it, we can delay it for a very long time... but it is inevitable.

The rich and poor conflict will never go away... the poor will always hate the rich as the poor want to be the rich... and the rich will always take advantage of the poor so that they can both keep their money/power, and gain more. That is how society will always work. True Communism is impossible.

Human greed is what dictates that. People are rarely ever content. They always want more, even if they don't need it. People will often find themselves superior to the rest or think that they are different than the rest of the pack and thus deserve more/different things than them.

A society can delay collapse by going into conflict with another society. Conflict tends to unite the people of a society, despite differences that might reside between the people. It is a time of greatest productivity and social peace within a society. If people have an enemy, then they will be focused on them rather than the other problems around them... that is why nations that close themselves off tend to collapse...

For at least 90,000 years homo sapiens adopted a Hunter-Gatherer subsistence lifestyle, following the herds across the savannahs and eating seasonal fruits and nuts. This was replaced by sedentary agricultural models due to the drying of the central African continent as a part of natural Milankovitch cycles. In a very real sense, the primary way of human (and indeed human pregenitor species such as homo habilis and homo erectus) society functioned satisfactorily for over 90% of our existence on Earth. What our ancestors did by adapting to these geographical changes by settling the Nile and Meso-America etc, was incredibly antithetical to society as they knew it. Partnership social structure and lunar religious rites were replaced by dominator social structure (primarily patriarchal, with the rare matriarchal exception) and solar worship as defined by the changing of the seasons which brought about flooding of alluvial plains.

How far have we progressed as a species since then? Do all our cultural achievements count for nothing? Have our solving of problems like polio, space exploration, and instant worldwide communication given no indication of our power? To have a realistic expectation of future events is one thing, but to mindlessly decry the human endeavor as hopeless and doomed is nigh on zealotry. I understand the fear many have of inevitable decay of human civilization as a whole, but surely one can see many potential solutions to a problem that affects us all.

Our common history surely shows that beyond all factions' power struggles, we have a common past, and as a planet we have a common future.

Yukitaka Oni
March 5th, 2016, 03:20 AM
I personally don't particularly like associating myself with ism's for anymore than a starting point for convo's

Yuki would you define yourself as marxist| marxist-lenist| trostkyiest| or anarcho-| communist?
50% Communist v)o.o)>
I agree on society communist but not the economy v(o.o(<
Because political is so easy to be corrupted, society is good tho d(o.o)^

Sen
March 5th, 2016, 11:26 AM
How far have we progressed as a species since then? Do all our cultural achievements count for nothing? Have our solving of problems like polio, space exploration, and instant worldwide communication given no indication of our power?
(...)
Our common history surely shows that beyond all factions' power struggles, we have a common past, and as a planet we have a common future.
The common future of the planet is to get rekt, and that future is the same shared by everyone at an individual level.

So sure, there have been advancements and progress, if you focus on the immediate -ie; the human history-, but it's fair to say that in the great scheme of things, all of those advancements are meaningless -as in they making nothing but local, ephemeral modifications in what is but a grain of sand-, and so are we; a bunch of narcissistical, self-aware animals looking for meaning where there is none.

Yukitaka Oni
March 5th, 2016, 11:54 AM
Yes I know this Yuki
^)o.o)^ :toad: ^(o.o(^

Frozen Angel
March 5th, 2016, 12:22 PM
I guess I didn't thought about world and its state sinsce a long time ago.

when i was younger I was believing there is always something good in anything. I mean even if its going to end , is that really bad? we all die and something else going to live instead of us.

or even worse. everything finishes...

whats bad about that?

After I felt the pain of life I started to think completly vise versa. like every action is the word is bad

then i suddenly realized. does it matter what we call it? i kind of lost caring about the world around me , and beleive me its for my own health.

TheDarkestLight
March 5th, 2016, 12:47 PM
For at least 90,000 years homo sapiens adopted a Hunter-Gatherer subsistence lifestyle, following the herds across the savannahs and eating seasonal fruits and nuts. This was replaced by sedentary agricultural models due to the drying of the central African continent as a part of natural Milankovitch cycles. In a very real sense, the primary way of human (and indeed human pregenitor species such as homo habilis and homo erectus) society functioned satisfactorily for over 90% of our existence on Earth. What our ancestors did by adapting to these geographical changes by settling the Nile and Meso-America etc, was incredibly antithetical to society as they knew it. Partnership social structure and lunar religious rites were replaced by dominator social structure (primarily patriarchal, with the rare matriarchal exception) and solar worship as defined by the changing of the seasons which brought about flooding of alluvial plains.

How far have we progressed as a species since then? Do all our cultural achievements count for nothing? Have our solving of problems like polio, space exploration, and instant worldwide communication given no indication of our power? To have a realistic expectation of future events is one thing, but to mindlessly decry the human endeavor as hopeless and doomed is nigh on zealotry. I understand the fear many have of inevitable decay of human civilization as a whole, but surely one can see many potential solutions to a problem that affects us all.

Our common history surely shows that beyond all factions' power struggles, we have a common past, and as a planet we have a common future.

Because every time society falls apart a new one rises to take its place. Human society is a constant rise and fall of individual groups/nations. No group can survive forever, that's impossible.

Progress is good however, as it can allow societies to last longer, for individuals to live longer, happier lives and to just generally prevent constant chaos.

Toadette
March 5th, 2016, 01:12 PM
I can't wait til the human species is extinct, as always species eventually go extinct. I won't be around to see it but my dusty remains will cry out "rekt noobs"

Yukitaka Oni
March 5th, 2016, 04:41 PM
I can't wait til the human species is extinct, as always species eventually go extinct. I won't be around to see it but my dusty remains will cry out "rekt noobs"
Everyone go Allahu Akbar and human will extinct <(o.o)>

Yukitaka Oni
March 5th, 2016, 06:07 PM
Everyone go Allahu Akbar and human will extinct <(o.o)>
Or all the countries press the Nuke button b)o.o)b

yzb25
March 7th, 2016, 09:48 AM
Communism is an economic system, not a government/political system, noob. Capitalism is the flip side of the coin, not democracy.

surely how the state handles the economy can be considered a branch of politics, though. That's like saying "gun control isn't a political debate! Gun control is a debate regarding the law!"

so putting the subject of 'states who use a branch of communism or are developing into / out of a branch of communism' under the subject of 'politics' is legitimate, the same way putting the subject of 'how a government handles gun laws' under 'politics' is also legitimate.

picking a fight about linguistics on a site with so much more combined autism than you was a bad move, Toadette. Noob. :3

Toadette
March 7th, 2016, 10:01 AM
surely how the state handles the economy can be considered a branch of politics, though. That's like saying "gun control isn't a political debate! Gun control is a debate regarding the law!"

so putting the subject of 'states who use a branch of communism or are developing into / out of a branch of communism' under the subject of 'politics' is legitimate, the same way putting the subject of 'how a government handles gun laws' under 'politics' is also legitimate.

picking a fight about linguistics on a site with so much more combined autism than you was a bad move, Toadette. Noob. :3

Saying that a communism is being abandoned for democracy is an ignorant statement that needs to be corrected. The man literally stated:


you can see that communist nations are beginning to revert to a democratic form of government

Ignorance should be corrected, not defended.

Slaol
March 7th, 2016, 11:10 AM
Lex Luthor for president.

Yukitaka Oni
March 7th, 2016, 11:24 AM
Trump is love, Trump is life. Vote 4 Trump, make Murica g8 again d(o.o)^

secondpassing
March 7th, 2016, 11:48 AM
The common future of the planet is to get rekt, and that future is the same shared by everyone at an individual level.

So sure, there have been advancements and progress, if you focus on the immediate -ie; the human history-, but it's fair to say that in the great scheme of things, all of those advancements are meaningless -as in they making nothing but local, ephemeral modifications in what is but a grain of sand-, and so are we; a bunch of narcissistical, self-aware animals looking for meaning where there is none.

Humans are going to get rekt, but those that choose to look for meaning surely can't be looked down upon. They have nothing to lose.

Sen
March 7th, 2016, 11:57 AM
Humans are going to get rekt, but those that choose to look for meaning surely can't be looked down upon. They have nothing to lose.
Oh, sure. I mean, we wouldn't be able to discuss such things from an almost instant, long communication device if it wasn't for all of those who spent their lives pursuing said meaning, and even if the pursuit of significance doesn't impact at a global level, we are beings capable of experimenting joy and happiness -even if only by accident-, and I'm not going to be looking down anyone trying to achieve that.

It is a meaningless existence, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to enjoy it as much as we can.

Toadette
March 7th, 2016, 12:43 PM
Enjoy your meaningless existence! I love it. I was asked by Mormons if I wondered what the meaning of life was, I said "sure. Enjoy it while it lasts shitlords". They didn't seem to appreciate that very much.

Meh
March 8th, 2016, 08:07 PM
Who knew SC2Mafia was so existential.

secondpassing
March 10th, 2016, 12:16 PM
Who knew SC2Mafia was so existential.
It's not existential, it's nihilist. There's probably some other philosophical term that describes it better.

ThePaladin
March 10th, 2016, 12:32 PM
It's not existential, it's nihilist. There's probably some other philosophical term that describes it better.

Both are applicable in a sense.

Nihilist works better from this thread since it is mostly the negative/negation assertion that beliefs are wrong rather than the positive assertion of things that are better that should be enacted.


So when are we starting up that philosophy sub-forum?

Sen
March 10th, 2016, 01:03 PM
Nihilist works better from this thread since it is mostly the negative/negation assertion that beliefs are wrong rather than the positive assertion of things that are better that should be enacted.
It's not a matter of right and wrong; all of those postures agree that existence is meaningless, and they only differ in their reaction towards said truth.

Existentialists propose that you can create your own meaning through free will.
Nihilism states that said attempt at constructing our own meaning is pointless.

That said, my statements fit neither of those. If anything, my posture is closer to that of Camus' Absurdism, which points out how nonsensical it'd be to look for meaning if you know that there's no such thing, and that it shouldn't deter you from enjoying it anyway.

oops_ur_dead
March 15th, 2016, 02:38 PM
I agree on society communist but not the economy v(o.o(<

What does a communist society but not a communist economy even look like?

deathworlds
March 15th, 2016, 03:14 PM
What does a communist society but not a communist economy even look like?

A mistake.

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 03:25 PM
What does a communist society but not a communist economy even look like?
Given that the economy is at the core of communism, that wouldn't even be possible: The condition of a classless society cannot exist while the reason for the existence of said classes -ie; money- hasn't been addressed. And of course, it cannot be stateless if you understand the state as the repressive arm of the class rule without first getting rid of the whole class thing.

A communist society without the economical part is like a spaceship that cannot go into space, and isn't a ship.

yzb25
March 15th, 2016, 03:42 PM
The common future of the planet is to get rekt, and that future is the same shared by everyone at an individual level.

So sure, there have been advancements and progress, if you focus on the immediate -ie; the human history-, but it's fair to say that in the great scheme of things, all of those advancements are meaningless -as in they making nothing but local, ephemeral modifications in what is but a grain of sand-, and so are we; a bunch of narcissistical, self-aware animals looking for meaning where there is none.

Are you implying that just because humans are small in comparison to the vastness of space and time, they are meaningless?

well excuse me good sir! It's not about the size - it's about how you use it! A shittonne of metres and minutes in the universe =/= meaningful existence

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 03:48 PM
Are you implying that just because humans are small in comparison to the vastness of space and time, they are meaningless?

well excuse me good sir! It's not about the size - it's about how you use it! A shittonne of metres and minutes in the universe =/= meaningful existence

It's meaningless in the same way a fly that hatches, steps into a random pile of poop and then proceeds to try and shag mid-air just before you squash it against the closest window is meaningless: the fly might have a good time while it lasts, or maybe a shitty one, but in the end, it doesn't make any significant difference in any level that matters.

yzb25
March 15th, 2016, 03:56 PM
It's meaningless in the same way a fly that hatches, steps into a random pile of poop and then proceeds to try and shag mid-air just before you squash it against the closest window is meaningless: the fly might have a good time while it lasts, or maybe a shitty one, but in the end, it doesn't make any significant difference in any level that matters.

It's all relative to where you're standing though. The fly's life was very significant - to the fly. It simply makes no sense to, as a human, measure your value in terms of the entire universe. You are a human, so you should measure your value with the only value system you care about - yours!

It's also worth noting that you (deliberately or not-deliberately) thought of something that was very stupid and graceless (a fly's life) to demonstrate something that lacks value. Measuring value and significance of a life or a species by the intellect and understanding achieved and the beauty created rather than how many rocks it can explode or how many centuries it can last is not crazy dammit! Why do so many people have your viewpoint?! T_T

Calix
March 15th, 2016, 03:58 PM
It's meaningless in the same way a fly that hatches, steps into a random pile of poop and then proceeds to try and shag mid-air just before you squash it against the closest window is meaningless: the fly might have a good time while it lasts, or maybe a shitty one, but in the end, it doesn't make any significant difference in any level that matters.

Are you advocating hedonism?

If not, then I don't see much of a point in considering how pointless our lives are. What is the end game to this line of thinking? Why is it worth considering as an option as opposed to focusing solely on the petty issues on Earth? I'm not seeing a convincing argument or conclusion for why acknowledging that our lives mean nothing is a worthwhile pursuit.

If that's how someone really feels, you might as well commit suicide sooner rather than later. It wouldn't matter either way, right?

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 04:03 PM
It's all relative to where you're standing though. The fly's life was very significant - to the fly. It simply makes no sense to, as a human, measure your value in terms of the entire universe. You are a human, so you should measure your value with the only value system you care about - yours!

It's also worth noting that you (deliberately or not-deliberately) thought of something that was very stupid and graceless (a fly's life) to demonstrate something that lacks value. Measuring value and significance of a life or a species by the intellect and understanding achieved and the beauty created rather than how many rocks it can explode or how many centuries it can last is not crazy dammit! Why do so many people have your viewpoint?! T_T
I find flies to be quite beautiful, actually. Try capturing a close-up f their wings with a high resolution camera somday. Their 90ish° turns are also quite... zen to watch. You are the one calling it stupid and graceless for reasons.

I don't adhere to the idea of trying to asign arbitrary values to lives; I'm just here to have a good time, so yeah, I won't be measuring myself -or anybody else, for that matter- just to fit somebody else's need for significance.

And of course it's relative; I'm just stating what I've come to think after spending more than a healthy ammount of time exploring the subject. It's not my intention to convince anybody of anything; I couldn't care less about other people sharing or not my opinion that this is meaningless. Now, that would really be stupid and graceless, unlike the poor fly.

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 04:06 PM
Are you advocating hedonism?

If not, then I don't see much of a point in considering how pointless our lives are. What is the end game to this line of thinking? Why is it worth considering as an option as opposed to focusing solely on the petty issues on Earth? I'm not seeing a convincing argument or conclusion for why acknowledging that our lives mean nothing is a worthwhile pursuit.

If that's how someone really feels, you might as well commit suicide sooner rather than later. It wouldn't matter either way, right?

Like I said earlier, it's closer to Absurdism, and funnily enough, suicide is one of the three logical results of reaching such understanding. The other two being going lazy and embracing some sort of belief system -eg; religion- which allows you to cope with it, or simply going "fuck it" and having a good time, in a hedonistic way, like you say.

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 04:08 PM
Here's what Wikipedia has to say on the matter. Not that I acknowledge Wikipedia as a reliable source of information, but it's good enough to get an ovrview of some subjects.

Suicide (or, "escaping existence"): a solution in which a person ends one's own life. Both Kierkegaard and Camus dismiss the viability of this option. Camus states that it does not counter the Absurd. Rather, the act of ending one's existence only becomes more absurd.

Religious, spiritual, or abstract belief in a transcendent realm, being, or idea: a solution in which one believes in the existence of a reality that is beyond the Absurd, and, as such, has meaning. Kierkegaard stated that a belief in anything beyond the Absurd requires a non-rational but perhaps necessary religious acceptance in such an intangible and empirically unprovable thing (now commonly referred to as a "leap of faith"). However, Camus regarded this solution, and others, as "philosophical suicide".

Acceptance of the Absurd: a solution in which one accepts the Absurd and continues to live in spite of it. Camus endorsed this solution, believing that by accepting the Absurd, one can achieve absolute freedom, and that by recognizing no religious or other moral constraints and by revolting against the Absurd while simultaneously accepting it as unstoppable, one could possibly be content from the personal meaning constructed in the process. Kierkegaard, on the other hand, regarded this solution as "demoniac madness": "He rages most of all at the thought that eternity might get it into its head to take his misery from him!"

Calix
March 15th, 2016, 04:15 PM
Like I said earlier, it's closer to Absurdism, and funnily enough, suicide is one of the three logical results of reaching such understanding. The other two being going lazy and embracing some sort of belief system -eg; religion- which allows you to cope with it, or simply going "fuck it" and having a good time, in a hedonistic way, like you say.

I have considered suicide in terms of how logical it is. I have to say, if you are going to die in an accident or in your sleep anyway, then why would you deliberately cut your life short?

You have an undetermined amount of time to be alive and eternity to be dead and there is nothing to be lost by exploring the world before you lose your ability to appreciate it. If anything, you are just removing the window of opportunity to test out your self-awareness and ability to exist with nothing to gain from it.

Although I'm aware that most suicidal people do not view it in such a way. It's an easy way out. You don't have to think when you're dead.

I lean towards hedonism myself, if that wasn't evident.

yzb25
March 15th, 2016, 04:19 PM
I find flies to be quite beautiful, actually. Try capturing a close-up f their wings with a high resolution camera somday. Their 90ish° turns are also quite... zen to watch. You are the one calling it stupid and graceless for reasons.

I don't adhere to the idea of trying to asign arbitrary values to lives; I'm just here to have a good time, so yeah, I won't be measuring myself -or anybody else, for that matter- just to fit somebody else's need for significance.

And of course it's relative; I'm just stating what I've come to think after spending more than a healthy ammount of time exploring the subject. It's not my intention to convince anybody of anything; I couldn't care less about other people sharing or not my opinion that this is meaningless. Now, that would really be stupid and graceless, unlike the poor fly.

Yes, beauty can be found in flies, but I was moreso talking about the lives of flies you were portraying. You focused on them "walking through poop" and "shagging the air". It certainly looks like, deliberately or non-delibaretly, you chose a graceless and stupid image to bolster your argument. That may not be intentional, but it implies to me that you do, to a degree, measure value by human standards, even though the focus of your argument is meaning in terms of raw size. Don't flip it 'round, you are definitely the one who appeared to deliberately choose a graceless and stupid example, even if your descriptions of "walking through poop" and "shag the air" are coincidences to you.

Also, if you "don't adhere to the idea of trying to assign arbitrary values to lives", then how can lives be meaningful or meaningless on any level? Again, you are the one who started out by assigning values to things: "all of those advancements are meaningless", "it doesn't make any significant difference in any level that matters". Please don't tell me you were drawing some kind of obscure distinction between value and meaning and significance. I think it's fair to say they all mean the same thing in this context.

And, I guess I was lamenting the viewpoint you hold because I also held it. I don't require people to follow my viewpoint as some kind of internal need, don't worry :P. Again, repeating the original point, it doesn't seem right to, as a human, look at the things HUMANS see significance in (art, knowledge, exc.) and go "Nah those don't have significance, if you look at it from the universe's perspective".

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 04:34 PM
I have considered suicide in terms of how logical it is. I have to say, if you are going to die in an accident or in your sleep anyway, then why would you deliberately cut your life short?

You have an undetermined amount of time to be alive and eternity to be dead and there is nothing to be lost by exploring the world before you lose your ability to appreciate it. If anything, you are just removing the window of opportunity to test out your self-awareness and ability to exist with nothing to gain from it.

Although I'm aware that most suicidal people do not view it in such a way. It's an easy way out. You don't have to think when you're dead.

I lean towards hedonism myself, if that wasn't evident.
Indeed. Suicide in a pretty logical conclusion in many situations, and as someone who had a pretty close relationship with someone whocommited suicide, I've come to think that the negative connotation that it has is merely a result of the egoism of the ones that remain alive; "why did you kill yourself? I enjoyed having you here", and while I'd really recommend people to avoid doing it while in a very emotional state, I've got no valid arguments against people who rationally decide that it is what they want; I, too, consider that it's not the best idea, but like I said; I'm not here to convince people that they're wrong for thinking what they think.

As for hedonism, I think my classical "I'm just here for the fun" line during games sums up my stance on the matter. (:


Yes, beauty can be found in flies, but I was moreso talking about the lives of flies you were portraying. You focused on them "walking through poop" and "shagging the air". It certainly looks like, deliberately or non-delibaretly, you chose a graceless and stupid image to bolster your argument. That may not be intentional, but it implies to me that you do, to a degree, measure value by human standards, even though the focus of your argument is meaning in terms of raw size. Don't flip it 'round, you are definitely the one who appeared to deliberately choose a graceless and stupid example, even if your descriptions of "walking through poop" and "shag the air" are coincidences to you.

Also, if you "don't adhere to the idea of trying to assign arbitrary values to lives", then how can lives be meaningful or meaningless on any level? Again, you are the one who started out by assigning values to things: "all of those advancements are meaningless", "it doesn't make any significant difference in any level that matters". Please don't tell me you were drawing some kind of obscure distinction between value and meaning and significance. I think it's fair to say they all mean the same thing in this context.

And, I guess I was lamenting the viewpoint you hold because I also held it. I don't require people to follow my viewpoint as some kind of internal need, don't worry :P. Again, repeating the original point, it doesn't seem right to, as a human, look at the things HUMANS see significance in (art, knowledge, exc.) and go "Nah those don't have significance, if you look at it from the universe's perspective".

I focused in hanging around poop and shagging because those things are at the core of a fly's existence; they will lay their eggs on poop, because of the nutritional value it has for them, and they will have sex because... welp, that's a biological imperative. You can use butterflies as an example instead, they very much enjoy the nutritional heaven that poop is for them.

Value and significance are matters of entirelly different orders; value is the worthiness of something when compared to other similar things, o in regards of fulfilling a specific function. Nothing to do with people looking for significance in their lives (unless you find your meaning by making yourself valuable by someone else's standards, that is). It's not an obscure distinction, it's a basic one.

And now you are talking about seeming right. This is pointless, because we are trying to play the same game, while using different rules each. It's kind of like when you are discussing with someone who believes in a deity and their arguments are based on "it's the word of god!". It leads nowhere.

Calix
March 15th, 2016, 04:43 PM
Indeed. Suicide in a pretty logical conclusion in many situations, and as someone who had a pretty close relationship with someone whocommited suicide, I've come to think that the negative connotation that it has is merely a result of the egoism of the ones that remain alive; "why did you kill yourself? I enjoyed having you here", and while I'd really recommend people to avoid doing it while in a very emotional state, I've got no valid arguments against people who rationally decide that it is what they want; I, too, consider that it's not the best idea, but like I said; I'm not here to convince people that they're wrong for thinking what they think.

As for hedonism, I think my classical "I'm just here for the fun" line during games sums up my stance on the matter. (:

That's just the effects of grief and mourning, isn't it? You're never mourning the loss of such a wonderful, amazing person and how the world is worse off for them being dead. Nobody thinks that.

No, it's all about how their death affects you. How you can't talk to them for hours upon end or how you can't rely on them for emotional or financial support or how you feel about the aftermath of their death.

People like to say that you will live on in others, but that's a falsehood. Nobody can ever really have a true understanding of how you operate. All they have is a vague and watered-down generalization of how you MIGHT act in given situations. You don't miss the person. You just miss the role they played in your life.

I support euthanasia if people voluntarily agree to it. How far do you think that the 'slippery slope' argument that is often used to criticise the legalisation of euthanasia is a valid concern? (I mean 'forced killings of the elderly, mentally ill, etc')

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 04:52 PM
That's just the effects of grief and mourning, isn't it? You're never mourning the loss of such a wonderful, amazing person and how the world is worse off for them being dead. Nobody thinks that.

No, it's all about how their death affects you. How you can't talk to them for hours upon end or how you can't rely on them for emotional or financial support or how you feel about the aftermath of their death.

People like to say that you will live on in others, but that's a falsehood. Nobody can ever really have a true understanding of how you operate. All they have is a vague and watered-down generalization of how you MIGHT act in given situations. You don't miss the person. You just miss the role they played in your life.

I support euthanasia if people voluntarily agree to it. How far do you think that the 'slippery slope' argument that is often used to criticise the legalisation of euthanasia is a valid concern? (I mean 'forced killings of the elderly, mentally ill, etc')

Yeah. It's always about ourselves. Even "selfless" acts such as charity, or even giving your life for somebody else's is a selfish act, sometimes in pretty twisted ways, but selfish nontheless.

As for euthanasia, I think that it should be a personal choice of the one wanting to die or live, and nobody else should be able to change it. This as long as the people make said choice while in a sound state of mind, so it would imply people deciding it before they get to a point where their physical and/or mental state doesn't allow them to, kind of like a not-so-last will. Of course , this leave the problem of what to do with people who are born in a state which prevents them from doing it, like with full paralysis of sorts.

Other than that, I don't think anyone but the individual should have a say in the matter. If you want to live 15 or 115 years, regardless of health or other factors, that's yours to decide.

Yukitaka Oni
March 15th, 2016, 05:20 PM
A mistake.
^
it become a economy that depend on capitalism economy. It become
China
Vietnam
(A mistake......a curse.....but yes, this is where I used to lives) it's my own burden that I have to carry....
v)o.o)v ( yuki never said he has a childhood for a reason)

Firebringer
March 15th, 2016, 05:39 PM
Are you advocating hedonism?

If not, then I don't see much of a point in considering how pointless our lives are. What is the end game to this line of thinking? Why is it worth considering as an option as opposed to focusing solely on the petty issues on Earth? I'm not seeing a convincing argument or conclusion for why acknowledging that our lives mean nothing is a worthwhile pursuit.

If that's how someone really feels, you might as well commit suicide sooner rather than later. It wouldn't matter either way, right?

Calix advocates hedonism? O_o
Didn't expect that.

I advocate restraint, in which I show none.

:D

Firebringer
March 15th, 2016, 05:41 PM
I have considered suicide in terms of how logical it is. I have to say, if you are going to die in an accident or in your sleep anyway, then why would you deliberately cut your life short?

You have an undetermined amount of time to be alive and eternity to be dead and there is nothing to be lost by exploring the world before you lose your ability to appreciate it. If anything, you are just removing the window of opportunity to test out your self-awareness and ability to exist with nothing to gain from it.
.

Their is no point in life, except the meaning we give it to ourselves.

Ohh the beauty of Nihilism. Their is a strange positivity given to the thoughts if you look at it from the right lens.

Mimron
March 15th, 2016, 06:23 PM
I think most people on the form can agree [most] that communism isn't a good way to run a country. If you look at the ideology of communism it actually looks like it could be better. well for some people..... thats the thing. Because all death is shared in communism the people that work harder than others should be making more money than the lazy people not. Lets say you were a engineer making 200$ an hour, and you have to share that with a lazy couch potato. it just doesn't seem fair does it? communism for sure slows economic growth and the communist country development. The big company like apple wouldn't headquarter in a communist nation were they have to give up all there money. I think capitalism is the best system for economic growth. But hey...thats just my opinion ^-^

Yukitaka Oni
March 15th, 2016, 06:52 PM
I think most people on the form can agree [most] that communism isn't a good way to run a country. If you look at the ideology of communism it actually looks like it could be better. well for some people..... thats the thing. Because all death is shared in communism the people that work harder than others should be making more money than the lazy people not. Lets say you were a engineer making 200$ an hour, and you have to share that with a lazy couch potato. it just doesn't seem fair does it? communism for sure slows economic growth and the communist country development. The big company like apple wouldn't headquarter in a communist nation were they have to give up all there money. I think capitalism is the best system for economic growth. But hey...thats just my opinion ^-^
That's what happen to my country v)o.o)v

Toadette
March 15th, 2016, 07:01 PM
American voters remind me of sc2mafia forum mafia players. Bunch of sheep that don't think about their best interests.

/rant

secondpassing
March 15th, 2016, 07:06 PM
American voters remind me of sc2mafia forum mafia players. Bunch of sheep that don't think about their best interests.

/rant

I think they are more like sc2mafia arcade mode players. Bunch of sheep that go against their best interests.

Toadette
March 15th, 2016, 07:07 PM
I think they are more like sc2mafia arcade mode players. Bunch of sheep that go against their best interests.

No, the literally get fucked over by the government, then the next vote they say "hey Paladin was town pulling a gambit" and vote for who they are told to by the establishment.

secondpassing
March 15th, 2016, 07:11 PM
I think most people on the form can agree [most] that communism isn't a good way to run a country. If you look at the ideology of communism it actually looks like it could be better. well for some people..... thats the thing. Because all death is shared in communism the people that work harder than others should be making more money than the lazy people not. Lets say you were a engineer making 200$ an hour, and you have to share that with a lazy couch potato. it just doesn't seem fair does it? communism for sure slows economic growth and the communist country development. The big company like apple wouldn't headquarter in a communist nation were they have to give up all there money. I think capitalism is the best system for economic growth. But hey...thats just my opinion ^-^

The point of communism wasn't to have economic growth, it was to equalize the amount of money everyone was to get. Look at people now. The current movements against the 1% is only about the income gap.
But yes, with less people making less money means that we have slower medical and technological advancements. That means more people die. :(

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 10:09 PM
Because all death is shared in communism the people that work harder than others should be making more money than the lazy people not.
Poor people are just a bunch of idiots too lazy to get rich. Right, right? ;D

Lets say you were a engineer making 200$ an hour, and you have to share that with a lazy couch potato. it just doesn't seem fair does it?
Let's say you were an engineer making $200 an hour, and you are making your lazy, couch potato company over $1,000,000 an hour, just because someone decided that they own the machines, your innovations, and your work. It just doesn't seem fair, does it?

As for your hypotethical couch potatoes, I don't see how maintaining a few of those would be worse than enslaving them to produce crap that we don't need. I'd certainly prefer to have a potato couch making others have a fun night in a videogame, or learning to play guitar, instead of a guy earning pennies by advertising the next Wal Mart store while dressed like an antropomorphic animal.
But to each their own, I guess. Your "I'd rather have it bad as long as others have it worse" mentallity isn't a new thing in this world.


The big company like apple wouldn't headquarter in a communist nation were they have to give up all there money.
I'm pretty sure the world can do without a company with no remarkable innovation other than changing the size and/or shape of the same subpar technology produced by Asian slaves with resources gathered by African slaves, and overcharging for it to uneducated people who simply want to exchange money for status.




The point of communism wasn't to have economic growth, it was to equalize the amount of money everyone was to get. Look at people now. The current movements against the 1% is only about the income gap.
But yes, with less people making less money means that we have slower medical and technological advancements. That means more people die. :(
That's closer to socialism. Communism is when said equalization is alreay a given.
The economic growth isn't an issue since socialism and communism require a post-scarcity economy to run, which is why the so called "communist" countries that try to implement that in a borderline feudal society fail. Well, that and because randomly calling your totallitarian monstrosity "communist" doesn't magically change the fact that nobody wants to live in a kleptarchy run by a murderous madman.

As for the technological, scientific and cultural advancements, I don't see why they would slower down just because people are doing it because they enjoy it, as opposed to doing it because otherway they'd starve. If anything, they would increase: a world where everyone is for self-fulfillment and have access to what they need would result in a permanent technological boom, or a steady growth, at the very least. There are millions of better ways to make money than getting into science and technology; we wouldn't be living in a world where mathematicians forfeit million dollar prizes after solving long-unanswered questions if everyone was that shallow.

deathworlds
March 15th, 2016, 10:13 PM
I don't like patents.

Technological innovations should be free for everyone to manufacture, use, and improve upon.

Sen
March 15th, 2016, 10:13 PM
The main issue with communism is that after so many decades of propaganda along with the eternal human quest of talking about shit they don't know a thing about, everyone seems to hate communism without even understanding the most basic parts of it.

I'm not communist (although ofc I believe its ideas to be way better than the shitty capitalist models we have right now), but it's fucking surreal being unable to click five links without finding someone who thinks that Bernie Sanders or the Nordic countries are socialist, that 'Murica saved the world from the Nazi regime (pro-tip: The super evil totally not communist Russians did way more).

Whether you agree with it or not, you should at the very least research and understand the basic concepts of something before vomiting the same idiotic things that you heard your favorite Trump-like barking last night, which they probably stole from some WWII Disney propaganda.

powerofdeath
March 15th, 2016, 11:52 PM
my thought on the world:

ThePaladin
March 16th, 2016, 12:22 AM
No, the literally get fucked over by the government, then the next vote they say "hey Paladin was town pulling a gambit" and vote for who they are told to by the establishment.

But... But..... I never Pull Gambits.

If I had to give myself I label it would be somewhere Along the lines of Voluntary Anarchism(basically no one is forced to work or do anything but by doing so you shouldn't exactly be expecting anyone's support. And for non-societal necessary stuff, you want to be a writer you need supporters to help you with your basic needs/amenities sorta like how crowdfunding or patron works today; you do favors people grant you favors in return. Pseudo-Contracts (Not official paper documents) which are agreed upon by parties(such as a build you a home and in exchange you supply me with some food) and if you don't follow, you'll build up a reputation till no-one wants to form contracts with you.)

Also this is anarchism following the European definition not the Anarcho-Capatalist definition.

FYRE
March 16th, 2016, 12:49 AM
The main issue with communism is that after so many decades of propaganda along with the eternal human quest of talking about shit they don't know a thing about, everyone seems to hate communism without even understanding the most basic parts of it.

I'm not communist (although ofc I believe its ideas to be way better than the shitty capitalist models we have right now), but it's fucking surreal being unable to click five links without finding someone who thinks that Bernie Sanders or the Nordic countries are socialist, that 'Murica saved the world from the Nazi regime (pro-tip: The super evil totally not communist Russians did way more).

Whether you agree with it or not, you should at the very least research and understand the basic concepts of something before vomiting the same idiotic things that you heard your favorite Trump-like barking last night, which they probably stole from some WWII Disney propaganda.

I mean socialist or not I would be pretty angry if I had to pay 50% of my paycheck to the Swedish cuck government...

Sen
March 16th, 2016, 01:34 AM
I mean socialist or not I would be pretty angry if I had to pay 50% of my paycheck to the Swedish cuck government...
And get free education (universities included), healthcare, over a year of paid parental leave, daycare, pensions (as in actual pensions, not saving plans)... plus I think the oft mentioned 50% thing includes a fee paid by the employer, and the actual percentage is determined at an individual level, and only a fraction of the extra that you get after your earnings are higher than some bracket. I might be mixing data from different countries of the Nordic block there, but I think most of them share a majority of that model.

In any case, you are thinking of giving 50% in the American (or wherever you live) context, and that doesn't apply, since the capitalist models of these countries are completely different beasts. RLVG could give a better insight on what it's actually like.

Cryptonic
March 16th, 2016, 07:57 AM
Send 50% of paycheque to Gov vs Send 60% to private companies for same services.

Helz
March 16th, 2016, 08:26 AM
My thoughts on the world:

GMFB

Toadette
March 16th, 2016, 08:38 AM
And get free education (universities included), healthcare, over a year of paid parental leave, daycare, pensions (as in actual pensions, not saving plans)... plus I think the oft mentioned 50% thing includes a fee paid by the employer, and the actual percentage is determined at an individual level, and only a fraction of the extra that you get after your earnings are higher than some bracket. I might be mixing data from different countries of the Nordic block there, but I think most of them share a majority of that model.

In any case, you are thinking of giving 50% in the American (or wherever you live) context, and that doesn't apply, since the capitalist models of these countries are completely different beasts. RLVG could give a better insight on what it's actually like.

Get all that, work less hours, and have an equal or more net pay than in the US.

yzb25
March 16th, 2016, 03:23 PM
I focused in hanging around poop and shagging because those things are at the core of a fly's existence; they will lay their eggs on poop, because of the nutritional value it has for them, and they will have sex because... welp, that's a biological imperative. You can use butterflies as an example instead, they very much enjoy the nutritional heaven that poop is for them.

Value and significance are matters of entirelly different orders; value is the worthiness of something when compared to other similar things, o in regards of fulfilling a specific function. Nothing to do with people looking for significance in their lives (unless you find your meaning by making yourself valuable by someone else's standards, that is). It's not an obscure distinction, it's a basic one.

And now you are talking about seeming right. This is pointless, because we are trying to play the same game, while using different rules each. It's kind of like when you are discussing with someone who believes in a deity and their arguments are based on "it's the word of god!". It leads nowhere.

Ah, I see what you mean with the value thing. That's fair enough. I conflated the two. I made an assumption that what is meaningful is what has value. I think that's fundamentally the "different rules" we are using - I can't really see how meaning can come from anything apart from things we value. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Sen
March 16th, 2016, 04:27 PM
Ah, I see what you mean with the value thing. That's fair enough. I conflated the two. I made an assumption that what is meaningful is what has value. I think that's fundamentally the "different rules" we are using - I can't really see how meaning can come from anything apart from things we value. Correct me if I'm wrong.
It'd be better to ask that to someone who has found said meaning, but yeah, that sounds about right; people tend to have a well defined set of things and goals that they value, and for which they keep going. That said, while meaning requires of value, value doesn't necessarily result in meaning.

This video sums it up, and although I don't agree with the humanist pursuit of happiness, the rest seems to correctly mirror what most people do. Also, I love Stephen Fry and never miss a chance to link to something that he worked on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvz0mmF6NW4

Capitalier
March 30th, 2016, 05:27 PM
the world is made up of 10 layers of irony

tiloup1441
April 14th, 2016, 10:40 AM
P sure Nordic countries are god tier and everything else is trash

Klingoncelt
April 15th, 2016, 08:54 PM
Standards have been lowered globally.

Quick
July 3rd, 2016, 04:42 PM
I accept Slavoj Žižek as my personal lord and savior.

BananaCucho
July 3rd, 2016, 04:56 PM
I accept Slavoj Žižek as my personal lord and savior.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/325/428/264.jpg

Quick
July 3rd, 2016, 04:59 PM
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/325/428/264.jpg

What's your problem? That was completely unnecessary.

Carrot Cake
July 3rd, 2016, 05:02 PM
What's your problem? That was completely unnecessary.

agree

ThePaladin
July 3rd, 2016, 05:03 PM
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/325/428/264.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/sEmgKMV.jpg

BananaCucho
July 3rd, 2016, 05:03 PM
http://rs1265.pbsrc.com/albums/jj515/PortraitOfMmeX/boohoo_zps058c9fe1.gif?w=480&h=480&fit=clip

secondpassing
July 31st, 2016, 02:08 PM
I like how the price of grapes has fallen below the price of chicken.

Victories.