Moderator: Community Team

Go smoke a doobie, you wretched hippie!nietzsche wrote:Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.john9blue wrote:the biggest problem in the world is the current human condition and human nature in general, which (from what i can tell) stems from irrationality and ignorance.
theoretically this problem can be solved, if human reason eventually wins out. but i don't know what will happen, since we are the first known species of our kind.
it may actually be an insurmountable obstacle, considering that after 13 billion years there is not evidence of any other species becoming successful enough to be detected by our current tools.
I didn't mean to say we don't need reason, but I wanted to stress the importance of genuinely caring for others.BigBallinStalin wrote:Go smoke a doobie, you wretched hippie!nietzsche wrote:Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.john9blue wrote:the biggest problem in the world is the current human condition and human nature in general, which (from what i can tell) stems from irrationality and ignorance.
theoretically this problem can be solved, if human reason eventually wins out. but i don't know what will happen, since we are the first known species of our kind.
it may actually be an insurmountable obstacle, considering that after 13 billion years there is not evidence of any other species becoming successful enough to be detected by our current tools.
Without reason yet armed with compassion, acceptance and love, then you'll have a terrible method for solving the problem of good intentions leading to bad outcomes.
Having grown up in a very small town, I'm gonna go ahead and assume your post was sarcasm or humor or something.Dukasaur wrote:Nobody who lives in the boondocks genuinely hates their neighbour; hatred is a function of population density.
See...we need to get the space program back on track, damnit!DoomYoshi wrote:Overpopulation is a subcategory of resource depletion, the resource being land. If we lived on a planet the size of Jupiter, population density would drop.
Interestingly, you didn't vote for religion...notyou2 wrote:Religion.
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
VICEROY WAS RIGHT!!!!!Serbia wrote:I did not see the "too many damn frogs!" option. Please add.
love, unlike reason, can be extremely dangerousnietzsche wrote:Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.john9blue wrote:the biggest problem in the world is the current human condition and human nature in general, which (from what i can tell) stems from irrationality and ignorance.
theoretically this problem can be solved, if human reason eventually wins out. but i don't know what will happen, since we are the first known species of our kind.
it may actually be an insurmountable obstacle, considering that after 13 billion years there is not evidence of any other species becoming successful enough to be detected by our current tools.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Sir, in accordance with Policy #396, we need to 1v1.Woodruff wrote:VICEROY WAS RIGHT!!!!!Serbia wrote:I did not see the "too many damn frogs!" option. Please add.
If we colonized Jupiter tomorrow, it would look like Cincinatti within 20 years. Habitual mismanagement of resources can't be solved by adding more resources.DoomYoshi wrote:Overpopulation is a subcategory of resource depletion, the resource being land. If we lived on a planet the size of Jupiter, population density would drop.
You might be thinking of the idea of romantic love, as seen in Cheaters.john9blue wrote:love, unlike reason, can be extremely dangerousnietzsche wrote:Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.john9blue wrote:the biggest problem in the world is the current human condition and human nature in general, which (from what i can tell) stems from irrationality and ignorance.
theoretically this problem can be solved, if human reason eventually wins out. but i don't know what will happen, since we are the first known species of our kind.
it may actually be an insurmountable obstacle, considering that after 13 billion years there is not evidence of any other species becoming successful enough to be detected by our current tools.
not my fault people are bad at using itnietzsche wrote: You might be thinking of the idea of romantic love, as seen in Cheaters.
And reason, what the f*ck is reason? Well, for once, it's a golden flower put in a pedestal, not even understood by most.
For one, "the use of logic" would be more acceptable in your sentence. Reason, seems to me, it's different to anyone, a crazy man can start playing in his head with ideas and come up with reasoning. So can Stephen Hawkins, and decide the we will be torn apart soon because the world is expanding so it's no use to stop hunger in third world countries.
Everyone claims to have good reasoning skills, and yet they come with different answers, the thing is, they are leaving some factors out of the equation. But if in every equation we include love and genuine care for others, acceptance, empathy, the result would always be positive for everyone.
So john, what's the real reason? Yours?, Obama's?, King Jong-il?, the Pope's? Hawkins'? Justin Bieber's? Pick one and go ahead and convince the rest of the world of it. Let's see if that fixes the problems.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Last time I was in Cincinatti, it was a very pretty city. Has that changed (it's been a LONG time)?Dukasaur wrote:If we colonized Jupiter tomorrow, it would look like Cincinatti within 20 years. Habitual mismanagement of resources can't be solved by adding more resources.DoomYoshi wrote:Overpopulation is a subcategory of resource depletion, the resource being land. If we lived on a planet the size of Jupiter, population density would drop.
You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...john9blue wrote:not my fault people are bad at using itnietzsche wrote: You might be thinking of the idea of romantic love, as seen in Cheaters.
And reason, what the f*ck is reason? Well, for once, it's a golden flower put in a pedestal, not even understood by most.
For one, "the use of logic" would be more acceptable in your sentence. Reason, seems to me, it's different to anyone, a crazy man can start playing in his head with ideas and come up with reasoning. So can Stephen Hawkins, and decide the we will be torn apart soon because the world is expanding so it's no use to stop hunger in third world countries.
Everyone claims to have good reasoning skills, and yet they come with different answers, the thing is, they are leaving some factors out of the equation. But if in every equation we include love and genuine care for others, acceptance, empathy, the result would always be positive for everyone.
So john, what's the real reason? Yours?, Obama's?, King Jong-il?, the Pope's? Hawkins'? Justin Bieber's? Pick one and go ahead and convince the rest of the world of it. Let's see if that fixes the problems.
what's dangerous is that they AREN'T using it. partly because they aren't perfect and omniscient, and partly because they are just lazy and/or dumbWoodruff wrote:You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...john9blue wrote: not my fault people are bad at using it
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.john9blue wrote:what's dangerous is that they AREN'T using it. partly because they aren't perfect and omniscient, and partly because they are just lazy and/or dumbWoodruff wrote:You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...john9blue wrote: not my fault people are bad at using it
how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?Woodruff wrote:By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.john9blue wrote: what's dangerous is that they AREN'T using it. partly because they aren't perfect and omniscient, and partly because they are just lazy and/or dumb
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
It's interesting that you want to argue with me about this, but weren't interested in arguing with nietscke when it was his original premise. I wonder why that is.john9blue wrote:how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?Woodruff wrote:By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.john9blue wrote: what's dangerous is that they AREN'T using it. partly because they aren't perfect and omniscient, and partly because they are just lazy and/or dumb
niet and i weren't arguing about the definition of reason. you're the one who brought that up. my question remains.Woodruff wrote:It's interesting that you want to argue with me about this, but weren't interested in arguing with nietscke when it was his original premise. I wonder why that is.john9blue wrote: how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"