Conquer Club

Put over population on the list and I click..seriously this is the problem. China and India are out of control..effects everything. Greed is the second which causes the next problem. From there Nature will bite our ass

UK banning porn

OVERPOPULATION

source: I live in the world in question

lol @ overpopulation. Really? Good god... If you hate too many people, then the problem starts with you. Other than that, overpopulation isn't a significant issue--depending on how that growth is stimulated and as it is self-corrected.

+1 for reason

+1 for corruption*

*Lootifer, there aren't any good indices on corruption across countries, so it's hard to measure the impact of "culture" on corruption. Good cases for corruption are in transitional societies (e.g. Rwanda, S. AFrica, Russia), but of course, it exists in "developed" countries, e.g. US, France, UK, etc. within government, business, and where the two meet. Fraud is pretty much theft for me. Corruption is like lowering standards to let somebody unqualified in a position because nepotism.

nietzsche wrote:

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.

Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.

Go smoke a doobie, you wretched hippie!

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.

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.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

nietzsche wrote:

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.

Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.

Go smoke a doobie, you wretched hippie!

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.

I didn't mean to say we don't need reason, but I wanted to stress the importance of genuinely caring for others.

With the reason and wealth we have we could solve most of the global problems, but then we allow our governments to do what they want. We need more NGO to set the example until the bastards in power feel sorry for themselves and start doing what is right.

Dukasaur wrote:Nobody who lives in the boondocks genuinely hates their neighbour; hatred is a function of population density.

Having grown up in a very small town, I'm gonna go ahead and assume your post was sarcasm or humor or something.

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.

See...we need to get the space program back on track, damnit!

notyou2 wrote:Religion.

Interestingly, you didn't vote for religion...

I did not see the "too many damn frogs!" option. Please add.

Bollocks.

Serbia wrote:I did not see the "too many damn frogs!" option. Please add.

VICEROY WAS RIGHT!!!!!

nietzsche wrote:

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.

Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.

love, unlike reason, can be extremely dangerous

Woodruff wrote:

Serbia wrote:I did not see the "too many damn frogs!" option. Please add.

VICEROY WAS RIGHT!!!!!

Sir, in accordance with Policy #396, we need to 1v1.

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.

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.

john9blue wrote:

nietzsche wrote:

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.

Nope, it's not reason what is needed, it's compassion, acceptance and love. Yes, I said love.

love, unlike reason, can be extremely dangerous

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.

Religion, it will always cause problems for people of different beliefs, or lack thereof.

nietzsche 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.

not my fault people are bad at using it

Dukasaur wrote:

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.

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.

Last time I was in Cincinatti, it was a very pretty city. Has that changed (it's been a LONG time)?

john9blue wrote:

nietzsche 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.

not my fault people are bad at using it

You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...

Woodruff wrote:

john9blue wrote: not my fault people are bad at using it

You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...

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

john9blue wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

john9blue wrote: not my fault people are bad at using it

You said it couldn't be dangerous. But if they're bad at using it, it certainly could be...

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

By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.

Woodruff wrote:

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

By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.

how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?

john9blue wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

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

By your view of what "reason" is. That's precisely what the guy you were responding to was saying.

how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?

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.

Woodruff wrote:

john9blue wrote: how do you think my view of what reason is differs from yours or niet's?

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.

niet and i weren't arguing about the definition of reason. you're the one who brought that up. my question remains.