That is the excuse that is always made for this system. Trouble is that it will always be implemented wrong. It denies mankinds natural desire to make their own lives and that of their children better. This system you describe is very close to an aristocracy. In terms of abusing the down trodden that social structure stand in a league of it's own.The ancient Greeks had the best grasp of what human nature was all about.
nah there doesn't need to be any law & order, government, or any other self imposed rules or regulations or any arbitrary system..... for starters its important to realize there is no "human nature" there is only human behavior which is based entirely upon environmental conditioning sure genetic information outlines traits and attributes, but it DOES NOT i repeat DOES NOT have any influence on a person's consciousness.....whatsoever!! i think as technology evolves and as society in general becomes more connected via the internet the old views and philosophies will become less and less relevant and have less and less influence over peoples decisions.... people will begin to realize that technology; the collective knowledge and ingenuity of humanity, is ultimately what makes everyones life better, not government, not your congressmen, not religion, not capitalism, not money....it's technology.....period!! keep in mind religion couldn't control/stop it even when it had absolute power and control over the people. The priests or whatever they were called back then would label scientists as heretics and entice riots straight up murder them for simply trying to understand how things work and apply that understanding into a tool or a machine that makes something easier or more efficient. and i doubt a monetary system will be able to control it for too much longer either; although it can be prevented or hidden from the people temporarily or abused for more control or power over the people but in the end technology will continue to evolve regardless of the economic system and thats "the truth" as soon as the people realize that technology is the collective knowledge and ingenuity of humanity the better. Because everyone will realize that no one person or corporation should ever be able to own or control technology for the people either directly (through monopolization/anti competitive business practices or a dictatorship) or indirectly (through IP ownership and enforcement) as that will obviously be a conflict of interest for what really improves everyones life.....
Oh no don't say that, Republicans may come and kill you in your bed while raving about the Founding Fathers. About Communism, I think it the best, most ideal type. But it's impossible to run fairly, so it fails time and time again.
Oh boy, here goes. Again, technology is a tool that can be used for good or evil. It is valuable and effective but we must never put our faith into technology. My responses in red.
@noman thanks for the reply here is my counter arguments to your responses.... first of all i respectively disagree; there is no human nature only human behavior and the environmental conditioning that influences that behavior. its true i cant deny that humans have been and still are (to a certain extent) compelled to be competitive, selfish and/or greedy, but the question is why? certainly if in the environment where you were raised and where you live (hypothetically speaking) if everything was free, and in much abundance and there was literally nothing to gain from being selfish or greedy.....then wouldn't you think that behavior would be nonexistent in such an environment? i also believe consciousness is not something your "born" with. Its a collection of stimuli aggregated and organized throughout your life; like for instance if you were taken from a Christian family at birth and then raised in the middle east, you would be endowed in their belief system, think and communicate in their language and adhere to their culture and traditions, you wouldn't have a genetic predisposition for being a Christian or a liberal or a racist. we are not born with a pre-programed consciousness, we are born with a blank slate, basically huge sponge of a brain that soaks up all kinds of information during your life also there is no good vs evil; only behavior......evil or good is typically used in a way that implies a religious context and should not be considered logical. A person cant be evil or good based on their actions its either they have acceptable behavior or unacceptable behavior according to the society in which they live or were raised all of which is constantly changing; like 1000 years ago some of their acceptable behavior is by todays "status quo" unacceptable. yes technology is a tool and can be used in acceptable and unacceptable ways as with any tool or any word or any object; but you cant deny that technology is responsible for improving your life (in terms of making things easier for you; or providing you with luxuries such as heating & air conditioning ect) i never blamed religion directly in that statement and im not a big fan of arguing against religion in general because i don't want to "offend" anyone. i want to open your mind show you different perspectives that you might not have considered before. but here goes.... the idea of religion is basically "control" religion is a sect designed to oppose a belief system upon others by claiming authority; for what else if other then control? thankfully in the 21st century we have a separation of church and state and freedom of religion Also while on the subject of religion; I'm glad you brought up Christianity as its one of the most popular religions. However did you know that a lot of the content of Christianity was plagiarized from old school Egyptian theologies? from the concept of Jesus to the 10 commandments to the story of moses to the great flood on and on and on.....all very much lifted straight from text, stories and theologies around the time of the Pharaoh's. If you are a devout Christian you owe it to yourself to research the "book of the dead" and research "Horus" in particular. If you do you will start to recognize all kinds of similarities, that should at the very least make you question a few things about the origin of the content of which your "faith" is devoted too; content that can not provide anything other then temporary comfort.....anyways understanding & knowledge is where its at technology is important but its not something to "worship" by any means especially since technology is always evolving and improving anyways. My main point in my last paragraph was to emphasize that we as a people shouldn't allow an individual or an organization to own concepts of technology no matter how small or insignificant the patent or IP may be. As the whole ideal of owning IP will allow entities to thus control technology that relies on those core concepts from then on out which actually limits technologies potential to evolve and improve more freely. Although technology and its improvement can never be stopped or controlled completely but any minor improvements during each generation is essential for the next generation to champion and build upon. Limit the next generations potential to expand upon certain technologies is essentially limiting their ability to improve technology, overcome challenges they may face and limit their ability to make life easier in general for their generation or future generations after them; unless of course they are willing to pay royalties to IP owners from OUR generation......such nonsense.
Well rich (spoiled is more appropriate) kids turn out to be be selfish, snobs and they get everything they want.
I think cubytes is talking more about that anyone could get any amount of anything they wanted, which is a lot different from a spoiled rich kid getting everything s/he wants, and the majority of other children not getting the same treatment. It's the exclusivity as well as the material possession that has an effect, not to mention the attitude of their parents will greatly influence their behaviour. @cubytes Sorry I've dropped off the big discussion, a bit too busy at the moment to leave properly thought through replies so would prefer to hold off till I have a bit of time on my hands. I'm liking what you have to say though Might want to stick an IMO in front of some of it, as although, for example, I agree nurture > nature, I'm sure someone will eventually drop into the thread and have a problem with you stating it as fact
its all good ES glad to see you have returned and btw i love your username; ayahuasca is absolutely mind blowing shamans are geniuses..fo shooo!!! your right about IMO i need to add that in there or i could add some reference material to back up my claims and throw in some hyperlinks in my post but i get soo caught up in writing and just flow with it based on a lot of the ideas and perspectives i absorbed from the material i posted in the guide and for anyone following along i want you to come to your OWN conclusions and do your own research, its actually a LOT of fun and very satisfying to research issues that you are moved or feel passionate about and be an investigative journalist and dig up information on both sides of the argument do interviews and talk to people in your community or around the world im open for debate i actually like to talk about a lot of the issues i presented in the guide cuz im very passionate about it
Perhaps you should read your own opening post. Throughout this thread you have unequivocally stated your opinion. Don't have a problem with that but it hardly demonstrates objectivity. Particularly, your belief that human behavior is controlled strictly by environment. That would seem completely at odds with the idea that we are part of an evolutionary process. The idea that humans are affected solely by environment is relatively new and completely unproven. It requires one to discard thousands of years of observation. While genetics may settle this debate, for now we have a lot to learn before it can do this.
Genetics is just mutations over time. I do think that our environment is one of the biggest factors in determining human behavior and attributes. The one's who have a beneficial mutation (behavior changes can be made by a mutation of the brain...sounds bad)and can reproduce more will pass on their mutations, and so forth. The environment determines which traits and behaviors are beneficial. Thus determining who survives and reproduces. I don't see how this is wrong. Behavior is nothing but reactions to external stimuli. These stimuli can be refered to as the environment.
fair enough.... i don't exactly follow your logic or understand your point about how being a part of an "evolutionary process" dismisses the theory of behavior or consciousness being a result of a persons environment.....care to elaborate? and when i say "environment" i mean; -the family -the community -the belief system prevalent in that culture -society & the status quo in general, -culture & tradition of their people -the institutions a person attends -the media (movies, books, music, TV) that person has access to or is most popular in their homes or communities, -the internet and technology -how a person was raised and the experiences the person has had during their life -a persons financial wealth, their job security -their diet & heath -drugs -economy -government and laws order -friends and peer pressure -ect all are factors which effect a persons behavior and decisions which i refer collectively as a persons "environment" im sure there is some genetic information that might also influence a person's behavior or consciousness but i would argue that its only a fraction of the influence a person's environment has on their consciousness or behavior. because if our consciousness is pre-programed by our genetics, we really wouldn't be sentient beings then would we? is self awareness an illusion? if so then are we nothing more then genetically programed robots? and more importantly what is programing us hahahaha sorry just had to throw that our there.....
@cubytes I thought of something I could throw at you quickly: what if our robots develop autonomy? (assuming they haven't already) Would it cause a problem for your tech reliant system, or has this been planned for all along? Of course, it all depends of the level of autonomy that develops, and if we can still control them afterwards, if it will even be ethical to still control them.
But doesn't that help to prove Christianity? If the events told in the Bible also appear in many other cultures? Stories of the flood appear in many cultures around the world including the mayans, chinese, and sioux. None of those cultures had any contact with writers of the Bible so the writers of the Bible could not have stolen ideas from them. That just goes to further prove christianity. Also, I am very familiar with egyptian and greek mythology. But on the original subject, I believe the largest problem facing America (in a broad sense) is a lack of motivation. Ask yourself the question: What is our goal as Americans right now? We are not working together toward any single goal. The greatest accomplishments in american history came when we united toward a certain goal. In today's America, Patriots are a dying breed.
Clearly both are factors. What isn't clear what the exact ratio is. Human nature is a general term for behavior. It includes behavior we can account for through environmental factors and what we can't. If environmental facters where all that was needed we could cure all alcoholics, as an example. Since environmental factors can not alone predict all who will become one, genetics is being studied to try to come up with an answer. All this gray area has been rightly described as human nature in the past.
I think you're placing too much emphasis on environment. It's certainly a factor, but "equality" is an impossible ideal unless you can completely re-wire the human brain. There will always be resentment and despair. It's part of our nature. Life isn't just about the economic system you're in. Let's say you could create a world where everyone's basic needs are accounted for and no one has to work. There will still be the "beautiful people", the "elite", by virtue of talent or appearance or charisma or dumb luck. And there will be those who hate them for it. Look at little kids in kindergarden or pre-school to see human emotion at its most primal. They group up instinctively, some rise to the top and others are excluded. The "rejects" and "losers" could have all their needs taken care of and never want for toys and candy and whatever else kids crave, but if they aren't accepted by the "popular" kids they're going to be miserable. This is a basic fact of human nature that's been with us since we were cavemen and applies to every group from a small classroom to an entire nation. Some humans will always be considered "better" than others, and some are born to be depressed and angry.
thx for the comment keep the debate going I think you underestimate the influence our environment has on our behavior, or more specifically (to rebuttal your argument) the influence media and society has on our behavior. IMO; The only reason beauty is held to such a high standard is because our sick SICK society is absolutely obsessed with beauty and attractiveness this isn't our "nature" and it was not always this way and its not natural at ALL. its FAKE and the media is fueling this unnatural obsession with attractiveness it's sad, VERY sad, like "you need to call every girl (or if your a girl call every guy) on your contacts list and tell them they look beautiful/handsome just the way they are" sad; seriously DO it, before they cave under the pressure and do something like plastic surgery or continue using make up (which has almost been proven to contain carcinogenic chemicals), or take drugs or go on diets, that are extremely unhealthy; all because society & the media is putting tons of pressure on everyone to look attractive. and next time you see a girl or guy in a magazine, or on the internet realize its FAKE most of the images are digitally altered to artificially emphasize the illusion of attractiveness as far as "the elite" i suppose your talking about people who are under this weird assumption that their bloodline is somehow superior....ha as if as far as talent anyone can learn and be great at almost anything really, they just have to have the opportunity for practice, training, education ect and the commitment to see it through and a legitimate passion for what they are doing, not to mention support and influence from family, friends and fans to stay committed as far as charisma or more specifically social personality (the person we are around others); we are all master imitators. Our personality or our social identity is a reflection of what we think is appealing to our peers or what is appealing or "the norm" in society in general. Its usually a result of trying to "fit in" because we are compelled by the media and society to blend in rather then be unique. as far as your personal personality (who you are when no one is around or just family or significant others or very close childhood friends) thats a result of the conditioning from how you were raised and the institutions you were encouraged/influenced to be a part of by your parents
