The horse and buggy is technology too.  So is the plow, and the sharpened stick, i.e. spear.  Technology is part of the human ecosystem, just as the hive is part of the honeybee's.  Unless you're living as a naked, nomadic gatherer, you depend on technology to survive.  Why is this something that needs fixing?  Should we fix the hive-building of bees, or the tunneling of gophers, or the spinning of spiders?

Posted on: September 23, 2008, 10:41:41 PM

---

Quote from: lisagurl on September 23, 2008, 07:33:30 PM

QuoteI think you're taking a lot for granted.

It is all the people taking antidepressants that are not taking it seriously.

What's wrong with antidepressants?  Is it a problem with the specific drugs?  The rate at which they're prescribed?  The unknown harm they might do?  Something else?  Or is it simple opposition to the entire idea of depression as a medical condition?  If so, I hope it's not because you think it's just a corrupt, modern development.  Melancholia as a disease has been understood since ancient times, and self-medication with drugs & booze has been around even longer.

Edit:  The deadly sin of sloth, as originally construed, was nothing other than depression.

Quote from: cindybc on September 23, 2008, 04:12:25 PM
The only thing that could fix anything is a change in the system which would also not happen without change pain of one type or another, and even then end up with about the same total of deaths.

Cindy   

The number of humans alive at any one time generally continues to grow but no matter how many of us are about, eventually the number of deaths will always equal exactly the number of births that preceded them.

The part of that statement before the comma could change.   

Hi Margaret Ann, hon. I agree with your post and instead of fix I should have stuck with the word **change like I did in a couple of other places in that paragraph. But

QuoteThe only thing that could possibly [change] anything is a change in the system which would also not happen without pain of one type or another, and even then end up with about the same total of deaths

I am only guessing as to how many would die if the lights were to go out in modern world, *period.* I mentioned a change in the system as a possibilety because any other type of system devised by man during the history of man rising from the stone age up till to the present day has failed miserably. OK I won't take this any further it would require several more posts to elaborate on this type of possible turn of events for mankind good or bad.

Hi Nephie, mankind being clever and  resilient in survival, I beleive there will be plenty enough left over to make new little humans to replace the loss of their predecessors.

Cindy

Scenario 1:

Jack goes quail hunting before school and then pulls into the school��
parking lot with his shotgun in his truck's gun rack.
1957 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his��
car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.
2007 - School goes into lock down,�FBI�called, Jack hauled off to jail��
and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for��
traumatized students and teachers.


Scenario 2:

Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.
1957 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end��
up buddies.
2007 - Police called and SWAT team arrives -- they arrest both Johnny��
and Mark. They are both charged them with assault and both expelled��
even though Johnny started it.


Scenario 3:
Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disrupts other students.
1957 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal's office and given a good��
paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and��
does not disrupt class again.
2007 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. He becomes a zombie. He��
is then tested for ADD. The school gets extra money from the state��
because Jeffrey has a disability.


Scenario 4:

Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a��
whipping with his belt.

1957 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to��
college and becomes a successful businessman.
2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to��
foster care and joins a gang. The state psychologist convinces
Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad��
goes to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.


Scenario 5:

Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.
1957 - Mark shares his aspirin with the Principal out on the smoking dock.
2007 - The police are called and Mark is expelled from school for drug��
violations. His car is then searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario 6:

Pedro fails�high school English.
1957 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English and goes to college.
2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear��
nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for��
graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against the��
state school system and Pedro's English teacher.� English is then��
banned from�core curriculum. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but��
ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario 7:

Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the�Fourth of July, puts��
them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up a red ant bed.
1957 - Ants die.
2007- ATF,�Homeland Security�and the FBI are all called. Johnny is��
charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates his parents --��
and all siblings are removed from their home and all computers are��
confiscated. Johnny's dad is placed on a�terror watch list�and is��
never allowed to fly again.

�


Scenario 8:

Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is��
found crying by his teacher, Mary.� Mary hugs him to comfort him.
1957 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.
2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job.��
She faces 3 years in State Prison.� Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.

Quote from: cindybc on September 24, 2008, 03:08:51 AM
I am only guessing as to how many would die if the lights were to go out in modern world, *period.* I mentioned a change in the system as a possibilety because any other type of system devised by man during the history of man rising from the stone age up till to the present day has failed miserably.

BTW - I am delighted to find that this forum has a philosophy zone and I am delighted to read your ideas here and anyone else's too because I love this stuff. When I discuss ideas at this level, either reading them or writing them, I see some truth and some room for disagreement in every one. And I also understand that anyone's view of these things is just a matter of perspective. My comments will tend to be in the nature of tossing some additional thoughts into the campfire. I'll almost never post a comment, especially in this zone, to assert that I am right about something or that someone else is wrong. My posts do tend to be more contrasting than agreeable just because that's more fun.

I wish there was an emoticon for, "There's truth to what you say but have you looked at it this way, yet?"

I'm not pandering either - I just don't think these are things that anyone can / should think they are right about and others wrong.


That said, now, how do you define fail? You seem to say that like it's so obvious that it needs no explanation.

Cheers, Margi   (Some emoticons don't work for me. Is that a browser thing?)

Colonies of organisms die out all the time, and we can talk about specific ones as having failed, but how can you go on to say that their system has failed?  What's the standard for success, eternal life & growth?

Quote from: lisagurl on September 24, 2008, 09:18:48 AM
<sagas of terror and stupidity>

I mentioned somewhere else how today's Americans are focused on imagined terrors, false guilt, self-loathing, and existential angst, all while the rest of the world is progressing.  Our time in the sun is over.

apparently, it turns out that science is religion to some people. No one in particular. I'm making a general statement.

Quote from: Nephie the Tree-Hugger on September 24, 2008, 11:22:51 AM
I mentioned somewhere else how today's Americans are focused on imagined terrors, false guilt, self-loathing, and existential angst, all while the rest of the world is progressing.  Our time in the sun is over.

This too will pass. Our place as the world's most arrogant ->-bleeped-<-s will again be secure. 

Quote from: Rebis on September 24, 2008, 11:23:16 AM
apparently, it turns out that science is religion to some people. No one in particular. I'm making a general statement.

I find your statement to be non-falsifiable, and thus sinful, as it is written in the Gospel of Popper.  I damn your protons to entropic dissolution at the end of time, unless you repent your wicked ways!

Well, it'll happen anyway, but you'll feel better about it if you confess.

Quote from: Rebis on September 24, 2008, 11:23:16 AM
apparently, it turns out that science is religion to some people. No one in particular. I'm making a general statement.

All belief systems are religious in nature - that is, beliefs are always held because they make the person feel good.

Some people feel good when their minds hold beliefs that are edited to better conform to reality. For others that's not so important.

Everybody feels good when their beliefs conform to their society - because that earns them acceptance.

That's why religious believers of similar flavors hang out together - and scientists do the same.

For most people, social acceptance is far more important than rationality. That means that the good feelings that come from social acceptance are generally far more powerful in the mind than whatever good feelings come from being a rational person.

Another way to say that is that for any scientific discipline there are continuous debates within it that redefine the knowledge in that field and factions that support the different views - views that most non-scientists don't understand anyway. So, there's not much available in the way of good feelings that come from belief systems that are constantly undergoing revisions and are subject to an indifferent objective reality.

But, irrational belief systems are protected in our culture and questioning them is seen as boorish or impolite. You can always find plenty of fellow believers that will tell you what a wonderful person you are for believing the same BS as they do.

Just some thoughts to throw on the fire.

Margi

Quote from: Margaret Ann on September 24, 2008, 12:06:39 PM
All belief systems are religious in nature - that is, beliefs are always held because they make the person feel good.

The psychological egoism angle, eh?  I agree, except for the use of the term "religion" - it's ambiguous and confusing in this context.

Quote from: Margaret Ann on September 24, 2008, 12:06:39 PM
There's not much available in the way of good feelings that come from belief systems that are constantly undergoing revisions and are subject to an indifferent objective reality.

You're wrong - Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation loves me!

Quote from: Nephie the Tree-Hugger on September 24, 2008, 12:37:22 PM

Quote from: Margaret Ann on September 24, 2008, 12:06:39 PM
All belief systems are religious in nature - that is, beliefs are always held because they make the person feel good.

The psychological egoism angle, eh? I agree, except for the use of the term "religion" - it's ambiguous and confusing in this context.

I didn't say religion, I said religious - meaning sharing some of the characteristics, not necessarily the same thing, and being purposefully non-specific, hardly qualifies as ambiguous or confusing. I think you're reaching too far for a criticism here.

What do find wrong with the substance of my statement?

Re: psychological egoism. Some people call it psychological egoism. I call it how the human brain works.

Added: If you disagree with this, tell me one belief that you hold that makes you feel worse than you would if you adopted a more comfortable version in its place.

PSS: I wasn't sure what part you agreed with or not so maybe my post is irrelevant. From reading your other posts I think we share some ways of looking at things.

Cheers, Margi

Gah, meant to write "religious".  I'm just quibbling about the connotations of religion, specifically because it's often seen as being immune to evidence.  I believe in science because it often leads to more satisfactory outcomes for me, and I'd give it up if I could be proven wrong.  I just don't see how you could do that and not invalidate your own argument, though.  While that might seem like immunity to evidence, it's more about self-contradiction.

And yes, I believe that humans are egoistic creatures.

Quote from: Nephie the Tree-Hugger on September 24, 2008, 01:49:45 PM
Gah, meant to write "religious".  I just disagree based on the popular understanding of religion.  You're right about it, though.  And yes, I believe that humans are egoistic creatures.

Cool!

What's your avatar? It makes me think of bundles of neurons. Of course, one could interpret my avatar the same way.

Margi

It's actually a somewhat abstract rendering of vines and flowers.  It's not even my usual, but I think I'll keep it.

Quote from: Nephie the Tree-Hugger on September 24, 2008, 01:55:51 PM
It's actually a somewhat abstract rendering of vines and flowers.  It's not even my usual, but I think I'll keep it.

[D] Oh, I'll twine with my mingles and [A7] waving black [D] hair
With the roses so red and the [A7] lilies so [D] fair
And the myrtle so [D7] bright with the [G] emerald [D] hue
The pale and the leader and [A7] eyes look like [D] blue.


Another great Carter family song.

Hi Margaret Ann, Yes there is an alternative to everything in this reality, much depends on the choices we make on this very second will determine what will take place tomorrow although there may be a lot of road blocks between point A, where you start and point B, end of destination, but not the end of the concept. **The prophesies are not written in stone**  The flow of events in this world is like a stream, fluid and can be diverted by simply building a dam to block it's path and redirect in toward another destination.

I love a good debate hon. <---- There's the smiley I use the most because maybe that's the mood I'm in most time. Happy and I love life but it don't mean I am unflappable, I am only a human waiting for the aliens to come and abduct her. "Now where are them dang aliens?" Hee, hee, hee." Now there is something you don't see very often, a philosopher with a sense of humor.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on September 26, 2008, 03:12:28 PM
Now there is something you don't see very often, a philosopher with a sense of humor.

Cindy

I never thought much about that but it certainly seems to be true - you being the exception, of course. OTOH there are many good humorists with a fine sense of philosophy. In fact, I'd say that's what makes the good ones good. It looks like the universe does have a bias.

Cheers, Margi   

Oh but a realy good philosopher can suddenly make a left turn in the middle of their narrative on how to care for your pet critter and the rock it lives under, and then take for instance if it be that the listener is you and your attention is suddenly blind sided  by the philosopher, then the joke is certainly on you for not paying attention, see? Then this would also be true as potential proposition if you are not paying attention and you miss the philosophers caution sign, you know, the big yellow one with the big black arrow pointing to the right. Now that is what you call deception to the nth degree which can, in reality, end you and your brand new Mercedes in the middle of a swamp.

Have you often wondered why so many can't see what's right in the front of their nose? Well some will argue that the obvious is always transparent. Boy no wonder so many people walk into sliding glass doors. There is no problems with the the concept that there is a door there, but someones peanut sized brain is considerably lacking in foresight  to see past the end of their nose see. Well maybe if they wore their glasses. "Hee, hee, hee." I love riddles too. All home grown too, I couldn't remember a set joke if my holly socks depended on it.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on September 26, 2008, 08:33:50 PM
Oh but a realy good philosopher can suddenly make a left turn in the middle of their narrative on how to care for your pet critter and the rock it lives under, and then take for instance if it be that the listener is you and your attention is suddenly blind sided  by the philosopher, then the joke is certainly on you for not paying attention, see? Then this would also be true as potential proposition if you are not paying attention and you miss the philosophers caution sign, you know, the big yellow one with the big black arrow pointing to the right. Now that is what you call deception to the nth degree which can, in reality, end you and your brand new Mercedes in the middle of a swamp.

Have you often wondered why so many can't see what's right in the front of their nose? Well some will argue that the obvious is always transparent. Boy no wonder so many people walk into sliding glass doors. There is no problems with the the concept that there is a door there, but someones peanut sized brain is considerably lacking in foresight  to see past the end of their nose see. Well maybe if they wore their glasses. "Hee, hee, hee." I love riddles too. All home grown too, I couldn't remember a set joke if my holly socks depended on it.

Cindy

And then there's Will Rogers. And how about Lenny Bruce although he was more sardonic than funny.

Margi