The origin of mankind

[Junko]

I am not saying we are going to talk about love.What I am saying is love is important.And to know love is philosophy.We can't ignore philosophical way to look things.That's what I'm talking about.....

[Stosh]

This is universal low. Love conquer everything.

Im not so sure, ...I love Karl,, in a rough and tumble manly sort of way, It just doesnt seem like he feels beaten yet. Edited March 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Karl]

Karl, I disagree that I am setting up a staw man argument. Im merely pointing to the straw nature of your morality argument

.You appear to be playing both sides of the court. Since when did Me First become the standard of heroism? And Me Second ,become the standard of villainy?

In this finite world your pursuit for yourself very often is the loss to someone or something else. You drive a car , that requires roads, you contribute to traffic and deprive.. buffalo.,,whatever. of space. There is no neutrality.

Once you assume your morals have a greater standing beyond just being your opinion, you set yourself as being better and someone else as worse.

Fan of mankind, isnt silly, its just a loose phrase , you got the general idea, so what silliness could it exhibit?

 

It is my standard of heroism because I value my life as a primary. I did not imply that you will have the same standard, but neither am I speaking from arbitrary whim. In other words I know, regardless of wether you know it or not. It is as plain as 2+2=4 (and I did not choose that example without good reason).

 

You do not deprive anyone of anything by driving on the road unless you stole the car and thus acquired a value by deceit or force.You cannot live your life through the mirror of another because you are no longer accepting your life as prime value. Don't confuse this with hedonism it is entirely the opposite.

 

My morals are my morals, my virtues and values are mine and mine alone. However I choose to act will have to accord with holding my own life as the primary value. Existence is identity ; consciousness is identification. Therefore, I choose people to trade and associate with who also hold similar standards. This should be obvious-would you let your wife/daughter into the car with a known rapist. Would you buy from someone who has continually failed to honour their contracts. Would you get on a plane with a pilot who announces that he believes life is just a dream, that reality cannot be know, morals are subjective and so we shouldn't worry if he decides to fly into a cliff. I'm going to bet you want to get on a plane with a pilot who values their own life most highly and will do everything in their power to survive.

 

I've tried explaining this many times but perhaps it's too radical to grasp, even though to my eyes it's so patently obvious it really should need explanation.

[Karl]

OK, you are not commanding me. Good

 

But what I said was that I hold my own life dear, and those of my loved ones, but will not claim that they are intrinsically valuable. The value that they have to me is the value that they have to me. That which I place on them.

 

By definition, value and meaning are applied/ascribed/inserted/inferred/etc, but they are never universal or intrinsic.

 

To claim that each or any human life is universally valuable is itself meaningless. Value depends on perspective.

From a star's perspective, human life has no value. From my perspective, the Sun has much value, but other stars less so.

 

From my perspective, my life is valuable to me, and I recognize that the life of another is valuable to them -- and it is this empathy, this understanding of what it is to be alive, that means I would be sad to see another human in pain. And indeed every time I turn on the news I get a little sad. And this might make me think that I value others' lives, but really they can have no value to me until I have some kind of contact with them. A child just died somewhere, and I have no idea who he was, and his life did not affect me, and his death does not affect me. What value did his life have to me? And yet how terribly upset would I have been to watch him die?

 

 

 

 

I did not argue against them. I said it sounded like a dreadful plague. It does. It is evident that humanity is already a dreadful plague on this planet, but I'm not arguing for our annihilation.

 

I am as an animal. I am an animal. So are you. No more "valuable" than any other.

 

Your life is not 'intrinsically valuable' you must 'choose' to value it that way. Then you have to think and do action which preserves and enhances that prime value. We are reasoning animals and that's the difference. We must choose to live or die, to survive, to produce, to plan. An animal doesn't have this faculty. It simply does what instinct tells it to do in an automatic way. I am more valuable to me than you are to me.

 

You don't argue for annhialation for one very obvious reason. You are lying to yourself and evading. If you really believed it was a plague then surely you should be first with a rope around your own neck, but you don't advocate that of course. It's just everybody else who is the plague, not you and your loved ones clearly-who you say you don't value any more highly than anyone else. That's the conflict you hold its as obvious as the tree outside my window. You can pretend to have your cake and eat it, but you know it isn't reality by the hypocrisy of your argument. You do value yourself and your loved ones higher than everyone else and you don't see them or yourself as the plague only 'others '. You can't advocate annhialation because it would put your neck and those of your family to the knife.

[Karl]

Im not so sure, ...I love Karl,, in a rough and tumble manly sort of way, It just doesnt seem like he feels beaten yet.

 

I'm not beaten for sure. I also see that there is possibility even if not probability. My life will shortly draw to a close, so the most I can do is pass on what I know to the tiny few who that might listen. It is the young who will have to make of the world what they will, I will have long since turned to dust. I will carry on carrying water and chopping sticks until then. :-)

[Stosh]

The pilot who values his own life highest , may choose himself first and foremost,

when its him over me, the fraudulent contractor certainly values himself more highly, same for the rapist. Thats why no one else considers these guys heroic.

Deceit and force just arent the determining factors whether one is depriving another,, they are loopholes in the chain of justification you are using ,,to allow yourself to feel your actions dont have the ramifications of someone deemed "bad".

Its the bestowal of importance on others which is considered as loving or heroic, or even just humane since intrinsically they do not have importance.

...other folks may not agree with me on this next part, since it is a bit difficult to let go of certain ideas ,,but, treating all men as straw dogs, speaks to this. Flesh and bone are like straw, ephemeral ,cheap , weak etc. The celebrations treat the form with love respect, honor, joy, ..its the people that imbue any value that the dog has. ...but its just straw. So to treat men as straw dogs is not disrespect, but honor with the very highest respect their humanity , with deepest sincerity, not make a show of honor for the meat.

[Stosh]

Groupings like 2 plus two being four are also imaginary constructs, ,, why then pick this as being obvious?

[Nungali]

Oh No!  We aren't going to talk about love again, are we?

 

yes ! 

 

and not only that .... you are being taken to the movies to see that animated sci-fi thing ... and have to sit right next to Junko and Michael and be a 3rd wheel . 

 

[Karl]

Groupings like 2 plus two being four are also imaginary constructs, ,, why then pick this as being obvious?

 

Because of what you are doing in order to integrate the concepts and how many concepts that are needed in order to reach such an abstract.

[Junko]

I had to think about what's the origin of Kangaroo.....! A head is like a rabbit.....and so.....Nungali.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Junko

[Karl]

The pilot who values his own life highest , may choose himself first and foremost,

when its him over me, the fraudulent contractor certainly values himself more highly, same for the rapist. Thats why no one else considers these guys heroic.

Deceit and force just arent the determining factors whether one is depriving another,, they are loopholes in the chain of justification you are using ,,to allow yourself to feel your actions dont have the ramifications of someone deemed "bad".

Its the bestowal of importance on others which is considered as loving or heroic, or even just humane since intrinsically they do not have importance.

...other folks may not agree with me on this next part, since it is a bit difficult to let go of certain ideas ,,but, treating all men as straw dogs, speaks to this. Flesh and bone are like straw, ephemeral ,cheap , weak etc. The celebrations treat the form with love respect, honor, joy, ..its the people that imbue any value that the dog has. ...but its just straw. So to treat men as straw dogs is not disrespect, but honor with the very highest respect their humanity , with deepest sincerity, not make a show of honor for the meat.

 

Everyone who doesn't want to comit suicide values their lives first and then all other values are judged against that value. its a more complex evaluation than you are imagining. It isn't a fixed hierarchy of values, but the value of ones life is the measure. So, it means a Father might sacrifice his life for his wife or children, but it is not sacrifice in the sense of altruism. This kind of sacrifice is a product of the value he places on his families life, judged against the prime value of his own life. If he didn't value his own life primarily he would be incapable of any action. This is why I say that people are evading the truth by a long string of conceptual justifications. The true suicide kills himself the moment he decides he does not value his life as prime. He just ceases trying to survive.

 

As I said, I'm saying everyone must choose how they act. If they decide to deceive or use force then they will suffer the effects of that action. Sometimes people make mistakes. That's life. All I'm saying is that it is up to YOU wether you decide to reason, to act in accordance with your values with your virtues. You are a moral man if you try to reason by the primary value of your life. It's only possible to act freely if you are free to act, so, in certain circumstances such as war, incarceration, abusive relationships or a totalitarian state it isn't always possible to apply reason.

 

I don't know about straw dogs, but I am cautious about whom I associate. I don't walk into a barber expecting to cut my throat, neither do I have an operation without some sense the surgeon is qualified and sober. Some of these things I must weigh up. Alternatively a stranger in a dark alley, or a taxi driver with bald tyres and a half drunk bottle of scotch on the passenger seat won't likely share my values immediately.

[dust]

Your life is not 'intrinsically valuable' you must 'choose' to value it that way.

 

Right, it's not intrinsically valuable -- nothing is. But neither do I choose to value it. (I don't think...)

 

I'd say that, on a basic level, my life is dear to me in the very same way that a dog's life is dear to it. It enjoys being alive; it does not desire to die. It is an instinct -- the same instinct we do not have for all others of our species. A dog doesn't value all other dogs' lives; only its own and those (of dogs/humans/etc) who are emotionally close to it.

 

On a more complex level, my life is dear to me because I am capable (in a way that a dog is not) of consciously recognizing the wonder in being alive.

 

In either case, I don't think I can choose, in my present state, not to value my life. I think that would go against all instinct that billions of years of evolution has endowed us with. And if I cannot choose not to value my life, so I also cannot choose to value my life. I place value upon my existence by virtue of existing (in a happy state).

 

 

Then you have to think and do action which preserves and enhances that prime value.

 

I don't have to do anything. True, instinctively I will do my best to preserve and enhance the lives I care about, but I can choose not to -- if my human reason, my logical side, decides that it is for some reason a good idea.

 

 

We are reasoning animals and that's the difference. We must choose to live or die, to survive, to produce, to plan.

 

Again, I don't think it's a choice. Not for most of us. We live far more in the realm of instinct, emotion, and knee-jerk reaction, than we do in the realm of pure logic. And actually the majority of people just do what they're told, to a greater or lesser extent.

 

 

An animal doesn't have this faculty. It simply does what instinct tells it to do in an automatic way. I am more valuable to me than you are to me. You don't argue for annhialation for one very obvious reason. You are lying to yourself and evading. If you really believed it was a plague then surely you should be first with a rope around your own neck, but you don't advocate that of course.

 

No. I don't advocate killing anyone in particular. You keep inferring that I want humans all dead, but I've repeatedly stated that I don't. I don't really care either way.

 

My life is pretty good, I do very little harm. I'm enjoying things. That is not to say that I can't recognize the human species as a whole as a devastating force. I can, and I do, because it is.

 

 

It's just everybody else who is the plague, not you and your loved ones clearly-who you say you don't value any more highly than anyone else.

 

Erm..I absolutely did not say that!

 

"I hold my own life dear, and those of my loved ones, but will not claim that they are intrinsically valuable. The value that they have to me is the value that they have to me. That which I place on them."

 

What I said was, once again, that I indeed place value on myself and certain other people, but recognize that nobody is intrinsically valuable -- that is, there is no universal power such as God endowing all humans with some magical power of "value". But my loved ones are absolutely valuable to me.

 

And perhaps we're all part of this 'plague', but I have not argued for anyone's annihilation. And not because it would be contradictory to say that I value my loved ones and desire an end to humanity, but because I don't desire an end to humanity. I simply don't understand why you think an expansion of humanity throughout the universe is worth pursuing.

 

 

That's the conflict you hold its as obvious as the tree outside my window. You can pretend to have your cake and eat it, but you know it isn't reality by the hypocrisy of your argument. You do value yourself and your loved ones higher than everyone else and you don't see them or yourself as the plague only 'others '. You can't advocate annhialation because it would put your neck and those of your family to the knife.

 

You have either not understood me or are pretending I've said things that I haven't. I think I've made myself quite clear! Once again: I have not, at all, argued for the elimination of humankind. I do not hate all humans, nor do I value all humans. I do value my loved ones.

 

Getting back to the original thing: the spread of humankind across the universe would be a dreadful plague. The world is rife with war and poverty and the destruction of all kinds of habitat & species and blah blah blah, after thousands of years we're still killing each other over pathetic things, but you speak of spreading "ourselves throughout the galaxy and the universe." I just don't think it's a particularly worthwhile pursuit, considering.

[Stosh]

Im not qualified to make much of a statement about folks who want to kill themselves,,, but I will anyway. Ive wondered if theyre not yearning for the better situation than they can have, rather than acting out some values plan. And Im thinking that folks emotions relate to internalized values more so than what they conciously juggle. just as ,We bypass the calculator doing two plus two. Our minds are largely a black box, sentiments well up, and while we can sometimes rationalize why, the scales are really in the back room.

I think the altruism of heros is like that, a summation done ,and handed up from below.Whether it amounts still ,to self service is debateable, but what isnt, is that people, despite anything they may cerebrally conclude, do sometimes sacrifice,,even their lives for people they dont even know. I wouldnt put heroism beyond you either, because until severely tested, ya never would know.

But even on the daily scene, you seem ready to sacrifice your time and consideration for people like me, who you dont really know. Same for dusty, whatever he may think ,or even Imsiz biri , when push meets shove,,, ya dunno.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Michael Sternbach]

Humans can both descend to very low states and ascend to great heights. The most unique thing unique about us may be exactly that innate flexibility which allows us to go in every direction. And I feel that especially in this century we set humanity's  course for the future.

 

Talking about which: Humanity spreading throughout the galaxy? I hope that, by the time we will have the required technology, we will also have reached the maturity to do so in responsible and sensible ways.

[Stosh]

Yes mom.

 

 

 

just kidding, this century? ready to be civilized? I dont see it , but ive been surprised before. I was the guy who rhetorically asked, What do I need a computer in my house for? I dont have any recipes to organize, and can already balance a checkbook.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Stosh

[Karl]

You don't think you choose to value your life ? Really. Then why are you doing anything at all ? Why are you writing your thoughts as an argument here ? It's complete and utter rubbish and you know it ;-)

 

A dog has no choice as to wether it values its life or not, but you do and you have to choose to survive. There is no automatic mechanism you are forced to plan, reason and choose every step of the way. You must decide on a career, what foods to eat, who you should associate with, where to bank, what transport to use, what things you must learn, where you should live, how to purchase a house, if you should have a pension for old age, how much you should spend and budget. You must do what a dog does not ever think about. A dog is born, it hunts, it fights it mates and eats. If it's food supply runs out it cannot choose to begin farming, to irrigate the land, to domesticate it's food supply.

 

You are not understanding the incredible being that you are and yet you default to calling man a plague, as if he was just so much irrational disease.

 

We have more people on the planet today than we did thousands of years ago. We live far more comfortable, healthier, safer lives. We can walk into a supermarket and pick up food, clothes or medicine for a tiny fraction of what we earn. As capitalism has spread, the rest of the world is beginning to benefit in the same way. We grow more food than the entire world can eat. We live far longer. We can indulge in art, entertainment or just lazing about on a sunny beach. There are even less deaths from war and deaths from war are far less than that which we once suffered by disease, injury and starvation.

 

Frankly I find it disgusting that you throw this all away and complain that it isn't a perfect utopia. That you wouldn't call for wholesale annhialation only because you are such a magnanimous perfect human being.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Karl

[Karl]

Humans can both descend to very low states and ascend to great heights. The most unique thing unique about us may be exactly that innate flexibility which allows us to go in every direction. And I feel that especially in this century we set humanity's  course for the future.

 

Talking about which: Humanity spreading throughout the galaxy? I hope that, by the time we will have the required technology, we will also have reached the maturity to do so in responsible and sensible ways.

 

We won't be going anywhere until we do.

[Karl]

Im not qualified to make much of a statement about folks who want to kill themselves,,, but I will anyway. Ive wondered if theyre not yearning for the better situation than they can have, rather than acting out some values plan. And Im thinking that folks emotions relate to internalized values more so than what they conciously juggle. just as ,We bypass the calculator doing two plus two. Our minds are largely a black box, sentiments well up, and while we can sometimes rationalize why, the scales are really in the back room.

I think the altruism of heros is like that, a summation done ,and handed up from below.Whether it amounts still ,to self service is debateable, but what isnt, is that people, despite anything they may cerebrally conclude, do sometimes sacrifice,,even their lives for people they dont even know. I wouldnt put heroism beyond you either, because until severely tested, ya never would know.

But even on the daily scene, you seem ready to sacrifice your time and consideration for people like me, who you dont really know. Same for dusty, whatever he may think ,when push meets shove,,, ya dunno.

 

Heroes know who they are. Our minds aren't black boxes unless we choose to throw away reason, to evade or just to be too lazy to bother thinking.

 

I do what I do because I'm selfish. I enjoy writing and arguing. If I was in Ancient Greece you woukd have seen me amongst the student philosophers arguing in the forum. It's not an altruistic position. You also give your time and writing here, if you didn't I would be very bored, so, we trade, it's a win win even if the argument gets heated. I'm always fascinated by the approach of others, so it's fun for me otherwise I'd be somewhere else.

[Michael Sternbach]

 

Yes mom.

 

 

 

just kidding, this century? ready to be civilized? I dont see it , but ive been surprised before. I was the guy who rhetorically asked, What do I need a computer in my house for? I dont have any recipes to organize, and can already balance a checkbook.

 

Well, you need a computer to find the answer to the question about Life, the Universe, and Everything...

 

 

Most of all, on

 

[Stosh]

Heroes know who they are. Our minds aren't black boxes unless we choose to throw away reason, to evade or just to be too lazy to bother thinking.

 

I do what I do because I'm selfish. I enjoy writing and arguing. If I was in Ancient Greece you woukd have seen me amongst the student philosophers arguing in the forum. It's not an altruistic position. You also give your time and writing here, if you didn't I would be very bored, so, we trade, it's a win win even if the argument gets heated. I'm always fascinated by the approach of others, so it's fun for me otherwise I'd be somewhere else.

I do not know that heroes know who they are, who may prove themselves to be one, or that our reason really even plays a big role in deciding what we have yet to do. No sir. From what Ive heard, they almost unanimously say, they did that which needed to be done,or they did the thing for their brother. .. Because it isnt really rational..isnt a clinical conclusion weighed and measured in cold facts. And I dont think you are as selfish as you prefer to attribute to yourself. Sorry, the emotion thats involved boils up, and later we explain ,to cover our ass. You feel you have something to contribute, not to gain,,for if it were to gain, youd listen hidden on the sidelines.

you mushy idealistic fool.

 

[Stosh]

and I mean that as high compliment.

[Stosh]

Michael, a computer cant really answer that, whether it generates a 42 or not. Neither can Dao bums unless a chord is struck. Most will keep to the mindset they start with ,while we throw bottles into the sea and theres no assurance either that the bottles contain the cure a person needs. We hope.

[Karl]

I do not know that heroes know who they are, who may prove themselves to be one, or that our reason really even plays a big role in deciding what we have yet to do. No sir. From what Ive heard, they almost unanimously say, they did that which needed to be done,or they did the thing for their brother. .. Because it isnt really rational..isnt a clinical conclusion weighed and measured in cold facts. And I dont think you are as selfish as you prefer to attribute to yourself. Sorry, the emotion thats involved boils up, and later we explain ,to cover our ass. You feel you have something to contribute, not to gain,,for if it were to gain, youd listen hidden on the sidelines.

you mushy idealistic fool.

 

That's the traditional 'hero' who sacrificed their lives-and we know how the state likes a good sacrificial lamb as a pin up. The more authoritarian and war like the state is, the more it wants its brand of heroes.

 

To me a hero is a businessman, a mother, a Father, or absolutely anyone who uses their minds rationally and does not give them up to consensus, religion or populism. I consider myself a hero because I choose to be one, not because anyone says I am one. In a sense this is walking the path, but it is one of my own making and not one written in a book, or nailed to a church door.

[Junko]

What has a hero got to do with my thread?

Edited March 22, 2016 by Junko

[Stosh]

Precisely true about traditional heroes, sometimes celebrated as a sacrificial lamb, depicted on a cross,displayed. But thats just the PR version. ..yes there is the other sincere version too. The inspiration, fathers teachers, friends of friends in need. But though the type varies,,Im still thinking that it is a title bestowed. One may live heroically, though go unnoticed for it. Maybe youre right, that a person could acknowledge their own heroism. It does seem a bit unfair to have to leave that to the disinterested. I mean like, screw them ! the blind stingy sheep! I change my mind. I accept that I am a hero in your eyes.