I am posting this rant in the My God forum because I believe it has to do with a deity many people surreptitiously worship, but to whom they never refer as God: progress.

Our developments in the field of technology have drastic effects on our quality as a civilization. Advancements in our scientific fields of interest have in turn defiled the inherently spiritual and independently strong people humanity once was. Especially in America, we have forsaken the principles of a strong peoples, replacing it with teh gluttonous self-perpetuation of a strong "nation" separate from its people, ergo guiding them towards passive and submissive sloth, to the condition of physical obesity, and to spiritual and psychic paralysis.

Let's take the first development of progress that helped light the path towards what we now call "civilization": farming.

As nomadic tribes stopped migrating and formed surpluses, the civilization could grow and allow more people. Considering the conditions of the day, this was a significant development. However, now that we survive off the surplus produced by others, we merely detract from the labor of others. This not only leads the average consumer to view the farmer in a Socialist/Communist way - not based on the merit of his character or the stalwart dedication to his family's survival, but on the efficiency of his labor - but it also leads that very same consumer to take what rightfully belongs to the farmer to devour his way into obesity and starve the family. Of course, this analogy represents not one-person parties, but groups of people - industries, organizations, tribes, and villages.

Not only that, but the reliance upon another as a food source prevents an individual from physically and mentally disciplining himself to the art of hunting. He loses his physical and spiritual integrity because he no longer taxes himself or pushes himself, challenges himself nor overcomes what he thought was himself, in order to survive. He is less of a man than he once was.

Let's take two fields of progress - closely linked and intertwined: communication and education.

Someone can argue that the most important thing to a culture or a civilization is communication. Expressing ideas, they argue, is extremely important to the development of a nation into a substantial and effective system. Every principle man ever held close to their hearts was conceived due to communication of ideas - the very definition of education.

While I agree that communication IS important for the continuation of important things like culture and tradition, my cognitive dissonance is with global communication and, therefore, cross-cultural education. Because of this "global communication," alien cultures seem more familiar to me than my own culture. Thanks to the residue of my Behavioral Sciences (rudimentary anthropology) class I took two years ago, had I only relied on that for information, I would know more about African Pygmy tribal religion than I do about the Irish Civil War or Norwegian Independence Day, or even my own family's genealogy. My own culture becomes diluted in the exploration and education of foreign alien culture.

The last field I wish to focus on/complain about, but certainly not the last possible one or even the worst of them: modern medicine.

First of all, the development of modern medicine and the sustenance of life beyond its natural intention has a two-fold damaging effect on the human genus: it prevents the sick and disabled from dying a death of integrity, free from dependence upon others, and it increases the population of the planet to far greater proportions than is healthy for the planet.

However, in practical application, there is a more materialistic and political debate to be had. More money goes into the development of AIDS cure research, birth control, and abortion technique than education. What is the function of this? To make the natural and biological consequences of marital infidelity an option. To make the concept of giving someone your virginity an insignificant thing. To further separate sex from love.

These principles of the fallacy and farce of "progress" are not anywhere close to the last ones. However, they are all I feel like posting now, as I find myself quite nostalgic and frustrated, and even sick, upon thinking of this conflict, and how the Principles of Antiquity is wrenched from the hands of modern man.

Ed: This, unbeknownst to me, marks my hundredth post... not necessarily a fantastic achievement, considering the average post count of Totse posters is 983649563294592675962340957293750273509623495632, but noteworthy nonetheless.

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-11-2003).]

You hit the nail right on the head, and I think only left out the Progress of the "equality of the sexes." Though every sphere of existence, from the crude and material, to the natural and supernatural, clearly shows men and women that Man is unique and apart from Woman, the hook-nosed high-priests of Progress have determined that to move forward is to ignore this obvious difference, ignore this uniqueness, and lead Man and Woman to an imagined utopia of mediocrity.

This is, of course, only an Effect, and is a symptom of a much greater and far-reaching disease. The mouthpieces of Progress can only justify the weakening of sexual identity and the muddling of Masculine and Feminine along Economic lines. Without a metaphysical, or even biological/scientific leg to stand on, the moderns are content to confuse and degrade the nature of Man and Woman because, as they see it, being a woman used to be bad for business, and this is obviously something to be overcome.

Other than that though, excellent cuz.

Um, no. Let's break it down, kids. I'm feeling charitable, so I'm even gonna try and be polite.

- How do you define a "deity?" Progress is something I can actually prove the existence of (subject to one's admittedly subjective definition of progress). Nobody prays to progress. It's simply a concept that many people - myself included - hold to be an admirable and desirable part of human society.

- How do you define "spiritually strong?" This strikes me as one of those phrases that's so open to interpretation that it essentially means nothing. Are you saying that we were once in closer contact with a deity or deities? You know what's coming, guys... you can't prove one does or ever did exist. I'd view our "loss of spiritual strength" as a form of intellectual growth, growing beyond an idea that was temporarily useful as a spur to culture and psychological defense mechanism.

To be perfectly honest, what I find most confounding about your whole post is the implication that our current situation is, somehow, not natural. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is humanity evolving, while still following the principles that have always guided that evolution. We live the way we live today because it makes sense from the perspective of our biological prerogatives.

Although I certainly agree with the Hemingway-esque assertion that nobody's worried about their manhood anymore, I hardly think farming had anything to do with this. I'd link it to more recent developments, such as the recent idea that masculinity is somehow undesirable and that young boys should be educated to be more like young girls. Guys could be counted on for a certain degree of gentlemanly stoicism right up through the forties, though this sort of behavior has ebbed quite a bit since then. I know, I go to school with a bunch of frat boys. http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

- Hating modern medicine just seems ridiculous to me. Nothing's stopping the sick and elderly from forsaking their medicine, popping a cyanide pill, and going quietly and bravely to their death, perhaps while reciting a psalm or a line of Shakespeare. Medicine simply gives those undisposed to such gestures the option not to die just then. More choices is good, in my opinion.

I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. Science often builds upon science. The pressure from a population crisis - if it arises; it's about two hundred years late already - would spur us to new heights of the progress you so dislike. There's plenty of space on the ocean floor, if a fire were lit under our collective ass to solve the engineering problems involved. Ditto for space, which, admit it, we'll have to venture out to in force someday.

- How do you define a "deity?" Progress is something I can actually prove the existence of (subject to one's admittedly subjective definition of progress). Nobody prays to progress.

Not literally, but they certainly use it the same way ancient man did gods. The notion of progress is both outside of man, like gods, and measures what is acceptable and taboo, like gods. Stop being a literla shitstain and read into it a little.

It's simply a concept that many people - myself included - hold to be an admirable and desirable part of human society.

- How do you define "spiritually strong?"

Aware of and loyal to forces and principles removed from the contingent and conditioned, promiscuous world of matter and mere nature.

Are you saying that we were once in closer contact with a deity or deities?

Yes. That should be obvious. The crimes against life that are today rationalized or embraced were literally inconcievable in ancient times. And dont start with the commie bullshit about killing people. Life is more than mortal, shitty, material existence.

You know what's coming, guys... you can't prove one does or ever did exist.

You know what's coming- Yes we can. Not from the telescopes and computers of the modern world though. If you want the reign of machines and masses to be the eyes from which you try and see God, then eat a dick, its your loss.

I'd view our "loss of spiritual strength" as a form of intellectual growth,

And I agree with you, since Intellect is a profane and lower sphere of life that can only contemplate and cope with material needs or lusts. There is no doubt in my mind that intellectual growth just keeps coming, and is one of the fundamental differences between the factories of today and the temples of yesterday.

To be perfectly honest, what I find most confounding about your whole post is the implication that our current situation is, somehow, not natural. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I know. It is clear that we are now wholly natural. Oxen and termites are natural too though. Until fairly recently in human memory, we were super-natural though.



This is humanity evolving, while still following the principles that have always guided that evolution.

Isnt that supposed to breed stronger beings by gradual genetic changes? Because we are, A, way less able to cope with the world around us today, and B, virtually unchanged genetically. We havent evolved at all.

We live the way we live today because it makes sense from the perspective of our biological prerogatives.

I know. But there is more to being human than biology. That notion doesnt sit well with cowards though.

I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. Science often builds upon science. The pressure from a population crisis - if it arises; it's about two hundred years late already - would spur us to new heights of the progress you so dislike. There's plenty of space on the ocean floor, if a fire were lit under our collective ass to solve the engineering problems involved.

I would rather see 3 continents depopulated of mankind than invade another ecosystem so that financiers, industrialists, and crowds of eunichs can eat and breed and enjoy gluttonous consumption or third-world IMF feudalism.

Ah, Spirit of '22, always willing to substitute hateful insult for objective reasoning. Why not mix the two, like I'm about to do? I think you'll find it most enjoyable. Anyway, let's do this.

- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, chuckles, but that "matter and mere nature" is all you've got, and it's all I've got, too. It's all anybody's got. You see no reason to believe in omnipotent ghosts, yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods, and see what it gets you. If you need me, I'll be out here, enjoying the liberating embrace of reason.

You know, my move from theism to atheism was at first a very difficult journey, fraught with shock and rage. But eventually, when my intellect finally grew beyond "the supernatural," I felt relieved, relieved to finally feel the inescapable conflict of what I'd like to believe and what I know to be true slide off my shoulders. Free at last, free at last, thank nobody in particular, I'm free at last.

And if you can prove the existence of your beloved spirits, by whatever means, please do so. I do know one thing, though, that you strive so mightily to blind yourself to - the telescopes and computers work, and we can understand why they work. Neither of these statements apply to your invisible Faerie Folk.

- Pick up a goddamn book, you ignorant fool. Technology and progress are evolution. Cultural evolution is, if anything, more pronounced and useful than genetic evolution. And you accuse me of being a "literalist shitstain."

- You deign to call me a coward? You, who lullaby yourself to sleep with fairy tales and myths about invisible realities and other such nonsense? You say there's more to us than biology, but it's your own brain chemistry that tells you those seductive lies. I know reality can be hard to cope with, but stop being a bitch and start living with it. You don't need your crutch; cast it aside and see the world as it is.

- Your care for the "ecosystem" is touching, it really is, perhaps due to its supreme naivete. Do you honestly think the other animals of the world have such concerns for your wellbeing? When some Hong Kong flu breaks quarantine and kills millions of your fellow humans, do you think some of the viruses will protest the wanton killing of humans? Do you think certain portions of the world will be declared human sanctuaries? Wake up, dipshit, and stop imposing rules on the world that it does not and will never follow.

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Ah, Spirit of '22, always willing to substitute hateful insult for objective reasoning. Why not mix the two, like I'm about to do? I think you'll find it most enjoyable. Anyway, let's do this.

How is any of what he just said considered "hateful"?

quote:- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, chuckles, but that "matter and mere nature" is all you've got, and it's all I've got, too. It's all anybody's got. You see no reason to believe in omnipotent ghosts, yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods, and see what it gets you. If you need me, I'll be out here, enjoying the liberating embrace of reason.

Spirit of '22: The notion of progress(or reason) is both outside of man, like gods, and measures what is acceptable and taboo, like gods.

quote:But eventually, when my intellect finally grew beyond "the supernatural"...

By submerging in what is physical and natural, material and fleeting?

quote:... I felt relieved, relieved to finally feel the inescapable conflict of what I'd like to believe and what I know to be true slide off my shoulders. Free at last, free at last, thank nobody in particular, I'm free at last.

Armed&Angry: ...yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods (or sciences), and see what it gets you.

Main Entry: defense mechanism

Function: noun

Date: 1913

1 : an often unconscious mental process (as repression) that makes possible compromise solutions to personal problems

Still want to feel relieved?

quote:And if you can prove the existence of your beloved spirits, by whatever means, please do so. I do know one thing, though, that you strive so mightily to blind yourself to - the telescopes and computers work, and we can understand why they work. Neither of these statements apply to your invisible Faerie Folk.

First of all, who mentioned Fairy Folk?

Second of all, we can prove the existence of the ethereal principles, to which we pay homage, as much, if not more, than you can empirically measure and scientifically calculate the Reason you pay homage to.

quote:- Pick up a goddamn book, you ignorant fool. Technology and progress are evolution. Cultural evolution is, if anything, more pronounced and useful than genetic evolution. And you accuse me of being a "literalist shitstain."

I don't think Darwin ever mentioned technology.

The function of my post was to point out that technology and "progress" therein ran counter to evolution. Instead of becoming independent and self-sufficient beings that coexisted with Nature, we are now dependent upon personal organizers, fast food restaurants, escalators, calculators, test results, electrical grid stability, plane schedules, prescription Prozac, and market fluctuations - we are effectively put at the mercy of Nature, and, therefore, of the principles of servitude that we attempted to defy.

quote:- You deign to call me a coward? You, who lullaby yourself to sleep with fairy tales and myths about invisible realities and other such nonsense? You say there's more to us than biology, but it's your own brain chemistry that tells you those seductive lies. I know reality can be hard to cope with, but stop being a bitch and start living with it. You don't need your crutch; cast it aside and see the world as it is.

Your own brain chemistry interprets the world around you. This, just like everything else on the planet, is subject to change, depending on the effectiveness of what parts of the brain in secreting what chemicals and hormones at what rate to what part of your body. Ergo, everything you perceive is only an interpretation of that which exists around you, and therefore does not encompass that which is beyond you.

Reason.

quote:- Your care for the "ecosystem" is touching, it really is, perhaps due to its supreme naivete. Do you honestly think the other animals of the world have such concerns for your wellbeing? When some Hong Kong flu breaks quarantine and kills millions of your fellow humans, do you think some of the viruses will protest the wanton killing of humans? Do you think certain portions of the world will be declared human sanctuaries? Wake up, dipshit, and stop imposing rules on the world that it does not and will never follow.

Tyrant: ...the reliance upon another as a food source prevents an individual from physically and mentally disciplining himself to the art of hunting. He loses his physical and spiritual integrity because he no longer taxes himself or pushes himself, challenges himself nor overcomes what he thought was himself, in order to survive. He is less of a man than he once was.

None of what I just said implies:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI>Nature can not take care of itself

<LI>Nature holds humanity in a special regard (why would he need to tax himself?)

<LI>Can not kill us at any point (i.e.: medicinal dependency vs. natural immunity)

</UL>

Humans have not conquered Nature. We are simply convinced it's not a threat anymore... despite the very existence of Disease.

Humans have not analyzed Nature. We are simply convinced we can see everything that ever existed... despite the very existence of the electro-magnetic spectrum.

Humans have not "gone beyond" Nature. We are simply convinced that what we create is worth more than what we were created from... despite the very existence of the Planet.

Humans have not "advanced." We are simply convinced there is no order to nature or principles by which to continuously abide... despite the very existence of mortality.

Ed: italics

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-12-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-12-2003).]

I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by cutting and pasting crap from your previous posts. Do you think it'll be sensical the second time around?

I know what a defense mechanism is, moron. You're using one right now. How can my thought process be defined as such? I've simply rejected what was never there to begin with. And by the way, I'm still waiting for your vaunted proof. Any time you're ready to share it would be just super.

Believe it or not - I know it sounds crazy - but the study of evolution has advanced quite a bit since Darwin. You might say it's experienced great progress... but I digress. We now know considerably more about the twin mechanisms of inheritance, physical and cultural evolution. The unit of physcial inheritance is the familiar gene, whereas Dr. Richard Dawkins coined the term "meme" to describe a unit of cultural inheritance. A meme is essentially any idea, from written language to heroin abuse. Good memes - or sometimes bad ones, but that's beside the point - are passed on through the generations, as more and more people say "Damn, that's a good idea." Since memes literally spread by word of mouth, rather than waiting perhaps millions of years for genetic mutations to develop, cultural inheritance is much, much faster than physical inheritance. There. Does that clear things up a little?

We were never "independent and self-sufficient." A lone hunter in the paleolithic would have gotten his shit ruined; there's nobody to help him trap and kill animals, and nobody to gather berries and such in case the hunt doesn't pan out. This whole Garden of Eden thing you've got going on it your mind is pure rubbish.

In days of old, we risked our lives every single day for a slab of fresh meat. We had terrible teeth, nothing even approaching health care, and we died at age 20. How are we more dependent on nature now? Cripes, back in the paleolithic, if you got caught in a heavy downpour, you were probably doomed to death by pneumonia.

Of course my brain chemistry interprets the world around me. And of course I can't see what's beyond me. Because there's nobody up there, kids. Prove me wrong or shut the hell up.

Reason!

You're making a lot of generalizations about humans. I, for one, never said we had conquered nature, nor that we can see everything about it, nor that we've "gone beyond it." As for us advancing, I just explained why we've advanced, and explained in some detail the mechanism of it. And there is no absolute universal ethics set, unless you can whip out that God-proof of yours I keep hearing about.

Look, we need not speculate on these matters. There are plenty of examples of peoples in history who've rejected sedentary agriculture and a life of settled convenience. They were called "barbarians." Mongols, Huns, Scythians, Cimmerians, Dorians, Medes, Avars, and Magyars, to name a few. The repeatedly robbed, raped, and murdered the decent, hard-working people of the Fertile Crescent and Europe. Every few decades, the horsemen from the steppes would crash down on civilization in great waves, killing the men, raping the women, and stealing whatever they could carry. When Chingis Khan lead his troops into the Khwarezm Empire, it was the single most destructive war, proportionally speaking, in human history. Something like 75% of the population was killed or lead into slavery. Every major population center was razed to the ground. Columns of refugees were surrounded and slaughtered by the rampaging Mongol tumens. Khan even went so far as to destroy the irrigation in the area - which is why, even today, Afghanistan and Central Asia are essentially deserts. Fun guys, huh?

In the more traditional hunter-gatherer vein, we have the Yanomamo of Brazil and the !Kung of the Kalahari bush. Despite their supposedly enlightened and fulfilling manner of living, the !Kung have a higher murder rate than modern-day New York City. Well, geez, what could possibly be getting on their nerves? Maybe people who've actually tried it don't care for a life of squalor? Over in Brazil reside the Yanomamo, who determine alpha male status by bestowing honor and power on - get this - the most prolific rapist. The man who has attacking, beaten, and violated the most women gets to be the chief. By God, this is living, isn't it kids?

Tell you what. Put down your copy of Ishmael and take a little jander down to your local library. There you'll find such fascinating and enlightening books as The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright, and The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. Just give them a chance. Hell, Wright is even one of you consarned theists.

Believe it or not - I know it sounds crazy - but the study of evolution has advanced quite a bit since Darwin. You might say it's experienced great progress... but I digress. We now know considerably more about the twin mechanisms of inheritance, physical and cultural evolution. The unit of physcial inheritance is the familiar gene, whereas Dr. Richard Dawkins coined the term "meme" to describe a unit of cultural inheritance. A meme is essentially any idea, from written language to heroin abuse. Good memes - or sometimes bad ones, but that's beside the point - are passed on through the generations, as more and more people say "Damn, that's a good idea."

And what "good ideas" do we have? Facial scanning databases and drive-through pharmacies? National policy that hands out resources to third-worlders so they can open another 7-11, so they can get their equality of opportunity? Factories with animals hooked up to them so they can cannibalize the young ground into food pellets and be radiated and genetically altered so a street-sweeper can have meat 7 days a week? Widespread eating disorders and alienation as a rule of culture? Thanks memes.

Since memes literally spread by word of mouth, rather than waiting perhaps millions of years for genetic mutations to develop, cultural inheritance is much, much faster than physical inheritance.

That makes it shitty. One little social gap caused by any large number of possible chaotic scenarios make people forget, or not give a shit, because this valued "cultural achievement" list is not compatible with the pace of their bodies or spirit.

We were never "independent and self-sufficient." A lone hunter in the paleolithic would have gotten his shit ruined;

Thats probably why people are not naturally solitary under most avoidable circumstances, ass.

there's nobody to help him trap and kill animals, and nobody to gather berries and such in case the hunt doesn't pan out.

What the hell culture have you ever heard of that consisted of solitary men going out by themselves as a rule of their society?

In days of old, we risked our lives every single day for a slab of fresh meat. We had terrible teeth, nothing even approaching health care, and we died at age 20.



That is pure fallacy.

How are we more dependent on nature now?

I think we are. Perhaps not more dependant on natural machinations, like the weather or seasonal migrations, but natural motivations have far more of a predominance than ever before. We are far more dependant on the concern to eat and breed all day than do anything that makes us better than binobos.

Cripes, back in the paleolithic, if you got caught in a heavy downpour, you were probably doomed to death by pneumonia.



No. If that were true, none of us would be here.

Of course my brain chemistry interprets the world around me. And of course I can't see what's beyond me. Because there's nobody up there, kids. Prove me wrong or shut the hell up.

Look. Thats usually good enough. You Since you seem incapable, you can just rely on the testimony and evidence of other people who have looked and found.



You're making a lot of generalizations about humans. I, for one, never said we had conquered nature, nor that we can see everything about it, nor that we've "gone beyond it." As for us advancing, I just explained why we've advanced, and explained in some detail the mechanism of it.

How can you call our machines and computers "advancement"?

And there is no absolute universal ethics set, unless you can whip out that God-proof of yours I keep hearing about.

The common denominators behind all ancient traditions point out the Primordial Tradition that is continually reaffirmed every day in all spheres of life, from the profane to the sacred. Even your precious and shitty, contingent world of biology and chemistry is subject to the laws of its principles, and manifest them for anyone who looks beyond the surface level of anything.

Look, we need not speculate on these matters. There are plenty of examples of peoples in history who've rejected sedentary agriculture and a life of settled convenience. They were called "barbarians." Mongols, Huns, Scythians, Cimmerians, Dorians, Medes, Avars, and Magyars, to name a few. The repeatedly robbed, raped, and murdered the decent, hard-working people of the Fertile Crescent and Europe. Every few decades, the horsemen from the steppes would crash down on civilization in great waves, killing the men, raping the women, and stealing whatever they could carry.

The poeple who farmed were often not related to the people who ruled over them. The land-owners never farmed and generally hated work. They roamed around killing people too.

So what?

When Chingis Khan lead his troops into the Khwarezm Empire, it was the single most destructive war, proportionally speaking, in human history. Something like 75% of the population was killed or lead into slavery. Every major population center was razed to the ground. Columns of refugees were surrounded and slaughtered by the rampaging Mongol tumens. Khan even went so far as to destroy the irrigation in the area - which is why, even today, Afghanistan and Central Asia are essentially deserts. Fun guys, huh?

Their culture and way of life was far superior to the inert one of couches and MTV that is so advanced today.

In the more traditional hunter-gatherer vein, we have the Yanomamo of Brazil and the !Kung of the Kalahari bush. Despite their supposedly enlightened and fulfilling manner of living, the !Kung have a higher murder rate than modern-day New York City.

You are arguing on a very human, liberal, shitty level here, obsessed with this percieved sanctity of all life, despite the quality of it. Why do you cite death like its the worst possible fate a man can undergo? Everything is going to die, get used to it.

Well, geez, what could possibly be getting on their nerves? Maybe people who've actually tried it don't care for a life of squalor?

The presence of the jet-age alongside them probably skews their perspective on life anyway.

Over in Brazil reside the Yanomamo, who determine alpha male status by bestowing honor and power on - get this - the most prolific rapist. The man who has attacking, beaten, and violated the most women gets to be the chief. By God, this is living, isn't it kids?

I dont think thats true.

For the record though, neither me nor Tyrant really think people from Africa or South America are men in the sense that you understand Humanity.

Tell you what. Put down your copy of Ishmael and take a little jander down to your local library. There you'll find such fascinating and enlightening books as The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright, and The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. Just give them a chance. Hell, Wright is even one of you consarned theists.

Science is a worthless confusion of effects for causes.

Tyrant. So you are upset that the current state of society doesn't come up to your standards and want to turn time back?

You could always wait ten years or so and then Mad Max would be a documentary or you could start doing some actions rather than as you call it 'rant' in a forum.

You fucking idiot. I give you reasoned argument, and what do I get back? Meaningless question-begging. Could you maybe present some reasoning behind your statements? Let's look at these brilliant rebuttals:

"That makes it shitty."

"This is pure fallacy."

"How can you call our machines and computers 'advancement'"

Oh, my, you sure showed me, Spirit! I'll start living in fear of mastodons and shitting behind bushes right away. Fuck, are you twelve or something?

Raging against memes, as a concept, is just fucking stupid. Every animal replicates efficient behavior from its peers, forming the building blocks of cultural inheritance. Humans are just the only species for whome cultural has largely supplanted genetic inheritance. Even your ahistorically virtuous hunter-gatherers had memes, such as "trap the mammoth in the ravine" and "rape that woman." And if you like those memes, fuck, you can have them. Idiot. Oh, and there you go again about the spirit and how we've lost touch with it. Still waiting on that evidence, kiddo.

And you blatantly contradict yourself. You piss and moan about how independent and self-sufficient we were, and when I pointed out how idiotically wrong this is, you just go "Duh." These are mutually exclusive statements, dipshit. Pick one and shut the fuck up.

Your response to established proven fact? Blind denial! Nice work! It has been established that hunter-gatherers DID have terrible teeth, DID have nothing compared to modern medicine, and DID, in fact, die at very young ages. What do you stack up against this? "That is pure fallacy." Oh... ok...

We are considerably LESS dependent on our natural urges than we were in your nonexistent golden age. Ancient life consisted of lust, some of the sexual variety, or the blood sort when it came to animals and sexual competitors. Why? Because we were monkeys then. Talented monkeys, but nothing more. It was the creation of agriculture that lead to food surpluses, which allowed people to take up different professions and hobbies. This allows some people today to become a celibate monk, to spend their life studying philosophy, or in my case, to drink heavily and try desperately to set ignorant asses like you straight. None of this was possible in your Garden of Eden.

Why do you think that somebody who you in a completely arbitrary, not to say brainless fashion declare possesses a superior lifestyle, therefore has the right to rob and murder innocents? Are you really such a fascist as that? Just because people are going to die someday doesn't mean you and your idiot nomad idols have the right to go around killing them for fun.

And in the next response, we see more of your denial of facts, plus some nice, blatant racism as a garnish. The habits of the Yanomamo are well-documented. Read a book and stop being an ignorant shit. As for Africa and South America, well, I've got some bad news for you, chum. We're all descended from the Great Rift Valley in Africa, so it looks like you're not human either. Sorry, so sad. Think before you say stupid shit like this.



[This message has been edited by Armed&Angry (edited 09-12-2003).]

quote:Originally posted by Tyrant:

don't think Darwin ever mentioned technology.

I don't think Darwin was ever established to be the final say on all things reguarding evolution.

Raging against memes, as a concept, is just fucking stupid. Every animal replicates efficient behavior from its peers, forming the building blocks of cultural inheritance. Humans are just the only species for whome cultural has largely supplanted genetic inheritance.

I didnt deny this, or say it was a bad idea. I asked what wonderful cultural legacy we are the proud bearers of. So we can eat more and produce food more efficently. A noble mantle of power indeed.

Oh, and there you go again about the spirit and how we've lost touch with it. Still waiting on that evidence, kiddo.

And I told you where to find it. Everytime man escapes your subterranean urges and is motivated by something beyond, "Eat, breed, repeat," you see that spirit manifested.

And you blatantly contradict yourself. You piss and moan about how independent and self-sufficient we were, and when I pointed out how idiotically wrong this is, you just go "Duh."

Which was followed by the reason why your definition of "indepednant" and "Self-sufficient" is ridiculous. Man was never "independent" in the sense that a single man was the master of his fate.

Your response to established proven fact? Blind denial! Nice work! It has been established that hunter-gatherers DID have terrible teeth,

So what...

DID have nothing compared to modern medicine

Thats like arguing whether or not they had something compared to modern automobiles.

and DID, in fact, die at very young ages. What do you stack up against this?

The fact that hunter/gatherers in the modern age that we had a lot of contact with, like Injuns, lived regular lifespans.

We are considerably LESS dependent on our natural urges than we were in your nonexistent golden age. Ancient life consisted of lust, some of the sexual variety, or the blood sort when it came to animals and sexual competitors. Why? Because we were monkeys then. Talented monkeys, but nothing more.

Do you know anything about ancient society? God was everywhere, and just about everything was a ritual.

It was the creation of agriculture that lead to food surpluses, which allowed people to take up different professions and hobbies. This allows some people today to become a celibate monk, to spend their life studying philosophy, or in my case, to drink heavily and try desperately to set ignorant asses like you straight. None of this was possible in your Garden of Eden.

I prefer a society with agriculture, personally. But I would never be the one to farm.

Why do you think that somebody who you in a completely arbitrary, not to say brainless fashion declare possesses a superior lifestyle, therefore has the right to rob and murder innocents? Are you really such a fascist as that?



What?

Just because people are going to die someday doesn't mean you and your idiot nomad idols have the right to go around killing them for fun.

Its not like ancient man couldnt fight back...

And in the next response, we see more of your denial of facts, plus some nice, blatant racism as a garnish. The habits of the Yanomamo are well-documented. Read a book and stop being an ignorant shit.

I read something about them and thought they were not worth further reading. The thing I read said their leaders were based on age and or hunting prowess.

But their ancestors also had no word for the number 3. They only ever counted their balls. Beyond that, everything was Many. That is not a normal human condition, and they are obviously a subhuman aberration.

As for Africa and South America, well, I've got some bad news for you, chum. We're all descended from the Great Rift Valley in Africa, so it looks like you're not human either.

I do not believe that. The science of it is flawed, the chronology is ridiculous, and the evidence is lacking.

But from an evolutionary perspective, it makes perfect sense that the closer we go to the origins, the more primitive, and thus less advanced, and thus less human. You know, the talented monkeys you cited earlier.

By what standard do you judge good and evil? Right and wrong? Improvement and degradation? Duty and obstacle? Loyalty and treason? Justice and crime? Natural and unnatural? And, more importantly: human from creature?

I'm not going to keep doing this idiotic crap with you, Spirit. Fine, enjoy your willful ignorance. If you hate society, good! Go live in the woods and die when you're 25. We won't miss you.

P.S. Tell your nonexistent god I said hi. And share Epicurus' Riddle with him, I'm sure he'd get a kick out of it.

Hegel was a fucking moron. I have absolutley no respect for him or Hegelians.

Spirit, how do you reconcile your instinctive desire for primitive independence and loathing of technology, consumerism and modern methods of warfare with your admiration for the Fascists and National Socialists? Pioneering rocket technology and revolutionising mechanised warfare may have been a means to an end (the destruction of enemies also possessing powerful projectile weapons) but you can't say the same about the development of Volkswagens and autobahns - mass production of modern technology for a materialistic people. Or the medical advances made by scientists who were amongst the strongest supporters of Naziism. It hardly seems likely that having eliminated their enemies, a highly organised, mechanised Reich adorned with extravagant monuments designed by Hitler would revert to traditional lives based on ancient spiritual traditions whose symbols the Nazis had appropriated rather than the "progress"-driven Nietzsche-based core of their philosophy.

Spirit, how do you reconcile your instinctive desire for primitive independence and loathing of technology, consumerism and modern methods of warfare with your admiration for the Fascists and National Socialists?

Because they showed how to use machines, not be used by them. Where the modern capitalist west looks at machines as a godsend to increase production for the sake of increasing production, the fascists saw it as a tool controlled by them to make their shitty and demeaning jobs less demanding and emasculating. They also did what was possible to keep the spirit and identity of the artisan, guild spirit in their work.

They also tended to not like it, and despite scientific advances during the war, the society they realistically envisioned was far less "Modern." By stripping the technology and means to learn about it from what would become the serfs and artisans and monopolizing it within the SS, as was the plan, life would be much simpler and far less reliant on machines.

but you can't say the same about the development of Volkswagens and autobahns -

Sure you can. Those were for the mass, whose power and expectations for material wealth and modern assumptions of living would dwindle or be forcibly extracted.

Or the medical advances made by scientists who were amongst the strongest supporters of Naziism.

Most of their mdecine centered on holistic, backyard, mom picking herbs kind of stuff. They had classes and seminars for reichs mothers and awarded badges for that sort of thing.

It hardly seems likely that having eliminated their enemies, a highly organised, mechanised Reich adorned with extravagant monuments designed by Hitler would revert to traditional lives based on ancient spiritual traditions

That was the social plan to be implemented in a time of peace.

You're playing with semantics, moron. You can't draw away from the fact that Nazism was directly responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of innocent people. You're not superior, you're not God, and you cannot decide who lives and dies.

[This message has been edited by Smile (edited 09-14-2003).]

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

You're playing with semantics, moron. You can't draw away from the fact that Nazism was directly responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of innocent people. You're not superior, you're not God, and you cannot decide who lives and dies.



Armed&Angry: - Your care for the "ecosystem" is touching, it really is, perhaps due to its supreme naivete. Do you honestly think the other animals of the world have such concerns for your wellbeing? When some Hong Kong flu breaks quarantine and kills millions of your fellow humans, do you think some of the viruses will protest the wanton killing of humans? Do you think certain portions of the world will be declared human sanctuaries? Wake up, dipshit, and stop imposing rules on the world that it does not and will never follow.

Imperium est recta. Pure and simple.

quote:the fascists saw it as a tool controlled by them to make their shitty and demeaning jobs less demanding and emasculatingAs does the average housewife. The concept of equipment as something to reduce the time taken on demeaning jobs is one of the driving forces behind consumerism. quote:By stripping the technology and means to learn about it from what would become the serfs and artisans and monopolizing it within the SS, as was the plan, life would be much simpler and far less reliant on machinesNot really. It would just be reliant on an elite which could use the machines quote:They also did what was possible to keep the spirit and identity of the artisan, guild spirit in their work.How? quote:Those were for the mass, whose power and expectations for material wealth and modern assumptions of living would dwindle or be forcibly extractedBy pandering to these expectations of material wealth

quote:Most of their mdecine centered on holistic, backyard, mom picking herbs kind of stuff. They had classes and seminars for reichs mothers and awarded badges for that sort of thing. I'm talking about the stuff that wasn't - the stuff that had the West abandoning their principles in the rush to employ ex-Nazis quote:That was the social plan to be implemented in a time of peaceAny documentary evidence for this? Because whether it's Himmler's plans for organisation and settlement of the East or Hitler's plans for glorious cities, the evidence points towards the ultimate goal of the Reich being a highly efficient organised empire of Ubermenschen conquering nature, not a group of small communities living in harmony with nature.

Your idiocy continues to astonish me. My point was two-fold. One, it's more than a little questionable to decry a man's failure to hug a tree every day, while condoning the wholesale slaughter of innocent people. It doesn't quite add up. Second, because humans are capable of the level of reasoning necessary for the establishment of social contracts, they should avoid violence as a system of establishing dominance and driving cultural inheritance - we simply have more efficient, less wasteful methods. This is where the idea of "human rights" is derived from. That's where I'm coming from; you seem to think you can murder people for the hell of it.

who says people can't decide who lives and dies?! That's a bunch of shit, people die everyday from such decisions.

And technology is the one of the strongest characteristics of humans. What's the point of taking a dump in the toilet and having the feces taken away when you could just shit in your living room floor? Disease that's why. Technology has allowed you to live alot longer than you should have. Industry, a product of technology, is a means of mass producing goods that help you to live longer, or better, or more comfortably. Controlling a countries industry, besides military defense, is one of the most important aspects to ANY succesful government at any level of man's societal existance. almost all forms of government employ this control to varying degrees. Why is this good or bad? I don't know, but rest assured that the vast majority of this country would be destitue while a very slim minorty goes apeshit selling this country's assets as fast as they can be exported.

[This message has been edited by Doofnoil2 (edited 09-14-2003).]

quote:Originally posted by FuckOffandDie:

I'm talking about the stuff that wasn't - the stuff that had the West abandoning their principles in the rush to employ ex-Nazis

Because the studies of the ex-Nazis is the foundation of what we know as contemporary science. American military technology, common medicines, and genetic research is all based on the work of German scientists of the Second World War.

quote:Any documentary evidence for this? Because whether it's Himmler's plans for organisation and settlement of the East or Hitler's plans for glorious cities, the evidence points towards the ultimate goal of the Reich being a highly efficient organised empire of Ubermenschen conquering nature, not a group of small communities living in harmony with nature.

That's the farthest thing from the truth.

Adolph Hitler: Ultimate wisdom always consists in understanding the instinctive causes - that is: a man must never fall into the madness of believing that he has really risen to be lord and master over Nature - which is so easily induced by the conceit of half-education - but must understand the fundamental necessity of Nature's rule, and realize how much his existence is subject to these laws of eternal combat and upward struggle. Then he will sense that in a universe where planets revolve around suns, and moons turn about planets, where force alone forever masters weakness, compelling it to be an obedient servant or else crushing it, there can be no special laws for man. For him, too, the eternal principles of this ultimate wisdom hold sway. He can try to grasp them; but escape them, never.

Dr. Walter Groß: When a people begins to die, when a people no longer obeys the laws of life, when a people values money more than its existence and posterity, this people is on the path to disaster, both historically and politically. Withina few decades it will be dead, oppressed by other peoples who are stronger, closer to life, and who follow life's laws better than we.

No sane thinker has ever said it is a good thing that we've conquered nature. That's why it's the core of Marxism.

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

One, it's more than a little questionable to decry a man's failure to hug a tree every day, while condoning the wholesale slaughter of innocent people. It doesn't quite add up.

I think that connecting with nature also connects us to primal instincts of dominance we claim to have separated ourselves from. Therefore, slaughtering inferior people that can't defend themselves in order to keep Nature's most deserving alive is more parallel to nature than your Republican way of thinking.

Moreover, I think it's more questionable (and deadly) to declare our superiority over natural disasters and obstacles when, once stripped of the most basic household technologies, we would be as doomed as the rotten-toothed 20-year-old pneumonia-afflicted corpses you see your ancestors as.

quote:Second, because humans are capable of the level of reasoning necessary for the establishment of social contracts, they should avoid violence as a system of establishing dominance and driving cultural inheritance - we simply have more efficient, less wasteful methods.

Why?

quote: This is where the idea of "human rights" is derived from. That's where I'm coming from; you seem to think you can murder people for the hell of it.

The idea of "human rights" also attempts to convince the public that equality is inherent in all beings and is the most natural thing in the world. Anyone with eyes properly placed on his skull can see this is obvious self-esteem increasing trash.

Not to mention that, simply because we have social cooperation, it does not mean we should automatically adopt a doctrine of global altruism because "we're more efficient."

quote:Originally posted by Doofnoil2:

And technology is the one of the strongest characteristics of humans. What's the point of taking a dump in the toilet and having the feces taken away when you could just shit in your living room floor? Disease that's why.

Only primitive Negro tribes defacate directly where people live, eat, breathe, and procreate. Most others designated an area separate from the rest of common living areas to defacate.

quote:Technology has allowed you to live alot longer than you should have. Industry, a product of technology, is a means of mass producing goods that help you to live longer, or better, or more comfortably.

Longer, yes. More comfortably, maybe. Better, definitely not. Indulgence in leisure has definitely halted the quality of Mankind.

quote:Controlling a countries industry, besides military defense, is one of the most important aspects to ANY succesful government at any level of man's societal existance. almost all forms of government employ this control to varying degrees.

I'm not a homosexual anarchist (though I confess, I used to be... God, I hate high school). Nations are a good thing. Just not technology and "progress"-oriented democracies like America.

quote: Why is this good or bad? I don't know, but rest assured that the vast majority of this country would be destitue while a very slim minorty goes apeshit selling this country's assets as fast as they can be exported.

What the hell are you talking about? You mean without government?

[This message has been edited by Doofnoil2 (edited 09-14-2003).][/B][/QUOTE]



[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-14-2003).]

quote:Because the studies of the ex-Nazis is the foundation of what we know as contemporary science. American military technology, common medicines, and genetic research is all based on the work of German scientists of the Second World War.In other words the Nazis were exceptional for their time in their devotion to "progress". Thank you for making my point for me.

"Conquering" nature was perhaps too strong at term - since Hitler repeatedly stated his aims were based on natural processes, sometimes using patently unsound arguments. In practise, Nazi philosophy and actions were the opposite, from their mastery of engineering to their unnatural eugenics programmes, they were attempts to improve upon nature. I'm looking for Hitler's plans to deindustrialise a post-war Germany, his declaration the mass-produced car he produced the initial sketch for was a temporary diversion which the people would abandon, his belief that natural processes would maintain the integrity of German blood and not artificial sterilisations and restrictions (NSDAP racial policies being no closer to natural law than dog-breeding).

Conquering" nature was perhaps too strong at term - since Hitler repeatedly stated his aims were based on natural processes, sometimes using patently unsound arguments. In practise, Nazi philosophy and actions were the opposite, from their mastery of engineering

Building temples and cities is not an obstacle to man's perception and understanding of a supernatural order.

to their unnatural eugenics programmes, they were attempts to improve upon nature. I'm looking for Hitler's plans to deindustrialise a post-war Germany, his declaration the mass-produced car he produced the initial sketch for was a temporary diversion which the people would abandon,

Of course that was the plan. The nazi worldview defines "The People" as a narrow aristocratic elect. They were not meant for a slavic farmer to tool around the Reich in.

his belief that natural processes would maintain the integrity of German blood and not artificial sterilisations and restrictions

That was only a corrective step because of 1000 years or so of essentially imposed behavior incompatible with a higher spirit.

Though I do agree that making a lot of the mate selection and child-bearing issues something to be officially regulated is a modern deviation. The question intially posed to me was why I like National Socialism. I was assuming the implication was that I thought it a viable system, not the Kalki himself to be followed to the letter because of its clear ringing purity of purpose and power.

Are you purposely trying to misunderstand me? Dumbass, I never said people are inherently equal. I said that, for sheerly pragmatic purposes, people should establish dominance in nonviolent ways, because it's less wasteful. Nothing about equality. It's just more productive to settle the question of superiority through, say, free market capitalism. But of course you hate that.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating. Nobody is making you use your modern computer or live in your modern house. Drop it all, and move to the woods. You have the power, yet you're not doing it. Come on, hypocrite. If it's so superior, why don't you do it?

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Are you purposely trying to misunderstand me? Dumbass, I never said people are inherently equal. I said that, for sheerly pragmatic purposes, people should establish dominance in nonviolent ways, because it's less wasteful.

And letting a people incapable of self-defense live isn't wasteful?

quote:It's just more productive to settle the question of superiority through, say, free market capitalism. But of course you hate that.

Because it defiles what once made people, both as groups of people or as whole cultures, strong.

quote:I've said this before, but it bears repeating. Nobody is making you use your modern computer or live in your modern house. Drop it all, and move to the woods. You have the power, yet you're not doing it. Come on, hypocrite. If it's so superior, why don't you do it?

Because plane tickets to Europe cost quite a bit.

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-16-2003).]

Then go live in the local woods, pussy. Quit talking big and do it.

quote:Building temples and cities is not an obstacle to man's perception and understanding of a supernatural order.No but V-rockets and Volkswagens are little better than the American cruise missiles and SUVs you despise.

quote:Of course that was the plan. The nazi worldview defines "The People" as a narrow aristocratic elect. They were not meant for a slavic farmer to tool around the Reich in.So materialistic goods are natural and good when the ownership of them is restricted to a selected group.

I guess SUVs would be spiritual if Mexicans weren't allowed to own them...

quote:That was only a corrective step because of 1000 years or so of essentially imposed behavior incompatible with a higher spirit.What "imposed behaviour". The tendency for people to mix with other tribes is a natural inclination dating back to prehistoric times. Preventing Germans and Jews from marrying is imposed behaviour reminiscent of the imposed behaviour (both by Jewish society and the indigenous rulers who tended to dislike them) of the past 1000 years. Sterilising the mentally or physically handicapped is an artificial process which corrects nothing but birth defects usually unrelated to the social history of the past thousand years (and ignoring the natural corrective process which meant that the mentally and physically handicapped would rarely reproduce because people wouldn't want sex with them)

quote:I was assuming the implication was that I thought it a viable system, not the Kalki himself to be followed to the letter because of its clear ringing purity of purpose and power.I thought your admiration for Fascists and National Socialists went beyond merely considering it a "viable system". I think elements of fascism are viable systems but don't have any affection for Il Duce or consider Hitler to be an "avatar" whose birthday is an occasion for celebration.

Sorry.

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Then go live in the local woods, pussy. Quit talking big and do it.

Cheap accusations at manhood indicates you're at a loss for rebuttal. I'll take that as a victory.

quote:Originally posted by Tyrant:

Cheap accusations at manhood indicates you're at a loss for rebuttal. I'll take that as a victory.

Ha! Nice try, nature boy. Call it a victory if you like, but putting a bow on dog shit doesn't make it a Christmas present, now does it? The fact remains that I live by my moral code, while you refuse to live by yours.

Yes he does. Our morality is not self-centered, and is not based on or really concerned at all with merely our own happiness. What good is a cabin and a regular life if the world around it is killing god and is dedicated to rooting out all vestiges of anything resembling quality?

Oh, ok, and your solution to that is to continue to live the evil life you decry and use, for example, foul and unnatural computers. Makes perfect sense. Oh, no, I forgot, you're a hypocritical ass.

No one said that the use of a computer is evil. The dependence on it for interaction or entertainment achieved more naturally, however, is a bad thing, and something I am not guilty of.

You are purposely arguing this on the most banal surface-level concievable. Neither of us are talking about the inherent evil of "Technology." A sword is technology that both of us, Id imagine, are very comfortable with and approving of. Our quarrel is with the abandonment of the self in this technology, the idea that is anything other than a very contingent and empty standard to meaure or appreciate anything of worth.

Furthermore, where did I say that all life except the most primitive of the forest is unnatural or undesirable? You are building straw men.

quote:Originally posted by Spirit of '22:

How can you call our machines and computers "advancement"?

Are these the words of one who believes technology has its place?

Contemporary and modern man has taken the technology he's created over the past 200,000 years and used its luxuries and efficiencies to replace his most prized possession - his body, in both the quality of his physical condition and the strength of his spiritual mindset.

Now, his Wendy's binges have put him over the obesity line.

Now, his prescriptions for Prozac are commandeering his assets and corrupting the quality of his family life.

Now, his consumerist job has him buying the latest in automobiles and satellite dishes instead of teaching his children about life and his family's history.

Now, his television programs and magazine covers has his twelve-year-old daughter lying about her age to attract eighteen-year-old men's sexual attention.

Now, his lack of preparing his son for life and the eternal struggle inherent therin leaves the child painting his face before school and hiding firearms in his trenchcoat before he heads towards the school bus.

Now, his lack of pride has left his wife to immerse herself in a masculinizing career lifestyle, devoid of maternal instincts and leaving her children with the care of random babysitters, spending her husband's money on birth control and pedicures.

Now, his fantastic materialistic lifestyle has left him without purpose and shows him one more reason to will his own demise.



These are the memes which have improved humanity? These are the cultural evolutionary mutations that have enhanced the quality of human existence? This is natural and worth pursuing?

No, a thousand times, no!

Yeah, okay, I get it. But you're only focusing on the negative. What about the kids who don't shoot up their classroom, and instead take the good with the bad and learn how to live with people? What about the fact that those "Wendy's binges" are entirely the result of the natural human desire to consume whatever is available? More importantly, who are you to declare a working man's life "purposeless?" If he's good at what he does, and he derives pride from doing it, why the hell is it your business? Why the hell do you care how others live their lives? Stop being so goddamn mellowdramatic, and mind your own business.

What happened to my post?

Ah, it was short, I will just say it again.

Are these the words of one who believes technology has its place?



Yes. Technology's place is not as a marker for whether or not a way of life is Advanced or Primitive. It does not define the worth of a people and has no place in defining superior or inferior.

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Yeah, okay, I get it. But you're only focusing on the negative. What about the kids who don't shoot up their classroom, and instead take the good with the bad and learn how to live with people?

They're slowly becoming a minority.

quote:What about the fact that those "Wendy's binges" are entirely the result of the natural human desire to consume whatever is available?

Society is convinced that this is natural, acceptable, and encourageable.

quote:More importantly, who are you to declare a working man's life "purposeless?" If he's good at what he does, and he derives pride from doing it, why the hell is it your business? Why the hell do you care how others live their lives? Stop being so goddamn mellowdramatic, and mind your own business.

I meant from his perspective. The reason people kill themselves is because they see their lives as meaningless, not because other people do.

I'm not trying to be melodramatic. I'm merely repeating what is typical, and my distaste for it.

Ed: bold tags

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-18-2003).]

No, they're not slowly becoming the minority. They've always been the majority, and according to every statistician who's ever studied the matter, the number of school shootings has actually declined in the past thirty years. Check your goddamned facts before you post stupid shit like that.

Hey, dipshit, binge eating is natural. I fail to see why you should view it as unacceptable for others to do; worry about your own diet. And who is actively encouraging obesity? Christ, even McDonalds is offering new healthier meals.

I'll share this advice with you - as the philosopher Hugh Akston put it in an Ayn Rand book, "Contradictions do not exist. If you see a contradiction, check your premises; one of them is wrong." It seems contradictory that man would imprison himself in the modern world, and yet he does. You need to accept the possibility that maybe, just maybe, he likes it. And if he doesn't, he can go live as a hermit anytime he likes.

No, they're not slowly becoming the minority. They've always been the majority, and according to every statistician who's ever studied the matter, the number of school shootings has actually declined in the past thirty years. Check your goddamned facts before you post stupid shit like that.

And? I disagree that they (being these not so bad, kinda positive folk you mentioned)are "slowly becoming the minority," (as they always were) and likewise disagree that They have always been "the majoprity." Most people have been and will always be slaves to what is ignoble and soulless. As the code of the Samurai says, Right and wrong mean good and evil. Right is good, wrong is evil. Ordinary people are not totally devoid of understanding of good and evil, but they find it boring and tiresome to act rightly and strive for goodness. Acting wrongly and behaving badly is fun and familiar, so they drift toward things that are wrong and bad, and it bcomes tiresome for them to do right and foster good....You will find that it comes from cowardice."

Anyway, that being established.

I'll share this advice with you - as the philosopher Hugh Akston put it in an Ayn Rand book, "Contradictions do not exist. If you see a contradiction, check your premises; one of them is wrong." It seems contradictory that man would imprison himself in the modern world, and yet he does.

Last i checked, 999 out of every 1000 people born into this world have no say whatsoever in the worlds affairs or culture, and at best can only try and cope with it. You or I did not create, nor do we actively maintain, the modern world.

You need to accept the possibility that maybe, just maybe, he likes it.

Some do, most lie to themselves and think they do. In either case, human acceptance of human values and standards is literally irrelevant in gauging somethins legitimacy.

Most people do kid themselves. Thats why there is so much visible degeneration, alienation, and psychological trouble absent in more traditional societies.

Tyrant/Spirit of 22.

I know you.

You have decided that the modern world does not suit you. You have decided that it is corrupt and you want to retreat into a golden past which never existed. Fine.

I am amazed by the bigotry you betray here. Niggers and lesser races. Your wife and your children (nice possesive pronoun). You show contempt for everyone around you. Nothing is real to you except your self.

This does not suprise me the one thing all Nazi's have in common is a lack of empathy.

I doubt very much that you do not avail yourselves of every conveniance and comfort the modern world can provide. Nor do I think you would hesitate to use modern medicine if you are sick.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold the goddamn phone. You started by implying that the majority of kids (good ones are "slowly becoming the minority") have the potential to become columbine-style killers. Now, you back off and simply say that the majority don't follow your (entirely subjective and more than a little stupid) philosophy. Why the retreat, old chap?

You then follow this by going off on a ridiculous tangent about who controls world affairs. As I have repeatedly stated, you can leave any goddamn time you like. Why don't more people leave, if it's so natural?

And the opinions of others are irrelevant? By what standards? Because other people aren't crypto-fascists like you? Hmm, good call. I see the error of my ways, now that you've totally refrained from reasoned argument.

And what's really interesting is that you totally refrained from addressing the binge-eating section of my post. Nice... ignoring it like a coward. Truly you shall lead us into the future, Spirit.

quote:Originally posted by crimson parrot:

Nothing is real to you except your self.

We've both established previously that what we can immediately perceive is not the whole of reality.

quote:This does not suprise me the one thing all Nazi's have in common is a lack of empathy.

We lack empathy only for the void of vitality and empty of soul.

quote:I doubt very much that you do not avail yourselves of every conveniance and comfort the modern world can provide. Nor do I think you would hesitate to use modern medicine if you are sick.

Which shows that you don't know either of us.

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-19-2003).]

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold the goddamn phone. You started by implying that the majority of kids (good ones are "slowly becoming the minority") have the potential to become columbine-style killers. Now, you back off and simply say that the majority don't follow your (entirely subjective and more than a little stupid) philosophy. Why the retreat, old chap?

Fascism: the worldview that states that a Nation exists in spirit more than mechanics, therefore both existing beyond the individual, and also gives a higher meaning to the day-to-day struggles of life, and implements that sharpening sense of knighthood into its political policy.

Columbine-like killers: weaklings who had neither the physical or psychic capacity to cope with the struggles of life, and therefore shot as many people as possible, and then themselves, in an attempt to escape it.

No retreat.

quote:You then follow this by going off on a ridiculous tangent about who controls world affairs. As I have repeatedly stated, you can leave any goddamn time you like. Why don't more people leave, if it's so natural?

Most (weak) men are attracted to things that allows them to stay weak - like the modern world of luxury.

quote:And the opinions of others are irrelevant? By what standards? Because other people aren't crypto-fascists like you? Hmm, good call. I see the error of my ways, now that you've totally refrained from reasoned argument.

They are irrelevant because modern and weak men will always impulsively look towards the path of least resistance. They would not choose a life of hardships, regardless of the fact that it would strengthen their honor and nobility. They would act like children, only accepting what is sweet, soft, flashy, fast, greasy, and/or colorful.

quote:And what's really interesting is that you totally refrained from addressing the binge-eating section of my post. Nice... ignoring it like a coward. Truly you shall lead us into the future, Spirit.

The collective psyche of humanity has degraded from concern of souls, spirituality, Nature, God, Eternity, and Life's entirety, to bank accounts, fast food, and Maxim magazine. We are not as strong as we used to be. That's all that I've been saying this whole time.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold the goddamn phone. You started by implying that the majority of kids (good ones are "slowly becoming the minority") have the potential to become columbine-style killers. Now, you back off and simply say that the majority don't follow your (entirely subjective and more than a little stupid) philosophy. Why the retreat, old chap?

Because, youre confusing Tyrant's statements for mine, and the former statement is his, the latter, is mine.

You then follow this by going off on a ridiculous tangent about who controls world affairs.

Because you said that modern man "built" the modern world, as though every Joe Sixpack jackass with a slut for a daughter and a career wife everyday consciously chooses modern world vs traditional one.

As I have repeatedly stated, you can leave any goddamn time you like. Why don't more people leave, if it's so natural?

And the opinions of others are irrelevant? By what standards? Because other people aren't crypto-fascists like you? Hmm, good call. I see the error of my ways, now that you've totally refrained from reasoned argument.

People's minds change, and can be closed, atrophied, enslaved, fooled, confused, etc, and thus, are not consistent. Reality is a constant. So, opinions are not an acurate measure of any Absolute.

And what's really interesting is that you totally refrained from addressing the binge-eating section of my post. Nice... ignoring it like a coward.

There is nothing to ignore. That argument was between you and Tyrant. But since you asked my opinion, I think binge-eating is natural. So are an infinite number of cowardly garbage behaviors. Nature yields to supernature, and exists relative to it. Its natural to lie to your father, kill and eat him, and impregnate his girlfriend. So what?