7
   

Another problem

 
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 15 Mar, 2014 03:50 am
Having served in the United States Army in wartime, and in two different theaters, i'd say television programs don't have a lot to offer me. I do see that that's how you would get your information, after running it through the filter of your silly narratives.
0 Replies
 
Ding an Sich
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Mar, 2014 06:10 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

No, the key point to you is that, once again, as always, you get to sit up in your ivory tower and glibly pontificate on mattes about which you really know nothing. No one goes into combat for the first time knowing what the experience will be like.


Couldn't agree more.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Mar, 2014 08:17 am
@Ding an Sich,
Agree with what ? Presumably Setanta was - drafted/had no choice - which underscores my general point that the history of humanity is largely shaped by social forces rather than the specific psychology of individuals (allowing of course for the exception of the psychology of belligerent dictators). The OP is about the "progress" of humanity and the irony is that technological progress tends to physically distance would be combatants from each other thereby detracting from the potential empathy factor in "morality" as evidenced for example by the accounts of bomber pilots. Setanta makes only one "key point" and that is his belligerent attitude to my responses. Maybe the "combat experience" which he brandishes at us has left more marks on him than he realizes.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Mar, 2014 08:54 pm
That we remain social animals.
Ding an Sich
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 04:24 am
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Agree with what ?


I agree with what I quoted him on? Are you blind?

Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 05:53 am
@Olivier5,
I agree with you. We are nothing but social animals. Not more advanced but more sophisticated. Social forces are still the predominant factor in the way we choose to live . Over time, the focus changes, but we as humans are still plagued with the same attributes we have always had; except there is a change in social structures, political power shifts, and of course the scapegoat always changes.

The need for power and social stature remains....perhaps as a survival technique. Sure, we have greater knowledge of communication, technology, our own bodies and science in general . However, our knowledge is infantile in terms of the cosmos( let's call it that).

Gendercide exists, as well as famine, human trafficking, exploitation of the poor, appropriation of land and resources by force. Yep...we tend to pay attention to what is politically correct. After all, we still want to feel good about who we are right?!

Things are as they have always been.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 06:30 am
@Germlat,
Germlat wrote:

I agree with you. We are nothing but social animals. Not more advanced but more sophisticated. Social forces are still the predominant factor in the way we choose to live . Over time, the focus changes, but we as humans are still plagued with the same attributes we have always had; except there is a change in social structures, political power shifts, and of course the scapegoat always changes.

The need for power and social stature remains....perhaps as a survival technique. Sure, we have greater knowledge of communication, technology, our own bodies and science in general . However, our knowledge is infantile in terms of the cosmos( let's call it that).

Gendercide exists, as well as famine, human trafficking, exploitation of the poor, appropriation of land and resources by force. Yep...we tend to pay attention to what is politically correct. After all, we still want to feel good about who we are right?!

Things are as they have always been.


That may not be. I respectfully suggest that to assert we ARE "infantile in terms of the cosmos" is a step too far.

We humans may be among the most advanced (our "knowledge may be among the most mature) of any beings in the universe.

Really no way to know.

If all entities evolve as we apparently have here on Earth (figuratively referred to as survival of the fittest)...with all the implications of that sort of selection...

...perhaps every evolving entity arrives at a point similar to where we are now (technologically at the point where we could conceivably destroy ourselves while not at a philosophical point where we are certain not to do so)...

...and almost every one does destroy itself.

Perhaps our stage of evolution is where almost every evolving species becomes a bubble that bursts.

There may be very, very few more advanced than we. No way of knowing right now; not enough information for a meaningful guess.

Just sayin'.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 07:09 am
@Ding an Sich,
Oh ! You agree with the insult and/or the irrelevant comment about my supposed lack of combat experience.
Sorry, I thought you were saying something significant with respect to the OP.
Olivier5
 
  0  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 10:45 am
@Germlat,
Quote:
our knowledge is infantile in terms of the cosmos( let's call it that).

Gendercide exists, as well as famine, human trafficking, exploitation of the poor, appropriation of land and resources by force.

Knowledge (e.g. science) and morality have nothing to see with one another. One can be a great scientist and a criminal. Morality is learnt from parents and role models and life, not from books and labs.
Ding an Sich
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 01:18 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Oh ! You agree with the insult and/or the irrelevant comment about my supposed lack of combat experience.
Sorry, I thought you were saying something significant with respect to the OP.


Sorry you misread that.
0 Replies
 
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 04:08 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I do agree with not denying possibilities !
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 04:09 pm
@Olivier5,
I agree !! I don't think anyone would disagree. What's your point ?'
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 04:37 pm
@Germlat,
Germlat wrote:

I do agree with not denying possibilities !


That's why it is best not to write something like: "However, our knowledge is infantile in terms of the cosmos( let's call it that). "
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 08:39 pm
@Germlat,
I mean that moral development is not linked to scientific and technological progress. I understood the OP "as advanced as we claim to be" as a reference to scientific progress, perhaps wrongly.
Braink37
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Mar, 2014 10:45 pm
The human race is as advanced as as a race can be. There was a point in our evolution that our brain was big enough and we had the resources ( thumbs) to take off, so to speak. Once recorded history was developed that was a major resource for intellectuals, and then came science replacing religion just recently and we are still learning and will continue to learn forever because every door that gets opened just leads to more doors. Lying actually is evidence of cognitive development so everyone is born with the ability to be disorderly on purpose and for most people, it is too good of a payoff not to try to get away with what they can. By nature some people just need to be controlled. Systems need to be developed for advancements in society to be made. Systems = general welfare = happiness = reduced inclination for disorderly behaviors. Wait... You were suggesting anarchism and self controle. Not possible
0 Replies
 
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2014 07:26 am
@Olivier5,
Moral development is no more than social adaptation. Morals are subject to change with time and culture. Science and morals have nothing to do with one another. "Morals" however, do affect science in terms of advancement ( think embryonic stem cell research , animal testing, etc).
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2014 08:40 am
@Frank Apisa,
In my view our knowledge is in it's infancy, since we realize how little we know. We have only set foot on the moon, have had robots/probes land in Mars and Venus, and had intentional impact with Jupiter. Also...it wasn't until this century that we realized the universe is expanding. It took us ( Voyager 1) 36 years to finally exit the solar system . I'm no expert..but maybe you know something I don't . Sorry I took so long to reply. I was away on travel.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2014 09:11 am
@Germlat,
Quote:
Moral development is no more than social adaptation.

Social adaptation to what, exactly?

Quote:
Science and morals have nothing to do with one another.

My point entirely.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2014 09:24 am
@Germlat,
Germlat wrote:

In my view our knowledge is in it's infancy, since we realize how little we know. We have only set foot on the moon, have had robots/probes land in Mars and Venus, and had intentional impact with Jupiter. Also...it wasn't until this century that we realized the universe is expanding. It took us ( Voyager 1) 36 years to finally exit the solar system . I'm no expert..but maybe you know something I don't . Sorry I took so long to reply. I was away on travel.


In your earlier post, you made an assertion: "...our knowledge is infantile in terms of the cosmos( let's call it that). "

Here, you offered an opinion: "In my view our knowledge is in it's infancy...".

I merely called attention to the fact that the original assertion might be incorrect...and I suggested a scenario in which it would be.

I appreciate and acknowledge your opinion. In fact, I hope your opinion is correct...and that we learn a lot more in the future...if we are wise enough to allow ourselves a future.

Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2014 10:24 am
@Frank Apisa,
I know understand what you mean ha-ha. ..I meant our knowledge.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Another problem
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/20/2019 at 12:55:07