If you could change one moment in history

I would stop the destruction of the library in Alexandria.

Good choice.

I can't think of anything I'd like to change. I don't believe anything would change significantly anyway. We are mere primates, and no matter what you throw at us we end up with the same thing, something both fantastic and horrible, and entirely human.

If the fable about Pandora and the opening of the box was true, I would try to stop her from opening the box, just like I would try to stop Adam and Eve eating the ill-fated apple.

Wishful thinking.

would have changed te birth of a dememtec, lunatic and scitzhophreniac caveman, somewhere in the er.. "middle earth".

Hitler's starting WWII. Ineffable suffering (not just from the war, but from the aftermath [Yalta, etc.] )would've been averted.

What if one of the many people that were killed by Hitler carried a lethal disease that would wipe out all humans were it not for the fact that its carrier was gassed and disposed of. One never knows. Maybe, if we could see many alternative histories, we'd see that Hitler was actually the lesser of evils? Strictly hypothetical of course, I do not support nazism.

I do not believe that Germany around the time Hitler came into power would have been saved from dictatorship if Hitler had been stopped. The government of the time, the times themselves, made it so that the country was easy picking for anyone with a brilliant mind for it. If not
Hitler, then probably someone else. The outcome could have been worse just as easy as they could have been better.

yalta?>

Not bad.

I have been doing some serious research into Epicurean theories of Ethics for a book I wish to write and am finding myself sick of reading Doxographic sources for my research. The librabry in Alexandria would have had all of Epicurus's 300 rolls.

I have to think more on my moment.

TF

Yalta:

"The conference at Yalta held in the Crimea on February 4-11, 1945 brought together the Big Three Allied leaders. During this conference, Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt discussed Europe's postwar reorganization. The main purpose of Yalta was the re-establishment of the nations conquered and destroyed by Germany."

Source:

http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/World/YaltaConf.html

TF

Nothing. Everything that happened happened for a reason. Like Cyracuz said...WWII was awful and terrible and a blemish on the face of humanity but what if he was the lesser of two evils? (I do not either, support Nazism)

ty TF for the yalta.

Bella Dea..... where is the irrefutable proof that everything happened for a reason (i mean everything DID happen for a reason...if there was no WW2, then so many people would not have died.. so one can always say that the reason WW2 happened was to enable so many peopel to die all together etc....BUT whats the proof that everything happens for a GOOD reason).

what theory can prove that what might have happened if ww2 had not happened, would be worse than ww2 - therefore its a beautiful thing that it happened.

?

Bella -

Do you believe in free will?

I do not think you can believe in free will and make the statement 'Everything happens for a reason.'

Here is why I think this:

If everything happens for a reason - and those reasons are not yours, (i.e. God, fate, or some other deterministic force) then everything happens for reasons beyond your control and you no longer have free will.

A little more formally:

Everything happens for a reason.
Those reasons are not yours
Nothing happens for your reasons
Thus you do not have free will.

Thoughts?

TF

Yes ttf.

But-suppose you thinking you have free will is also determined.

Remember the physical states of the brain idea.Are you suggesting there are non-physical states of the brain.Fair enough.But if there are only physical states of the brain they have been brought about.

Thoughts?

The conversion of Saul/Paul, who spread a corrupted version of Jesus' ideas to the Gentiles. The differences would be incalculable.

Cyracuz, it is far more likely that one of the soldiers killed in WWII would have found a cure for cancer or an inexhaustible energy source than that one was carrying a lethal disease which he failed to spread in spite of the close quarters and poor hygiene of battlefield conditions.

I confess that i have no idea about what you are talking.

could you enlighten me or tell me of a site that would? what was corrupted about what "saul/paul" did and what incalculable differences would have come about if you could prevent his conversion? i am weak in history.

Brahm, there's an old canard that Saul (who after his conversion became "Paul," which means "little one") supposedly distorted the message of Jesus. Never mind that it was Jesus Himself who called him and appointed him the premiere apostle to the Gentiles (see in the Bible the Book of ACTS, chptr. 9:1-22). And earlier, while He was still on the planet, He stated, "The one who listens to you [those whom He sends] listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me." (LUKE 10:16)

A lot of people think that the historical abuses by institutions that call themselves "Christian" (think of the Inquisition, for example) would not have happened had dastardly Paul not messed things up. Of course, what they fail to notice is that he himself, just like the One who sent him, never resorted to violence (after his conversion; while he was still a Pharisee, of course, he viciously persecuted the new Christians).

Maybe Terry. We can never know for sure.

ttf wrote:


I've said it before, but it's worth repeating. In life we are powerless to change anything but our perspectives.

I've always thought of free will as something rather stupid. Free as in free from thought. Action without consideration, the way monkeys do (and a great number of humans too). The oposite is free thought, thought unguided by will, meditation in a way.

thethinkfactory

It has been pointed that there is a difference between "everything that happens has a cause" and "everything happens for a reason".
The first sentence has to do with causality and imposes a strong limitation to free will, but does not make it impossible.
The second sentence has to do with "purpose". And purpose, by definition, supposes free will - even if it is a God's free will.

I refuse the idea that there is a plan, a purpose. Nothing happens for a reason. That was Hegel's idea, "the astuteness of reason": something bad happens now, in order to make possible that a good thing occurs in the future. I think this is absurd and reflects a distorted vision of History.
Given a situation, multiple events can occur. But only one will occur.
Martel could have lost the battle of Poitiers , the battle could have not happen, the battle could lead to a piece agreement, a storm could have drowned both armies ...
But, due to several circumstances, including Martels will and the will of his officers, he won the Poitiers battle.

I read (in a website on the net) an article on the library of Alexandria, and it said, it had information that if it had survived, the Industrial Revolution would have started hundreds of years ahead of its time.

True or not, think about it. Look what the Industrial revolution has done to our planet.