John Wilkes Booth

you talking about the laogai, bro?

cause that **** didn't start 20 years ago...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laogai#History

OccultHawk

I'm aware of those examples and Sagan wrote extensively on outrageous chimp behavior. I carefully avoided saying "all" of the non-human animal kingdom. I'm not even sure about plants.

RoxyRollah

Why is that funny? Just because eqaulity was achieved from the times you're talking about up until now doesn't mean the moral fiber of the country hasn't gone down in quality.
I don't understand the world any more and I'm frightened that we're going to end up enslaved.

__________________

Guybrush

On humans and animals, humans came about by the same processes that created the other organisms on our planet. The basic premises are the same. For example, genes have selfish interests. It doesn't matter if you're a plant, a bacteria, a fungi, a protist or an animal like Homo sapiens. Our genes have to somehow further their existence or go extinct. This leads to selfishness and hence, nature is itself is full of conflict. Chimpanzees may go on cannibalistic raids, plants compete with eachother for space and light, fungi engage in chemical warfare on other fungi and insects and the area where two different corals meet is a warzone. Members of a species compete with members of its own species as well as members of other species. Generally speaking, that's the way life is for humans and other organisms and looking at things comparatively, humans may not be particularly bad. As previously mentioned, we are actually very good at cooperating.

Regarding morals, my comment was on how social media is helping to speed up changes in moral values. Other factors may also help to do this, like a free press or democracy. I think peoples moral values are generally improving and I was mainly thinking of the parts of the world that really engages in social media. I use the word "generally" because there are always exceptions. If you don't agree with me on this, that's fine.

__________________
Something Completely Different

John Wilkes Booth

i think that it's relevant, tbh. abolition, women's sufferage, the civil rights movement, etc all came about from moral questions

edit - i do know people who think our moral fiber is declining, because of rock and roll music, drugs, broken families and sexual indecency etc. and i understand morality is subjective, as mentioned before. but it is largely a matter of social consensus. there's no universal morality, but there are basic values that more or less an entire society can vaguely agree on, i think. so i am open to the idea that morality has declined in certain specific ways. but i think if we make general statements about the moral fiber of the country, we should include all moral questions, and prioritize them by their relative importance. and while i know people who might regard the above mentioned issues as important, i don't know anyone who doesn't regard murder, rape, slavery and systematic oppression as severely immoral acts. so in achieving or seeking to achieve equality, we have improved the moral fiber of the country (and to some extents the world at large) in some very important ways, imo.
can you elaborate?

Trollheart

No I don't think so. I originally responded to Mr Charlie's completely baseless and hippy response, asking him to back it up. He then went into some stuff about how we're all hard or softwired to do this or that. As he was getting hung up on the semantics of the word I explained that I think we are genetically, historically and instinctively predisposed towards war. It's in our blood. I don't see where I changed anything, I just explained further what I think of it. Perhaps it was worded in a way that confused some people, so I redefined it for them.

The basic premise remains. If Mr Charlie, or anyone else, had replied, as some did, with what I would consider more informed and well-thought-out answers than "look into your heart" (Neo, can I get a puking emoticon please?) then I would have been prepared to discuss it more. But a line like that is worse than childish. There's no basis for it. You might as well say "every person is a rainbow". It's claptrap. Sorry, but it is. And look into your heart and you might find some dark demon looking back at you. Not everyone is pure inside, as MC seems to think.

Edit: I've nothing against you MC but when you post something like that you set yourself up for ridicule.

Edit two: I think the only possible way peace can be achieved, a lasting peace, would be for every person (male at least, women don't seem so warlike) to be lobotomised, then nobody would care about what anyone did, or have the incentive to do anything. I certainly would never want to see that, but with a shared history like we have, I cant' see us changing any time, and certainly not voluntarily.

Look at it this way: a man finds a rock in the middle of a forest. He decides "This is mine!" and stands guard over it, night and day. Another man comes up and asks what he's doing. The first man tells him and advises the second man he can either join him in protecting the rock, leave, or he will fight him. The second man decides to join, and stands guard over the rock too. When a third man appears, they attack him and drive him off. Word gets around and before you know it, there's a horde of men attacking, others joining to defend, the rock that nobody even wants.

Stupid, yes, but it illustrates the lengths men will go to to protect what they believe is theirs, and how they will spill blood to retain it. Replace the rock with a country, any country, does it now seem so silly?

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Guybrush

Just off the top of my mind ..

The best way to ensure peace may be to have a totalitarian dictatorship that efficiently enforces laws that ensure peace and prohibits differences, disagreements, behaviours and situations that lead to conflict. If people are free to disagree, then conflict arises. For example, if people have the freedom to pursue different religions, then religions may clash. To keep the peace, it's better to outlaw all religions, perhaps save one.

It might also be helpful to eradicate cultures, dialects and to breed people so that mankind was more homogenous. Freedom of speech would obviously have to go and free press as well. Such a nation would probably attract the ire of neighbouring nations and so that could cause war on an international scale, but if such a nation came out the victor and could assimilate all of mankind, then peace could be maximized and war minimized.

__________________
Something Completely Different

Mr. Charlie

No worries, man. It's all good.

grindy

Yeah, I often think that utopia and dystopia lie really close together in a way.
I'm totally unable to come up with a decision though, whether a society like that would be worth it or not.

__________________
A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.

RoxyRollah

I can only say this. ....The illuminati, they do exist.

And tbh until people's hearts change those actions we mentioned are merely that, immorale acts.

__________________