Why don’t you take a toke to slow things down for a bit and relax?
Eurpeans: Your first take on your freedom
Sure thing man, with pelasure.
What that dude here doesn’t understand or fails to, is that in our human nature and evolutionary heritage to manifest compassion, be altruistic and help others even selflessly for the benefit of the ones around us, and it developed just as beautiful things as love we have out there for eachother and manifest, and we do it selfishly but also selflessly in the same time and is a great thing. Is part of our complexity as a whole. And we need to stick to that along with the fact that we need to keep being intelligent and dismiss malevolent practice and intent and violence. We manifest the later mentioned because we still hang on to some parts of our primitive state. Sure we do everything to survive but we would be fighting over bones in the steets if we were to follow that part of our nature and means to justify them at every pace.
Sorry for the edits and inconvenience, it just needed edits so I can compile reply over and over just to avoid the spam of reply in the section.
That’s fine. I simply wanted a summary as I said it was a little hard to follow.
I think the arguement being made however is that even by striving for these more utopian beliefs we need to be aware of the fact that it is not a level playing field. The simplest way to put it is “you can’t uninvent something”. So considering that greed and corruption exists negate the possibility of an entirely altruistic society? It would simply take someone willing of violence to dominate a non violent society. The same of a liar in an honest society. Dismissing the concept from yourself doesn’t remove it from existing, it actually makes you more vulnerable to it because of a lack of understanding yes?
1 Like
Everything is about context. Of course the world is not all roses, but that should not stop one to aspire for a better world. The trick is just not to be too naïve nor be too pessimistic, because neither seldom ends well. The patch often lies somewhere in the middle.
1 Like
Well, obviously here is about choice. You either choose to do something meaningful for you and ones around you and contribute and be a positive and towards the better peer for yourself and other or you choose not to. But that doesn’t put you in the spot of not dealing with consequences. Individualism has its limits.
Also, nobody tries to implement an utopia, the idea is wrong here from the start. Being or trying to be kind, generous, considerate, loving, altruistic, conscientious with yourself and others doesn’t mean you lack to identify threats of one’s who are willing and able to do harm. It just means that you wish to make the world a better place, after all existence itself is full of crappy stuff, suffering, malevolence, cruelty…you name it, what difference do you think it makes or does it make you feel any better for contributing to the negative factors mentioned? If you do, then something is not right with you as an individual, mentally speaking. Utopias will probably never work, but better working and functioning societies base on more considerate peers can and do exist.
However I do not get where the “communist” type of lable comes from especially when you try to talk sense into folks from the U.S. On this specific issue.
Is similar in manner but the opposite when you discuss with folks from the East, like Russia or China, about what need fixing and what is wrong in their parts as a standard social practice and way of being. If you have a more liberal view they call you out as being a, quote “libtard”, or other slurs that are horrible and disgusting as well.
It seems people don’t understand or pretend they don’t or don’t want to, even humanism as a way of life, ideology, and concept like this guy here doesn’t. Despite great people like Albert Einstein being a fan of the thing, practicing it, and not only him.
That being said is a poison of the mind of people not being able to accept the new, or innovation…i to anything. It reaps and causes things like stagnation at most levels and that is not beneficial at all. Progress and innovation are a must, and if they weren’t…we would have found ourselves living in the stone age. Is bad that some major innovations came, and progressed, when horrible things like wars or conflicts came to happen. Again, conflict, another part of our primitive side…and should not be mistaken or justified by means of competitive spirit. There are different things each and if we study history and philosophical ideologies we find out differences that some do not know or understand or fail to understand.
Thank you, point well made. 👍
I don’t disagree. I simply feel caution and awareness of some of the failings of humanity are required. It’s a lot easier to ignore uncomfortable aspects of humanity when striving for the betterment of.
2 Likes
Nobody said we should ignore, on the contrary here history is our best teacher. We should learn what NOT TO DO. 😉
Being cautious is also fine, and if you wish for a better view and outcome of the human species doesn’t make you flower power either. It just gives you and others hope for the better including in how you can cope and do things for the better. Even as a simple individual. By all means.
All those walls of text and you finally get the point.
Yes, people who virtue signal do it because they can afford to at little cost to themselves. Case and point it takes nothing to talk big talk about your humanitarian plight on the internet while also being an insufferable cunt complaining about your facebook ban.
Wars are the biggest periods of innovation in history, do you know why? How are you deciding what’s “good innovation” and “bad innovation?” The same way you think you know whether or not human nature is inherently good when there is more pointing toward the opposite?
That if everyone shared your ideal you’re bullshitting around that communism would work, ofc.
Amazed at your inability to answer questions. Typical, people want something that they can’t even define.
Still waiting to see what percentage of people also partake in your glorious humanitarian aid quests and that should tell us how much everyone cares about humanity outside their tiny family units, right?
Maybe I’m just not grasping your point then.
This to me suggests the concept that human beings generally strive toward the betterment of their peers naturally as a method upon bettering themselves as well. A point with which I counter by saying that the very fact the concepts of greed and corruption exist disproves this naturally altruistic human nature and suggests another aspect to human nature.
We seem to agree on this. Where communism and the idea that individuals that people are more cautious and aware of the more negative aspects of human nature don’t actively strive for better ideals comes in I’m currently unsure of.
Dude, what is your problem? I just said that me fore example along with plenty of others, do altrusim or practice it selflessly regardless of what you choose to think or false impression you may have.
You should check with a doctor if you like to denigrate people like that, what did I do to deserve what you called me there? How old are you? 8?
Where did I say that? Are you OK?
What do you do selflessly, susan b anthony?
Read again the text. Or better learn how to read and drop the insults. You only make a fool of yourself. Don’t be and act like a Karen.
Man stereotyping a group of people based on their name doesn’t sound like the path to world peace to me
Being peaceful doesn’t take out the ability to spot a person who has bad or stupid intentions like you do. Talking about being able to identify and also deal with what is wrong here, eh?
Also, do you choose or give others proof that you are being a Karen? You do a pretty good job to be like one so far.
Ohoho but from my point of view the jedi are evil. Define “bad or stupid intentions” thanks. Giving your house to a homeless man would be a selfless, stupid decision yes? Or you just do it for the 5 minutes of fame?
And Remind me again what the issue is with people named Karen.
Who would go to extreme as to do what you say there? Doesn’t the homeless mane have arms and legs and a head to think in order for you to help him selflessly achieve his resolve and get out of his condition?
What you said there is naive, more naive than simply trying to help people anyway you can a person out of a situation or problem.
Because its an altruistic action that has consequences. If its of little or no consequence to yourself then is it a truly altruistic action?
??
So if he doesnt have arms and legs do you give him a house?