Basically, yeah. Again this is more of a historic injustice thread so I wouldn't have been so blunt.

Unless you're vocalizing a presumption about me? I'm a religious philosopher. You can give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish... Poseidon might show up and invite you to party in Atlantis.

Anyway it's just human nature. Sometimes out of intelligence, sometimes out of laziness. You learn to work or invent something that works more efficiently... your time and efforts are maximized. And so will those of others. I mean, come on, is anyone who uses something that's not a virtual Rube Goldberg machine foolish or lazy?

I've thought about it. Unfortunately (or perhaps even fortunately) you tend to get less interested in the vain and materialistic dreams we're presented with 24/7. It'd be nice to take some cool and decent people somewhere nice every now and then. Few gifts maybe. Folks who deserve it. Though money, power, and influence are a trio seldom seperate, I just think there are more important things then mansions, yachts, and vacations that surpass the average teacher's salary in cost. Of course. These are not temptations that I have the opportunity to resist or indulge in so, who knows lol.

Myself, I'm fine with edible enough food (seasonings and spices can turn something ok into something great), place to stay, beer to drink, a car that's not a clunker, and a few folks to talk to. Anything else is just anything else. We all like nice things though.

I understand this discussion is more about historic injustices but my thoughts when I read the title before clicking....

"People confuse privilege with reward earned through effort."

Basically yeah, why would someone have invented the polio vaccine, the steam engine, the lightbulb, or the computer if they could just sit around all day. One should be careful in the pursuit of equality not to devalue human effort entirely.

How did you grow up, fdrake? You're a mod so you're open to more scrutiny of course. Did you enjoy it? Eitherhow, others who did, usually do.

So you like to let people sit in darkness when you say you have an answer. Don't knock your own creation. It might knock back.

Because if you did care about equality and "education" you would share your belief- "cold hard facts", sorry- with someone less educated. Yet you don't. Which shows your attitude is far worse than your presumption of any so called elite you speak of. See. You're no different. At all. Perhaps no one is.

the interests of the financial/corporate elite over and against those of middle and working class Americans. — Enai De A Lukal

Why do people work? So they can be rich like them. You can set a negative example or a positive one. Which would you prefer?

He can be pretty abrasive. But "that's why people like him" apparently it's "real" lol. Never know though... never know. Perhaps one day. But not now.

Wow. Then again when diplomacy fails... long live politics!

...at first I was trying to be concerned, allegedly. But the fact that semi-unique word is used by him only an hour after I suggested you should... is interesting. Politics, man. Game of Thrones. Good people can be controlled by emotions, by those without. Trust no one. Especially on the internet.

Or to put it in meme speak. I'm in ur inbox eating ur PMz.

Fight battles of spirit not flesh. Or mind not matter. Of course, spillover can always occur.

Who or what stop someone from trying to get ahead or perhaps even steal. Who controls them? This is perfectionist, idealist, utopian... wrongness. Lol.

Everything we eat turns to shit. — Frank Apisa

Which turns to fertilizer. Which in turn grows more food. Ergo, buying groceries is a scam. :wink:

These 10 words not only served to delay my response, but also required me to temper my response a number of times. For that, I thank you. — Scemo Villaggio

Just more of what I was saying. Gotta be right. Gotta have core beliefs protected and unchallenged. Until. Well. Let's not worry about that.

Shouldn't take much. It's already the majority view- by far. Summed up by the repeated use of "my". What works for me vs. thee, essentially.

Not quite so nuanced and black and white though. You seem to at least recognize the difference in an intellectual manner which already places you far above the actual majority. God speed. And good luck. Not that you need it... then again, not that I know your situation, perceived or not.

That's the paradox. One leaves another comes in. Why not just say the way to prevent death is for life to leave. Lol. Everyone has to make it worth their time or at least cover expense. Difference is, some won't bother with wellbeing of others. Unless they know they have to. Open media they say. Do the most powerful countries not have persons who care nothing about others and just want to smash and grab while keeping a clean image? Absolutely. Instead of being unrealistic, it's best to be discerning. Educated. Connected. And open. Options weighed. Like they say, better the devil you know.

Only chaff likes to see others complain and in misery. With or without cause. Crab mentality in a nutshell. Of course, the best chaff knows to appear as wheat, which can at times fool even the wisest of folk. And of course, no one knows what circumstances fathered a person and their mentality, views, attitude, or mannerisms. Someone awful could have secured much wealth and prosperity for a sibling who now lives in perfection that interacts with someone whom it was stolen from that now lives in anguish. You judge using a simple observation of the two you may miscategorize.

It's not something folk are meant to do. That is, your judgement is of your own and for your own. The ultimate process is something that takes far more than any one lifetime. Besides. If it were of such urgency, the amount of chaff would be in numbers where complaining is far from their first option.

Eliminating ie. de-incentivising via education and enlightenment versus fascist suppression of human thought and free will in a person's own mind for goodness sake is a world of difference. You can create a system like that, but you won't be able to control it for very long.

"Unexplained neologisms, distorted grammars, contradictory phrases, unusual meanings of words, endless sequences of ideas without conclusion, unstructured texts..."

Any of these from someone well known.

In a word, no. That's why it's not science and total enslavement. Lol. As some would say... always when they do harm to others never when it's done to themselves though. Then all the hands folds and knees bow.

Post some examples of short passages that encapsulate what you mean.

Bury the human story then. If you don't remember the past it's sure to repeat itself. The solution is thought police. Which is doable if you're the majority. Otherwise, I wouldn't recommend it.

Ironic how backwards and detrimental doing so would be toward preventing corruption, The utopia you imagine is actually a dystopia of the worst kind. I have a feeling people confuse eliminating corruption with eliminating people talking or knowing about it. Am I wrong?

How so? You don't know you'll be around long enough to ensure any offspring is raised desirably, even if you are you don't know they'd follow along.

Maybe then. For the past 300 years- at least- science has been advancing and creating so much including possibility the imagination is barely able to keep up. And this presents a new danger. Or perhaps... the two are one and the same.

Obvious answer. Like a suicide pact. You never really know if it's carried out.

What kind of things at the hands of modern day humanity could be described analogously with pandoras box? — Benj96

Science. Technology. Both already proven to a ridiculous extent.

You can't really blame Pandora though. Someone created both her and the box. It can be argued the nature of both Pandora and the box should perhaps have been more adequately accounted for.

Tongue in cheek, sounds like more women bashing to me. :grin:

You're stubborn, I'll give you that. — fishfry

Ah. Harkens back to the last words of the state as they executed the heliocentrist. Before they were disproved and later overthrown of course. How reminiscent.

You insult me by acting like you aren't trying to insult me, when your objective is clear. — Mac

I do apologize for that and would like if you believed that was far from my intent other than to say yeah, as far as quantifying life and other decent ideals I was merely asserting a kind of nurture over nature defines our sense of morals, ideals, etc. I even said you were presumably a decent person.

We're on the same page as far as objection to OP's premise. Mine is simply solely based on the fact no one is perfect as shown by DNA evidence exonerating people often some who spent decades incarcerated and so you could be performing inhumane acts on a perfectly innocent man when you think you're not. That could have unexpected ramifications.

I go through great pains to seperate the art from the artist. I don't "know" anyone here personally so like most people hopefully they respond to ideas, concepts, and assertions versus persons, personas, or anything personal like that.

Great. Until you get drunk and take your dog skateboarding while flying a kite playing loud music and get hit by an ambulance you couldn't hear and now not only you but everyone inside the ambulance dies. lol

I think it's wrong to quantify the values of human life. — Mac

Because you're (presumably) a decent person. Know nothing of you personally but you more than likely had a tolerable upbringing and currently have a tolerable existence. Who knows what you'd be like if neither were true.

Where there is death, I'd like there to be none, rather than less or some sick exchange of life. — Mac

Embracing perfectionism and idealism is a sure way to end up with neither.

I can't just propose we use those in the 1% that are concentrating my nation's wealth as test subjects because I feel they must pay for their negative impact. I personally think the 1% are worse criminals than most murderers, but I can't honestly say one is truly better than the other, or that we should use low-lifes for experimentation. — Mac

Bruh we all use their systems. You're using one if not many more simultaneously now. You don't know for sure (though I will admit it's probably not unlikely) that all or even any of them aren't decent people who perhaps know more than you or I. So the guy who revolutionized the world (arguably for the better or worse) by inventing the computer or the iPhone shouldn't be rewarded for their works proportionally yet you or I should simply because we're not of the highest class? Which is virtual life imprisonment btw and total removal from society. You can't really go anywhere or do anything. You'd get kidnapped, killed, tortured, or just constantly challenged by those with inferiority complexes.

Even if you're just a minor celebrity or local politician. You'll never know the true nature of people and experience the life that comes with it. Everyone will always either put on their best face because of what you have and can do or their worst because of what they don't and cannot. And no one will truly sympathize with someone who can afford mansions and decide laws that govern others because why should they? Shoot even I'm getting a little pissed thinking about someone doing either lol. Which is my point. You never know the thorns in someone's foot until you've walked in their shoes. Just some random food for thought on the interwebs I guess.

An inmate is already serving their time or will be put to death. Prison and lethal injection are torture enough I think. — Mac

There we go. Real talk.

As I'm sure would be asked, what are some examples? Emotions are something to factor in that hinder yet do not explicitly constitute what mental limits are. Or do they?

Are limits not meant to be broken or at least the reaching of them made tolerable?

Ideas, emotions, concepts? Opinions, views of things? Potential energy ie. a rock atop a hill?

Example I can visualize some insanely grotesque I dunno creature that's part Earth say like a rock wall of a cave that's alive, moist, and throbbing with a giant eyeball in the center of it. It doesn't "exist" really but it does in my mind. If I share the idea or imagery with another person does it exist more? If some scientist goes insane and somehow creates it physically in this world it does exist. What point between simply imagining something fictional for a split second and it manifesting in the real world does something cross between non-existence and existence? There has to be a transitional period that can at least be more easily rationalized over another as having qualities of none or qualities of both.

Come on @A Seagull, help me out lol.

I see you have no physical disabilities then and take mobility for granted. Arguably there is little that can be done to instill to you it's value.

Oh hush. If you had one that didn't render you completely unable to function and needed something another had that would die as a result of not your taking of it but presence, long story short the thing you needed would be taken and death would occur.

All the time!

The statement is proven accurate in a subjective way at least. In the 1600s "space travel is not possible" was a fact- subjectively. When it's dark where you're at saying "it's night" is true. Until it's not. There is more to it of course. Space travel was not objectively "impossible" at that time (someone could have in theory built a functional rocket ship if they knew how and had the materials) nor was it night halfway around the world.

Depends what aspect we're going for. Duality vs. non-duality comes to mind. There's reason never to become too accustomed or comfortable with things to the point of passivity. Complacency kills- and is the single greatest destroyer of not just lives and civilizations but worlds. Why is it so insidious? Because you intrinsically don't perceive it as a threat. It's what everyone works to gain. And no one fears to lose.

If that power is held what's stopping that from happening. Couldn't be more than ignorance or laziness. Self indulgence and realizing greatness really isn't a thing you do once and forget about resting on laurels for all time perhaps after deciding it's too much for you. But that's not the point.

If there's a problem find out why and where and solve that problem. You have to make that great again first or as some will say for the first time... surely we're not afraid of a selfless challenge that really isn't. Otherwise. In a word. Entropy. As shown.

What is there to figure out really? What is is. Until it changes. Then it's not. Then that is. Lol. Not too complicated really.

What I was going to say (love your name btw, not sure why but it brings me great joy whenever I see it) is to the casual onlooker it doesn't make a whole great deal of sense to say something can both exist and not exist. Something being hidden is one example but that is subjective or as some would say semantic. Essentially many would argue it has to be one or the other. Though I feel there are rationalizations that have weight beyond absolute subjectivism and semantics. Can't think of them now though. Perhaps you can?

Not at all. I'm saying we don't have to because it's already been done. Is it perfect? Not by far. Is it better than earlier systems factoring in the whole overpopulation thing? Absolutely and indisputably. It has mechanisms to correct itself when corruption rots and corrodes inner workings. Some of these are external of course.

To respond to the title, probably enough people asking if I strike you and you feel pain, and you would ask me or perhaps act in order for me to stop, why you think it would be okay to do it to someone else.

To the post, unless you live in Antarctica somehow or perhaps some isolated African jungle, it's called law and order and government. Already done lol.

Assuming the philosopher is employed as a philosopher say in a setting with other philosophers and the entrepreneur is stupidly wealthy... you can inverse the two and your post would still be correct.