The utility we produce for the rest of the population is nil- perhaps our contribution through consumption (and the growth of GDP unwittingly), and some twisting of logic with the butterfly effect may be some counter arguments here (that all the small things contribute somehow to an outcome), but practically speaking, as we usually understand the term in common usage, not many people "contribute" in a way that increases the utility a great deal to the populous (of a country/world). — schopenhauer1
Most of us go to work, consume, have some hobbies, friends, and family to fill the time. The utility we produce for the rest of the population is nil — schopenhauer1
The whole idea that some of us are the "Giants", those whose epic contribution has pushed human civilization to advance to such a level is a construct of the society itself. We just need rolemodels, heroes, stars, VIP's, etc. And many scientists are pushed to us as some wisemen (or women) and asked typically they don't have any clue about and give horrible answers as such. We just need this stupid narrative of these overachievers being some kind of guiding light for us ...and that others are moronic idiots who's life is meaningless: the people as they say. It's just the society itself wanting these "giants".While we pidder away on the piddly forums of distraction.. the Giants are in the forums of world-changing events that contribute to the welfare of the many. How they get there and we are stuck here is the interesting question. — schopenhauer1
Therefore, what about the other 99%? Are we just here to consume the major contributions of others through their products/services/findings/innovations and to sing their praises? — schopenhauer1
So, this does not need to be limited to just the ones in the major histories and documentaries, but anyone who contributes to major innovations that are recognizably useful, admired, and appreciated by a large population of people. — schopenhauer1
In 1546 Girolamo Fracastoro proposed that epidemic diseases are caused by transferable tiny particles or "spores" that could transmit infection by direct or indirect contact or even without contact over long distances.
And it's an important problem because everyone would like to do great things, and yet most of those who would like to do great things always fail. And as we all know, it's not worth always trying if you always fail ;) — Agustino
And these people are fine with the idea that they will never achieve their ambitions - because the stars may never align. They never depend on fulfilment of their goals to live a content, and otherwise meaningless life. In other words, they put it all on the line - either they will fulfil their ambition, or they will be nothing at all - no middle ground. — Agustino
Sure - the gods have not given everyone winning cards. Why should they? The challenge is how to play your cards well, not how to win :)Okay, but as you seem to note, this means that the 99.9% are always shut out from the real gears of technological, social, and aesthetic change or appreciation. — schopenhauer1
Haha it's a joke from a good movie I've seen :PThanks. — schopenhauer1
I think someone is dealing with feelings of inadequacy. — Jeremiah
Also this brings up the idea that we do not need to progress humanity. What for? Why are we pumping more units of people out there? So Jeremiah can be on a philosophy forum and comment? So you can really "do" something? Why create the "do something" in the first place? Why do we need to create people so they can do something? So basic, but no one really has a good answer, without sounding like a smug, arrogant prick. — schopenhauer1
If you can't find meaning and purpose in your life unless you become some great historical figure then that is a problem with your ego. — Jeremiah
Also this brings up the idea that we do not need to progress humanity. What for? Why are we pumping more units of people out there? So Jeremiah can be on a philosophy forum and comment? So you can really "do" something? Why create the "do something" in the first place? Why do we need to create people so they can do something? So basic, but no one really has a good answer, without sounding like a smug, arrogant prick. — schopenhauer1
You are trying to define the value of life relative to its contrition to society. — Jeremiah
Yes; you are just failing to see the connection. — Jeremiah
Why do we need to create people so they can do something? So basic, but no one really has a good answer, without sounding like a smug, arrogant prick. — schopenhauer1
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.