How about just 50 then. Your avatar suggests there's something you value about that time.

Another reason could be as far as why entrepreneurship has declined in general... is that some believe something along the lines of "everything that can be invented already has" and the same with thoughts, words, concepts, and ideas.

I don't think there are many strip malls or plazas I could visit today that, assuming they keep everything in stock, wouldn't be able to keep me alive, happy, and then some for several lifetimes. Of course, for all we know they said the same thing 2,000 years ago...

Seems to be the future is technological innovation. Advancing medicine, computers, science, all that. Not so much neat trinkets or personal devices. Though it will produce plenty.

The idea of a philosopher using his knowledge and insight to "set up a company" and earn money in a way that becomes exponentially easier after the initial hard work up front is what we're talking about I gather.

Well aside from the fact that competition and variety for the consumer is needed to spur innovation and be a natural guard against price gouging, there's always gonna be hard or at least constant work to stay ahead or even afloat. It can be done. With patents. But unfortunately logic alone won't guarantee a successful and profitable business, especially in today's moneymaking fields of technology, science, medicine, defense, etc. You need technical "nitty gritty" knowledge as well. Gotta either learn it all yourself or find someone who does you can trust (which is the real challenge) and go from there.

I don't think you misunderstood anything it's just called reading some dude's opinion and finding it to not make much sense. lol.

Let's try to answer the premise though. Let's name some unquestionable answers and unanswerable questions, if you may. Some I would say are...

What happens if your heart stops? Your body dies.
What happens when an ignitable substance is introduced to a flame or spark? It ignites.

Etc...

Compared to unanswerable questions.

Is there life after death in a realm that is undetectable to us here and now?
What is the item in a box that someone placed there that we cannot see or open?

Unanswered vs. unanswerable is something to factor in.

Good points made in the thread already. It's a matter of subjective views on an ideal that should be objective. Seems to me there's two groups of people who believe in it. Those who want to maintain and restore values (courtesy, politeness, equality, just general non-toxicity) and those who want to subvert or change them and society from longstanding, time-tested tradition (Christian holidays, ideal gender roles, importance of the nuclear family, etc.)

And as some replies suggest, then there are those just putting on an act. No one in government or any position of anything should be using slurs, bigotry, or anything that makes the place or group they represent seem like a toxic nightmare world. Now perhaps they'll go and be as PC as can be at work, then go home and use slurs in private. Not unexpected.

As was mentioned there's a big difference between using and not using hurtful racial or ethnic or other slurs compared to saying or not saying "spokesperson" or "Merry Christmas". There is free speech however. In and of itself it cannot be illegal for a random citizen. Now the stupidity is dangerous and punishable by social measure. See the FedEx driver who fatally assaulted a man in Oregon after being called the N-word. All charges were dropped. I'm telling you guys this equality thing is working.

You can't know what is fiction without knowing what is fact. So what is fact? If there are none, how can we be sure fiction even exists?

Safe word here is 'perception'. Either backed up by enough to compartmentalize it where the at this point theoretical 'fact' goes or just you calling it as you see it.

Oddly solipsistic if you ask me. Which may or may not be detrimental to advancing the philosophical thought process.

Perhaps it's not overpopulation in and of itself.. but of those who are unable to offer a humane solution ie. technology either by super efficiency in resources or colonization of planets. lol.

Of course. Neither matters if everyone still keeps trying to destroy each other. Might as well be contained here than be allowed to run amok elsewhere.

So is it the thought that counts, basically?

Pretty much summed it up. Depends. lol

I'm sure we could all think of a thousand scenarios where one view holds water where the other doesn't.

Moral philosophy you say.

Well thanks to freedom of thought you're free to choose you're own way.

Let's think of two inversely relevant examples.

You try to stop your neighbor's house from burning down and though you have a hose outside that can reach it is small and the pressure is low and so you instead reach for the phone to call emergency services. Say for some reason there's a bee on it which you happen to be allergic to and perish.

It burns down. No one was home and the pad was insured for a cool few million. Your neighbor collects, moves, and goes on to start a business that turns into a large global chain and ends up benefiting your home town beyond anything anyone could have imagined. Whereas if you had extinguished the fire, the house would have remained, let's say continued to lower property values and the area would've became a financial and investing wasteland leaving both you, him, and everyone else in financial ruin.

Unlikely? Yeah. But possible. One consolation is if a large enough perception of a well-intended action can not only null but reverse a negative effect. Say people see it decide to start a funding raising campaign that does exactly that. Of course, it falls on perception. Meaning literally none of the aforementioned needs to have happened only people need to believe it did,.

Public opinion rules the world and therefore is reality. Only religion can say otherwise.

Visually or logically? There's a distinction. Perhaps not a great one.

Would seem to me the mind seems to prefer complete shapes mixed with open accent patterns. Say a marble column accented by a wreath.

Could be wrong but that's just what it would seem based on the prevalence of pattern and design that seems to have gained popularity/stood the test of time.

The deeper mechanics to that (if correct) are at the moment an enigma.

Aesthetics. Ornaments. Etc. Very interesting and worth delving into full discussion about.

Pretty for one. Perhaps mentally invigorating or even occupying for another. Perhaps the concept of "balance" or even symmetry plays a role. Who could say.

Non-visually as in logic or math. Well it's just what happens when your brain connects two and two together. That's, after all, how we advanced so far. Is it simply trying to find shortcuts mentally or something greater? Now there's a debate.

1. what does having made a simulated universe say about the civilisation that made it?
2. given that the simulation is, or should be, undetectable by those inside it, how, precisely, does its existence communicate anything to anyone else? — Kaarlo Tuomi

That it knows how to turn minerals into circuitry, at least. Most civilizations are diverse, just because someone from somewhere did a thing doesn't necessarily represent the society.

What do you mean by "those"? Is my World of Warcraft character it's own person now for some reason? Getting into AI/trans-humanism otherwise. Very controversial. Is it like a memory transfer thing where I exist outside of it and a character with (assuming it could be possible- my exact memories and persona per se) is in this simulation and so can develop itself further and become someone else? How would it be tied to me, here?

Show me something that I cannot call nothing and believe it as such.

For that matter, show me nothing that I cannot call something.

A non-reply could be a shunning and carry greater message then many replies could.

Lots of people do lots of things for lots of reasons. Usually it's because they either have seen both society and culture both with and without faith. Or they want you to think or behave a certain way and view them as something elevated above this world and naturally yourself. It's probably 50/50.

The intellectual argument is simple. People want what benefits them here and now and if there is a later, later- and want to be on the winning side. Which alone begets a society of immoral leeches. So. You change things up. Suddenly faith has value. Not being a degenerate suddenly doesn't pay out automatically. It's pretty solid. Say you have a family business and have no heirs. Who do you want to look after it? Someone who thinks it's essentially without value, who you met as a literal nobody and has no reason to believe otherwise and convinces you they truly love the business for what it is, or the first prick who responds to a crap load of dollar signs if the paperwork is in order? Common sense, really.

There's flaws in every system. Decency can be abused and good intent turned into something of greater detriment than ill will. It's not perfect. That's why it is. Get it?

Less to worry about. Simple enough. Though some will write books to argue otherwise...

Can't help but want to label this as a good and productive thread. Even though some concepts, unbeknownst to the purveyor, can have insidious qualities.

If you "enjoy" something, does it not make sense to ensure you have ample time and resources to do so? Absolutely. But that's not what philosophy is about. It's about experience, perception, "viewing things from all angles" especially the most common and even at times the most undesirable and from there rationalizing and so and so forth new or forgotten avenues of thought one can use in life. Usually with the goal of benefiting a society, people, or perhaps even yourself.

Does philosophy make money? If you're a highly paid professor at a top university, it sure will. Or an author with an interesting and original enough premise. Or just the go-to guy who always has something intrinsically useful, beneficial, or at least interesting to say, will get you ahead in life. On a cynical hand, some may say something along the lines of if the doctor is too good the hospital will close. You'd want to hope most don't think like that but like it or not the logic is there. Many applications that philosophy has, sciences particularly theoretical fields, counselors, therapists, business analytics, trends, there's hardly a field that doesn't have at least a tangential use for philosophy.

As far as the entrepreneurship part goes, one view is that the logical man seldom gambles. He can. And may make a fortune. But it's a risk. Granted the more planning and fail-safe-esque procedures and mechanisms you can employ reduce it. But some just don't live life like that.

Erm..



Little late for that.

In a way people know this. You don't walk out from the theater after seeing a superhero or an alien movie wondering if it was a documentary do you?

Society of monks, hermits, or peoples who otherwise avoid eachother for whatever reason. Or perhaps, the go to example, a society of open slavery are examples of a society engaging in antisocial or otherwise subhuman/dehumanizing behaviors are they not?

Fantasy becomes reality all the time. An early society of homogeneous peoples discussing the idea of "other people just like us but different" somewhere in the universe. Traveling the ocean. Space travel. Instant communication between peoples halfway around the world. Too many to list. You're using a floor as a ceiling by reducing the idea of society or reality-inducing change as "fantasy" in order to preserve belief.

You're confident in its value, correct? Why not just turn it into cash then. Shouldn't be a big deal.

I know there are many who cannot stand such ideas but I don't intend to re-fight that war. — Kenosha Kid

War? No it's a debate. To some perhaps it is. You see something dead, therefore it is. Which even if refuted still elevates us only slightly over what preys on an opossum. Not worthy of lengthy debate. The only war was the one over people who necessitate the idea of war over living and sharing ideas that do not seem to conform. This was won long ago. Curious huh. A war that- by it's own definition of victory- can never be "truly won". How's that for irony.

The true moral condition of the global virtual social group is then:
1. do not harm others to benefit yourself (unless you can absolutely get away with it)
2. help others as you see fit
3. oppose harm as you see fit — Kenosha Kid

1. Conditional blether. Otherwise implies people get into accidents on purpose.
2, 3. Do whatever you want.

Sure. Why not

But these do not constitute a nihilism. Antisocial behaviour still exists, is still hypocritical, and is still sub-human. Those who pool wealth and resources at others' expense, who in small social groups would have been attacked, exiled or lynched, are still moral (i.e. social, not rational) failures. One is not obliged to oppose the harm they do, because one is not obliged to oppose every harm committed in one's lifetime, but if one is inclined to oppose harm, it is morally meaningful to oppose that harm. Likewise racists, misogynists, rapists, drug dealers, paedophiles, political opportunists, looters, etc., etc. You are justified in ignoring or opposing them, so long as you yourself are not a hypocrite. To oppose racism and be racist would be antisocial on all grounds. — Kenosha Kid

Blanket statements, even when supported by all current social standing or "reality" that can be disproven under basic differences and changes are somewhat this. If the majority of society as a whole engages in either antisocial or subhuman behavior and as a rational man you seek to avoid it, this presents a paradox. You can't be subhuman for avoiding subhuman behavior. Or if you can, how so?

All those newly-established words of negative connotation are unfortunately how everyone got here and most fundamentally continue to exist. Where they are, with what they have, etc. Except for drug dealing. That's subjective to objective laws placed subjectively. They could ban caffeine. All of a sudden if you trade in coffee or energy drinks that's you. Basically the idea of using the word hypocrite is logically like misplacing a past tense with a present tense. Not much debate to be had. Granted the idea of a utopia has long existed before any civilization has and people naturally want to be part of this, especially over another that is less so. So naturally we gravitate toward not what manifests this but what convinces us it will, obviously because we view these as one and the same.

Anything can become corrupted. The idea of an eternal and omnipresent accountability is exactly that. Who do you or did you value or look up most to in life? Why would you want to forever be a murderer, thief, or degenerate in their eyes? Forgiveness doesn't indemnify all just what is needed. Or does it? Depends on your philosophy.

It doesn't really matter now because it really didn't matter then. I mean. It did. The entirety of humanity, society, and civilization is captained by public opinion. Then and now. But it never made the world less round or more flat. It never made the Sun revolve around the Earth or vice versa.

Pragmatism is the term we need to familiarize ourselves with. That some people arrogantly call "reality". Of course. It's simply the pragmatic thing to do.

So basically where you decide to believe the idea maybe you don't know what you're doing or basically that yes doing things purported to cause harm do in fact cause harm or equally yes assuming you wish to drive across a stable bridge you do what supports it and avoid what doesn't. Synonyms for common sense are infinite I suppose.

Lot of unpacking to do first and foremost as far as your OP.

Passive activities or casual hobbies that degenerate or increase in an observable way factors that detriment health. Opposed to active self harm. Which usually involves others just saying.

Not sure "where you be" per se but unless you live in a society where neighbors toss their dead into the woods to be eaten by wolves... someone pays for it. One way or the other.

While the place is in no high ground to shoot down short posts.. yeah. Really ought to expand on whatever more deeply. Learn to use non specific metaphors. I have a friend who.. such and such.

What was it about? Did you read... the whatever. It's not whatever you know.

It's about what you give up and what concepts and values that made you the happiest, perhaps as early as you can remember, that you denied to others to get to where you describe. Of course. Things aren't always as black and white as they are purported to be.

one of us will get fed up and tip the board — Lif3r

If such a thing can be done the person would merely be oppressing an equal or inferior even. I thought that was pointless? Or bad?

110 billion humans — Lif3r

Wrong planet? Lol. Happens. :grin:

Correct. That would be popularity. And depending on the current society could be something very terrible and frankly undesirable.

It just seems we're still stuck on the same old false paradigm of acknowledgement being equated with existence. Reminds me of an old supernatural thriller series. Several actually. Not to say majority view doesn't pragmatically define most things. Not at all. In fact. That's my point. Yours too it would seem?

No need. Well, perhaps append it (edit and write further). Generally I like to post in a mindset that would (hopefully) benefit or at least entertain as many reading as possible as opposed to a single individual (the OP ie. you).

I mean, what is a PhD versed in all the sciences of this world who has lost the will to question or discover over one perhaps less titled with drive and curiosity?

Eh. Is what you understand to be close and what is far respectively closer and/or further. Morality can be defined. That is a consensus can be reached. But it won't. What pleases me versus what pleases thee. Nothing new really.

Your alleged perception of non-existence was self determined by your own requiem for validation by rather as a result or non-result of others long ago. Perhaps the fault is not solely your own. So. Where will you go from here?

All media is biased. — Wheatley

Why would people watch something they didn't enjoy, tolerate, or that otherwise doesn't oppose their own complacency and ingrained sense of what is and what isn't. Most people here are a bit more refined- I'd imagine. It comes down to a sense of apparent ease presiding over both longterm assessment of logic or perhaps even chance.

People are biased. You have a child and say you know there's another next door. Assuming the law is not an issue, both are hungry and you only have enough to feed one.. after feeding yourself of course. Who do you feed? It's pretty much on par with biological necessity like oxygen.

So basically good enough being good enough. To most. Sure. Right?

I mean you don't typically use mathematics for no reason there generally is a precision that is lost otherwise that is fundamentally detrimental but.. for most yeah why not.

I pay for a 15 minute massage and for some reason I time it and it only turned out to be 14 minutes and 59 1/2 seconds. I wouldn't call that a scam or even anything.

Again mathematics generally has a purpose. It's not like fashion. Say I pour you a glass of water. Nice of me, right? Now if I put- pay attention now- less than a billionth of a gram of polonium in it. You would be dead in minutes. Just saying.

Nah man. Gotta turn it into a 9 page discussion about semantics drenched in profanity and emotion all while eluding the point. Haven't you learned anything?

Not sure. Probably to present to the viewer the horrors and miseries of the world just enough so they can forget about their own for a while, while still showing some positivity so it doesn't seem like we're all in some kind of hell. That's how we did it in my day at least.

Now perhaps... and it still would be unthinkable to present to a truly innocent man in contrast to a nearly equally indeterminate normal sentence.. but what if... you could give the person a new identity. Complete with a past, memories, etc. That makes them for whatever reason subservient to a particular institution or function in society. By any and all apparent choice. Of course. Some will say that's getting off easy.

Goes back to the capital punishment argument(s). One need only look at your avatar and see a famous case. Hm. Below this post too. Even today, not quite all the time but more often than we'd like to think, you have DNA exonerations and substantial settlements for the wrongly convicted. I'm sure the strictly worldly reasons why this probably should not happen are present.

It's hard to say if people are more easily manipulated or more prone to manipulate others. Eitherway you get people used to something that can be grievously abused the more likely it will be.

It's a political organization. And also could easily be bait and switch. You mention one thing decent then throw in foreign destabilization tactics exploiting a nation's conciousness and open society all while using (yet again) disprivileged people as the fall group. You really can't get more evil than that. Unless of course the people responsible are running the show. Which is possible.

The Constitution says "all men created equal". Literally anyone in a state position who acts against this is in violation of Color of Law and is an enemy of the State which can bring up to the death penalty. Now let's seperate the real from the ideal for a second. It doesn't always work like that. Which begs the question, what would they want if not this system in place functioning properly? Chaos? No. That's cancer. You wouldn't want that anywhere.

Without talking like a "racist" this planet has been wrought with unimaginable suffering. Even relatively recently. Entire cities of Asians were nuked killing the better half of 100,000 people. Whites were the most enslaved, granted usually by their own.. in Rome a redhead slave would fetch top dollar. Basically it was a common practice. There's nothing "wrong" with black people, in fact you can just ask around they are far from "inferior".

Most people just know what they read but I'd bet there's a higher up people who just have it out for the US government because all of a sudden they can't have "muh Game of Thrones expansionism" using people's whose lives would be worth more than yours if you ever really got in the way. Prove me wrong.

It's an interesting and quite relevant argument.

Finding out there's a door in a room full of complex puzzles you previously thought you were trapped in shouldn't fizzle your interest in them. In fact, it makes them interesting. To solve or even fail with a chuckle instead of a soulless stare of futility.

Anything can be used a crutch. Even an able body. Just something to think about.

the universe has many laws ... uncertainty principle — Benj96

Erm..

If the laws we see in the universe are the only laws that a universe can have — Benj96

Whoa, like ten different random assertions there. Not random of course. Mainstream belief, which is dynamic and always changing. You even say yourself the difference between "the" and "a" universe. Always the best place to start.

Was going to make a thread about this as far as the idea as it really wouldn't be a "feature" that could carry over to other forums generally or otherwise have a purpose beyond deep logical discussion but my idea was.

Basically different view modes when in a discussion thread. Different from "sort by ratings" because it is defined by the poster. I'm sure we've all ran into threads like this. Interesting enough premise, replies even, and not to say thread drift as that implies low quality or random elements perhaps even the OP begins to change their question to something different as a result of insightful posts.

Basically, imagine a thread like that. A question thread. There would be a single entry for what that specific question is, perhaps refined from the broad thoughts of an eager and somewhat rambling OP.

Then and for discussions too "key points" or otherwise if it is a question only "possible answers" but only permitted by the OP.

Basically turning a 50 page somewhat emotional discussion that ends up going half way around the world for some reason into an easily navigable page that people can see actually WTF is being discussed/addressed/solved/unsolved etc. I know I've asked this in many threads.

Yes.

Depends on the thing obviously. Life and reality is dynamic. Defining a thing is easy. Placating the stubborn is not. Nor is it terribly relevant. Unless it happens to be your job. It is mine, you know. :grin: