It seems Israel is doing what the Assyrians and Romans did to them over a thousand years ago...

Countless visions/visitations later and here they are doing the same thing to the Palestinians.

How long before we hear a Palestinian refugee/survivor who suddenly has visions/visitations from god/angels telling them about returning to their homeland and expelling the unholy infidels?

The river of blood and tears flows round and round.

There's a show called "Travelers" which reminds me of your topic. Here, you have people from a dystopian future who are sent back in time, with specific directions from a supercomputer - which is supposed to be incorruptible and with the sole purpose of righting history's wrongs.

In the financial world, we extensively use computers to sort of predict trends through complex metrics - but people need to be the one's to interpret the data - or so we're led to believe. I'm sure there are already programs or rudimentary Ai that are doing those things for the financial managers today.

So, if computers can dictate finance, I'm sure we can use them to do the same for policy.

The problem though is if those computers are hacked to favor one group over another. They're only as good as their programming after all.

Yeah it's a mess here but thankfully since the news is so open, we're seeing studies showing these vaccines' efficacy. In Brazil, this particular vaccine our govt is getting, got a whopping 51% efficacy.

Hopefully, congress/senate/cabinet would get their heads out of our president's a&& and suggest the right thing.

Bottom line- human success depends on human unity. — Athena

Ain't that the truth. That's why I'm all for removing superficial and archaic barriers.

This virus is an opportunity for us to experience how alike we all are and how connected we truly are as we all deal with this mindless thing that's affecting us all regardless of race, denomination, status, age, gender.

But of course, we're seeing groups trying to again highlight differences during this time. Which is unfortunate.

So the question is how far should development go? Third World countries have been modelling the development of Western countries. But the Western countries are far from perfect. The question is to what extent should people be reliant on large institutions or more community based? — Jack Cummins

3rd world countries like ours definitely want to be like you guys in the top echelon but I really don't think the resource management and distribution will ever match the population growth. As it is, our resources can only handle a population of 70 million and we're already past 110 million today. I think other bottom dwelling countries are in the same boat.

So, I think most Filipinos have no choice but to rely on the community for assistance and support.

As a country however, you can see in our politics how our government is trying to allign itself with China - who has really deep pockets. And they are lifting the ban on foreign owned companies. So maybe we will start to see a rise of big institutions coming in.

Maybe we'll see more industrialization in a generation or so. Maybe we'll see pockets of growth here and there but who knows? To be honest, I don't want them to come in too strong because they have a sort of scorched earth policy and I don't want my countryside to be uninhabitable, or our waters and air turned toxic.

I do wonder if we had been in a different historical epoch whether we would have just had an emphasis on the survival of the fittest. As it is, there is a concern about meeting the needs of vulnerable people and many people are not being completely self-centred. Perhaps we are beginning to see the better side of human nature. — Jack Cummins

There's evidence of early hominids caring for their elderly, their young and the sick. We also see similar behaviors in animals that live in groups. So maybe that is the natural state and selfishness to the detriment of others is unnatural because it leads to self-isolation.

I think most people were content being hung up on the practical or day to day things of their lives to be concerned of big picture stuff but nowadays I think we'll see a shift as more people's worlds are being upended by this calamity. I used to think a lot about it already and this calamity cemented my belief even more and I think that's why it's important to ponder.

It makes me think of an album title by Metallica, 'Hard-wired to Self Destruct'. I wonder if this is the destiny of the human race? — Jack Cummins

As chaotic as it all seems today, I'm hopeful that we will start aligning ourselves towards the better.

We're a global society now. We can see/record what our neighbors are doing - both good and bad. We can learn and adapt.

Again as bad as things are, humanity is slowly but surely making improvements. Compare our lives now to how it used to be during pre-biblical times and I wouldn't be surprised that people in slums today would rather live now than in the slums ancient history. I know nobody wants an impoverished life but I believe that the global help that impoverished populations get today makes their quality of life much better. I'm just guessing of course.

I think that the danger is probably when people end up really believing in the conspiracy theories and I would guess that the people who write the books really do. I have to admit that I probably enjoy some of the ideas of extreme thinking just because they stimulate my imagination to view possible alternative ways of seeing — Jack Cummins

I think we're all the same to an extent. Those things are quite fun to think about and make for some interesting topics of conversation. Nowadays though, the tone is becoming different. I'm noticing that some people are taking things way way too seriously.

Before, we'd hear some information and take time to process it to ultimately reject, accept or put it in the background somewhere. Now, it seems that some of us come in fully loaded already and so anything but anything that adds to the load immediately becomes accepted to the whole mountain of filth that's already there.

That's something to keep in mind nowadays and unfortunately, the only way to get through the filth is to discuss it with others who have opposing views. The bad thing again, we each have our mountains of filth but the hope is that since we're working at opposite ends of each other, that we'll eventually meet somewhere in the middle - where the potential reality or truth resides.

Oh yeah such theories can definitely be interesting but I think we need to keep it clear that these are just theories. And true or not, they don't really help change the reality of what we're dealing with unless we give them importance to the point where we start denying reality itself (like what so many have done to the detriment of their fellow countrymen).

Where are we going and how much do we play a part in determining this? — Jack Cummins

I guess this is really what's it's all about. How we're dealing with this worldwide phenomenon will be a precursor to how we deal with subsequent problems that will affect mankind. The more we cooperate and listen to the science, the better off we'll be.

The last thing we need is to allow extreme conspiracy culture to affect our decisions. We need to develop a culture that's more reliant on factual, verifiable data.

With regards to information, I do think that we are in a crossroads.

We're already seeing the danger of allowing unverified information to be passed around so easily.

Seriously it should be obvious to everyone that the God of Abraham religions are divisive and leading us to the last days. We may not wear masks, but Israel is ignoring the wisdom of respecting Palestinians and working with them for peace, dragging all of us into wars and possibly the final war. Seeing the world today and believing we are in the last days, could make this the last days. But the Greeks saw life as a fire and that someday the fire would be greater than what is left to consume. Human values and science are very important right now. — Athena

Yeah, at the very least, we should try to learn as much as we can so that we don't keep making the same mistakes.

But of course it is a big relief that she has a chest infection rather than the virus. — Jack Cummins

That's great news! Well, you're not gonna believe this but upon testing, my mom apparently has antibodies, which means she already got it but nobody knew. She was asymptomatic. Definitely relieved as well as shocked since she only stayed in her apartment. We're thinking it might be from some delivery - you have to be diligent and wipe down those packages with disinfectant. We're probably being paranoid but the last thing we want is to have to spend time in some local hospital or triage unit - both really unlivable.

Of course, I don't object if people do share their experiences of disaster because philosophy is about real life rather than pure theory. — Jack Cummins

I think this pandemic is showing all of us that we are all in the same boat. This isolates us, yes. But it also proves that we're all one people dealing with this thing. This virus is giving everybody problems no matter where you are, no matter what class you're in.

I hope people can see that reality and start to focus on our commonalities instead of our differences.

Do you know of a book that explains the Japanese way? — Athena

Unfortunately, no. Everything I know about them is based on our visits. I used to work for a company that did a lot of business in Japan.

Don't get me wrong, they can also be complete animals (as in the WWII, and there's still crime and everything, and this whole dolphin and whale slaughter ritual they have) and sometimes they can get rowdy and racist when they're drunk but as soon as an authority figure sees what's happening, they immediately fall in line and make a very loud apology and express their shame.

On our last trip, we saw a man lying on the sidewalk. There were two police officers "guarding" him. I didn't know what it was then we found out that the man had too much to drink and had passed out. The police were protecting him. Wow.

So, their culture is simply about doing what's right. They have this Code of bushido or this code of honor that exemplifies loyalty, honor, righteousness. It got lost somewhere in the war but upon losing, they went back to this code and completely went away from war becoming more pacifist - I'm assuming it's from the Buddhist influence. They also have the Shinto Religion - many gods for all sorts of things (mainly nature).

Interestingly, Christianity was introduced but then it was largely met with hostility and was completely banned by government. Christians had to worship in secret caves and such. But of course it's all open now but you don't see Japanese flocking to it since they already have a very strong sense of cultural identity.

Good luck USA if the pandemic continues or another disaster strikes. We are not doing as well as we need to. Our mentality is still ugly. — Athena

It's like that in many places where you have such divided politics and the division itself has become part of the culture - Democrat, Republican, for example. Any kind of division is an obstacle. And that gap appears to be quite large and so, needs a lot of bridging. But bridging will be difficult if you have whole populations actively or violently trying to tear those bridges down.

That sounds scary. That happened to an extension cable of ours. It started making popping noises and causing sparks. Hope your issue was taken care of.

Anyway, yeah disasters can be considered as natural occurrences. They do indeed have very negative effects but we can prepare for them and recover from them.

This is the mentality the Japanese have. Their major cities are along the ring of fire. There are many powerful earthquakes and tsunamis.

That's why when there are disasters, the people remain calm and all seem to know exactly what to do. The stores immediately start giving away blankets, water and the restaurants and bars start packing food. Everyone lines up and waits their turn and then move towards a designated safe zone.

Damage, injuries and even death is often unavoidable but the chaos is drastically minimized when the citizenry remain calm and orderly. Recovery is also much faster.

On a side note, it seems to me that they're also no stranger to pandemics since they culturally avoid contact - bowing vs shaking hands, they also leave their shoes outside and wear slippers inside, money is also placed on a little basket so you don't have to touch hands. They also have gods for pandemics that you can invoke by some ritual

So the whole idea of creating 'better' human beings is to make them more disease resistant? — Jack Cummins

So far that, aesthetics for the non-military and strength/endurance/intelligence for the super soldiers.

So are the new form of human beings being engineered genetically? What are they being programmed to do, or to serve? — Jack Cummins

As of now China and France are intending to engineer soldiers but I'm not sure what degree of enhancement we're talking about here.

Some people are concerned about what the vaccine contains. It is sometimes hard to sort out the facts from the fiction. — Jack Cummins

I'm a bit concerned too so I'm thinking of waiting a few months to see what the possible side effects could be.

But then again, I'm sure your country would only provide the best vaccine. For us, it's likely the vaccine that the officials can make the most money off of. So, it wouldn't exactly be the best quality.

If those in poverty became the majority perhaps we would really see people rising up to overthrow the capitalist system. Or perhaps ways of exchange could take place, such as barter. The only problem with barter is that some vulnerable individuals may not be able to contribute much, so they could still be left out, so economic inequality might not be changed. — Jack Cummins

Yeah I've thought about this too. Whether it's capitalism, feudalism, communism, cash or barter - it would still be the same. You would have the ruling elite who control most assets and the mass poor.

There would be an uprising but as we've seen, things revert back to that formula anyway. Like how the bolsheviks overthrew the Russian monarchy. They ended up with Lenin, Stalin and now Putin.

I hope that it will not just be more calamities, because at this stage in human evolution, surely humanity could find creative ways of living which involve compassion and less destruction. — Jack Cummins

There are already communities today that live in a cooperative/environmentally stable way. But they're still in the early stages and are very small. We need to see something stable like that but in a population of 10,000. I'm thinking that's the number because that's how many mankind was when it had to rebuild itself to almost 8B after 70k years.

A friend told me that he heard talk of a new higher developed form of human being born, mentioned on some radio programme. I have never heard of this, but it is an interesting idea, because can we just assume that the present human beings are the highest form possible, or whether there could be new mutations? — Jack Cummins

Yup. Both France and China have super soldier programs already. Wouldn't be surprised if other rich countries are trying to perfect our genetic code to make us more disease resistant.

But I don't agree with that. We barely know much about these genes to be fiddling about with them. The way I see it, every time we try pushing something forward, we'll inevitably see some other unforseen thing being pulled along with it.

It's just another take on the nature and definition of reality.

With regards to money, it should be no different from a televangelist asking for donations or someone selling a weightloss book.

In the 200 thousand years of our species' existence, we've gone through many such upheavals. The last major one 70 thousand years ago wiped us out to a point that our population went down to less than 10,000 individuals.

This current iteration, with a "clear history" that's just over 2,000 years and a possible root of 12,000 years, has so far muddled things so badly that it's only now that we're seeing what really happened. We wasted 2,000 years of preparation. But, as long as there is life, there is hope.

Unfortunately, the path that mankind chose - culminating to the mega city, is NOT the answer. It is the mistake. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we can start preparations for the next phase, the next calamity.

But this core point of embracing uncertainty is something that every single religion has gotten wrong.

They missed the truth of why civilizations continuously rise and fall. Sodom, Gomorrah, Mohenjo Dahro, and every other ancient city that was destroyed or abandoned was NOT because of "god's wrath." It was simply because the conditions changed and the massive lumbering giant of a city wasn't able to adapt and adjust fast enough.

You say that 'the thinking must change,' and of course you are right but the question is whether it is too late? — Jack Cummins

Well, clearly, it is too late for this disaster but then this will not be the last disaster. Climate change, extreme weather, volcanoes, earthquakes, droughts, and some stray asteroid - can all upend humanity.

I realise that you are from the Phillipines and probably your society is more community orientated. In England, as I said to you in the thread on human nature, it is easy for people to become isolated, especially if they are not living with family. I think that this has become more acute as a result of the pandemic, and, in a way, the rules of social distancing are reinforcing isolation. — Jack Cummins

I have a theory that the larger and more "advanced" or affluent the city, the easier it is to end up being isolated. Which is counter intuitive, because how can being in a higher population cause us to feel more isolated?

Well, the reality is that these cities basically provide everything to the individual. So, there is no need to behave or think communally. Food, water, medical, shelter are all available to the individual without needing to establish any kind of connection with their neighbors.

However, when it comes to the poorer populations, it is still necessary to think communally.

In both cases, it is very clear that humanity cannot sustain mega-city life. It is poorly equipped to manage any calamity and it takes massive cultural change to get to a level of proficiency that the city can survive and recover. But it is definitely possible.

Japan has done it countless of times. But again, the culture there has evolved and adapted to calamity being a normal part of life. I don't know who else (among the G7) is as well equipped. 3rd world countries also have highly adaptable cultures because again, there's not much you can take away from those who didn't have much to begin with.

I feel very bad for what's happening to your country. I sincerely hope you all find some unity and stability soon.

In my opinion, however, the root of the issue is with how information is being passed. I notice that you have major news organizations being extremely one sided.

This should not be. News agencies must present all sides and clearly state whether a piece of information is verified or not.

Right now, it seems that even opinions or conjectures are being presented as facts and this is dangerous.

Trump won Democrats the presidency and the senate and destroyed the right-wing online media space almost in its entirety. All in the space of a few months. Undercover operative? — Baden

A friend of mine told me this theory soon after Trump won. He said that Trump and his family were lifelong democrats. And so, he was planted to destroy the republican party and all it's supporters from within.

I didn't believe him of course because cmon. But who knows?

Is it still "coercive" if we can choose among a multitude of jobs or careers to work in? And if the whole city can't provide the individual with a good fitting job, that individual can choose to go to another city or even country to find suitable employment or possible opportunity.

I believe that embracing uncertainty is a starting point. — Jack Cummins

I definitely believe this must be at the core of planning and prevention. So, given that there's too much uncertainty, what are the things we can do to survive? That means going back to basics - going back to the community level, ensuring that each community can survive independently with regards to food/water/shelter/medical needs etc...when such disasters strike.

On an individual level, it means having to connect with your community. No man is an island and each individual has something to contribute to the success of the whole. That must be the mentality moving forward.

Throughout history, we've seen megacities rise and fall and the simple truth is that they're simply not sustainable or adaptable. Cities are built on specific conditions. Remove/change/alter those conditions and the city will fall. So far, all modern society has been built towards making cities bigger and bigger with little regard to what made them big in the first place.

So, the thinking must change. Focus on building communities. Govern them so that population growth matches the capacity of the area but create more communities for expansion - again only if the environment can accept the expansion.

The delay itself can be part of the predetermined decision process. But it can also give us a greater sense of agency.

The amount delay or planning involved can make the difference between making something an accident or a willful act.

But there's also this thing about higher order decisions such as choosing a college course, getting married, deciding to have kids, etc... These are decisions that require tons of planning and so a lot more "agency" is involved.

And those paths we chose each have their own predetermined or acceptable modes of behavior that we sort of live through.

Typically, individuals create a sense of purpose or meaning based on their biology, upbringing, education, culture, life experience. It can be theistic, atheistic, altruistic, selfish or a combination of all of that.

So, to the question of "programming" a singular sense of meaning or purpose - it largely depends on the ability to control all these conditions: upbringing, biology, culture, life experience - so that you can assure that each individual is getting the exact same thing (which is impossible even in a small family).

However, the closer to our biology, evolution or baser instincts the "idea" is, the easier it will be to program.

So, you could for example say that the "meaning" of life is to enhance pleasure - then it will be easy to accept because we naturally prefer pleasure over pain.

Why does the universe need to be created? Why couldn't it have always existed?

It's quite common to leave your primary family (parents and siblings) here too.

What's less common is when a husband/father leaves his wife and child. I'm sure this happens as well but it isn't normal and usually we don't consider this a good thing.

what would be the perfect human being? Would it be the ascetic way, or would it be more about caring for others? Would it involve attachments, or be free of them? — Jack Cummins

I don't think it's possible to attain a perfect state since nothing is static. The environment changes and we must constantly adapt to those changes.

Kind of like how bears gorge themselves, get fat, then hibernate over the winter and emerge at an emaciated state.

Because the environment changes, being attached to any single state of being might not be a good thing.

Asceticism though might be more practical since you're getting yourself used to the bare minimum but again, if you've locked yourself into this state, you would inevitably forgo all the things that life has to offer - including relationships which are vital to us humans. You could do it of course, stay in some far off cabin/cave/street corner and watch life pass by as you stay still - like a cactus, I guess.

So, there must be a balance between our real needs (biological, social, intellectual, creative etc...), our capabilities as well as what the environment can sustain.

We must be adaptable in the face of the ever changing environment. We can't do this if we were attached to static/unsustainable states and ideals.

Thus, in the context of code law and free choice, one’s choices should be taken as the sole condition necessary for someone to be held accountable for breaking a very specific law, and, thus, people cannot be held responsible for their actions if they did not make a choice to break any such laws. — ToothyMaw

I think modern law already takes this into consideration. That's why we have degrees of murder, for example - from involuntary manslaughter, second degree, first degree etc...

In my opinion, it would be easier to approach the question of "free-will" based on the process that we make our decisions.

For the most part, we humans act based on our tendencies, which are brought about by our biological/environmental upbringing - nature and nurture. If someone likes spicy food, it's because they were raised that way. If someone finds a particular thing more aesthetically pleasing than the other, it's because the environment (media, culture, peers, education etc...) taught them to prefer that particular thing over the other.

So, where would the question of free-will be applied? I think it lies in those decisions where the options are precisely 50-50 or equal in value. And again, this is extremely rare, if you really look at it objectively. I don't even know of an experiment that would create an exact 50-50 situation since we're all always leaning (even slightly) towards one thing or another - again, based on our upbringing (nature and nurture).

Should we seek to overcome attachment, to what extent, and can it be achieved ? Whether or not one adopts these worldviews, we can ask whether attachment is a problem and, should we seek to overcome our attachments at all? — Jack Cummins

I think attachments are simply a part of life. We're attached to our families and loved ones, we're attached to our jobs (somewhat), we're attached to the things which give us comfort etc etc...Even ascetic monks are attached to their beliefs.

I don't think attachment itself is "bad," it's when the attachment turns into disruptive obsession that it negatively affects our health and well-being as well as the well-being of those around us.

I actually don't consider even Siddhartha Gautama to be 100% perfect. I mean, he did become obsessed enough in his belief that he completely abandoned his family and responsibilities. And in his journey, he tried to be nearly 100% ascetic, having just a grain of rice per day or some other ridiculous thing and he ultimately ended up with the "middle way" which allowed him to have at least some comforts.

If not to alleviate your own suffering, it's possible that you're expressing something formed by habit or training. Or you probably may not share the experience but you anticipate some reward in behaving selflessly. Or maybe the act fulfills a need - as in a wanting parent finds a helpless child.

In any case, selfish or selfless, these are still positive behaviors and something groups must try to promote with their members for sustained success.

I see getting a job just as a way of supporting myself financially in order to do the more important 'work' of art, writing and philosophy. — Jack Cummins

That's a great strategy. This Pandemic is telling us that life's too short to be focused on just making money. We have to take what little time we have to do what we love to do.

When I chose Psychology, it's because I wanted to get into counselling. Family, couple, groups, youth. Family counselling especially because I find the family unit to be extremely important because that forms the base on how we deal and interact with the world. Grow up in abuse or neglect and most likely you will carry that with you and possibly continue that pattern because that's what you grew up with.

But in terms of accuracy, maybe Clinical Psychology because it covers most bases with regards to mental illness. This is what I'm focusing on now since I hear it's easier to go from Clinical to Counselling than the other way around.

I'm pretty old for school but this pandemic has kinda thrown a wrench at life and so I figured why not try learning new skills at a field I like? My sister in law is taking a course on healthy natural cooking. Healthy eating is definitely hot nowadays so that's a good choice.

That said, Psychology here isn't quite as popular because we're a deeply religious country and most still prefer that path for solutions. But, it's thankfully a growing field.

That's interesting because I'm a Psychology graduate and I'm currently pursuing graduate studies in Psychology. I'm also technically a Roman Catholic haha

Anyway, I also have a lot of theories regarding the core cause of illness, our basic motivations, dream function etc...I find it funny how advanced we are with a lot of things but as you mentioned, when it comes to our own minds, we really haven't gotten very far.

Nothing is absolute. But what do you think of the principle in terms of the likelihood that it will be followed?

Altruistic behavior has always interested me. I've always thought that we are a self-interested species that happen to be part of a larger group system.

When taken in a group context, we can see the basis of altruism more easily.

It begins with the family unit. Seemingly altruistic behaviors of our parents. The pain and self-sacrifice they endure for the benefit of their kids. We also learn, in this context, the benefit of obedience, cooperation and the great reward of selflessness.

We carry this understanding when we grow up and join other groups and soon find that the same applies. Obedience, cooperation and selflessness are typically rewarded.

We can see similar things happening with our animal cousins and studies have shown that infants prefer cooperative or selfless behavior over selfish ones.

So, is it still altruism if we directly benefit or if the behavior was developed from habit?

Great answer, friend. But, when it comes to fellow feelings, would you personally term this phenomenon as empathy or compassion? — jancanc

Well, empathy is more just sharing the feeling while compassion would be more of an outward expression of the desire to assist, alleviate. You would need empathy to first identify or confirm that the feelings are related. If you decide to do something about it then you would be expressing your compassion.

but would you agree that the two "discomforts" are nevertheless empirically distinct?? You have your discomfort and I have mine, which is caused by yours? — jancanc

Yes definitely distinct. The observer can only surmise what's happening based on their own personal experience. But there will still be that shared relatedness of observing another's experience that causes one to recall something that something similar also occurred to them.

With regards to yawning, you don't even have to be sleepy but when the person you're with (who is sleepy) yawns, it somehow causes you to yawn as well.

Or seeing your friends laughing at something you didn't yourself see but you still find yourself "copying" their reaction.