People debate over civil rights, as if they have a right to imprison our freedom of thought. People argue for the sake of health care as if they have a right to be taken care of. Let me tell you, if you had a right to these things you would have them already by the will of God.

What does this even mean? More specifically, what do you mean by "the will of God"?

"Men need to be caged and controlled. If we let them free they'd kill each other in the streets over scraps of bread. Men need direction and the threat of force to keep them in check. It can not be assumed that average men have morals and values"

I have yet to see a reasonable person to actually believe this. I would suggest cleaning out your ears and actually listen to what people are saying.

"Men need to be caged and controlled. If we let them free they'd kill each other in the streets over scraps of bread. Men need direction and the threat of force to keep them in check. It can not be assumed that average men have morals and values"

 

I have yet to see a reasonable person to actually believe this. I would suggest cleaning out your ears and actually listen to what people are saying.

That may be, but I still think most argument for increasing the size and reach of government boil down to "you can't be trusted to think for yourself, so the government will do it for you."

Anyway, Hollow, while I do agree with much of what you are saying, I do think the world is a very, very complicated place. Nothing wrong with that, though.

People have made it complicated. It's hard to believe that there was once a time when a child was not expected to go through 12+ grades of schooling lasting 12+ years to finally be able get a job flipping burgers huh?

That's a misleading statement. It sounds like you're saying they went through 12 years, with the express purpose of getting a job flipping burgers.That's not the purpose of 12 years of education.

You're stupid. I'm smart, you're dumb, you don't have my experiences and my experiences have enlightened me.[/

I can get behind most of this, I feel that people do tend to overcomplicate things just to make themselves appear more intelligent. I have a friend wh actually does just that and it is really hard to sift through his BS sometimes.

Im just going to hand out the TL;DR version of my response, given I am in Bio presently.

Your professor sounds like a bit of a prick.

While government in itself isn't evil, what exists today is rather excessive. The fact that the government can make decisions on things that directly effect your life disturbs me.

I totally agree that politicians are in this game for power and money. I could make the whole 'Politicians are people too' argument, and say that it is their career, but I would be lying to myself a bit. Politicians may intend good, but at the end of the day their success effects their paycheck, because making the law is their career.

(at above comment) The fish argument? Really, he tried to argue against that? People can go for a long time with out food. Trust me

"White people should be ashamed of their history"

Why do I want to punch someones face in right now?

Let me put it this way: Im German.

Everyone has something to be shameful of, but lets not let it define us as a people. And the honest truth is, the Europeans created everything that you enjoy in tis world. If you think that is something to hate because a few slaves were involved somewhere along the line, please take your butt-hurt elsewhere.

I am a futurist. I believe the betterment of mankind involves simple solutions to what we perceive to be complicated problems. Want to fix the economy? Stop wasting money. Want to stimulate growth? Lighten your grip on your people. Want to see the human race survive to 2552? Put some money in the space program god dammit XD.

I think I am getting off topic, considering I dont have time to sit down and actually analyse everything here. At first glance, however, I think I could get behind 85% of these statements given 1 ) your previous blog posts defining your concept of evil and B ) It is contemplative rather than argumentative which some people here aren't seeming to get.

And with that, I leave you this

While government in itself isn't evil, what exists today is rather excessive. The fact that the government can make decisions on things that directly effect your life disturbs me.

So you're disturbed that murder and rape is illegal? That disturbs you?

(at above comment) The fish argument? Really, he tried to argue against that? People can go for a long time with out food. Trust me

And they don't have the resources required to recuperate. Ever heard of the poverty cycle?

I am a futurist. I believe the betterment of mankind involves simple solutions to what we perceive to be complicated problems.

These are not simple problems.

Wasting money? What's considered waste? What should we cut? That's determined by the people. I mean, why don't you propose the budget for the next 4 years?

He writes about controversial issues and fires the debates. Whether he likes it or not he knows that his blog will cause debate.

And that Video? Really? Really? You're really saying we should go for the whole fossil fuel thing? It's going to dry up. And let's say we found that Climate Change isn't a real thing. We still need to start innovating efficient and renewable sources of energy. I mean, right now, we are having problems with solar panels. What if we started when fossil fuels dry up? We won't have any energy.

And the free market? It's pretty good, but it isn't perfect for things like pharmaceuticals. Companies will always want to make a profit, and they won't make that profit by developing medicine for life threatening diseases, which few people have. They'll concentrate on balding hair, since that's what people will pay up for.

And you're for the top money makers? I mean, come on. They were protesting how the government was owned by the rich. How Wall Street was the fall of the economy. How they were being left behind. They weren't against prosperity. We were against greed, greed that hurts almost everyone.

And they mentioned Thomas Edison. A businessman before an innovator. What a fail.

That's a misleading statement. It sounds like you're saying they went through 12 years, with the express purpose of getting a job flipping burgers.That's not the purpose of 12 years of education.

That's funny. So what was the purpose of 12 years of education? What is the purpose of education if the end result requires no actual thinking?

Evil in your system of morals. Evil in others? Not so much. You're opinion isn't the objective one. It's subjective, just like ours.

I am aware of this

While what you said is true, it's interesting that you mention property. I mean, since you do not own the computer you are reading this with, can I take it? I mean, you can take it back, but I can take it, right?

Sure, you can try. You have been granted the freedom of thought and action to try.

We all deserve to live. We have a right to life. What are you saying? Christ. I respect your right to have an opinion, but your opinion itself can go to hell. Everyone has the right to live, and everyone has the right to have a shot at life.

I am saying that if we had any right to live we would all be immortal. We have assumed we have a right to live, but we will all inevitably die.

And there you go, assuming God exists. Great job there buddy.

In that case I was suggesting that only by Gods will can someone claim anything as a right. If there is no God then there are no rights, it's as simple as that.

That's funny. So what was the purpose of 12 years of education? What is the purpose of education if the end result requires no actual thinking?

That is the end result of people who did not do well in high school. I'm not going to school to become a burger flipper. Hell, my friends do that already. Society isn't dumb enough to do that. We go to school to train for jobs that require more than basic math and language skills.

Sure, you can try. You have been granted the freedom of thought and action to try.

Really, it's impossible for me to do it. How about the common thief? In fact, why not just let someone take your house away? I mean, clearly you would raise no objections to that, considering you do not own the land on which you live.

I am saying that if we had any right to live we would all be immortal. We have assumed we have a right to live, but we will all inevitably die.

What? What does that even mean? So what you're saying is that if we have a right to something, we would already have it? So what about those being raped? Murdered? They deserve to die?

In that case I was suggesting that only by Gods will can someone claim anything as a right. If there is no God then there are no rights, it's as simple as that.

What is this based on? So no one has any rights? Really? No right? None at all? Are you bullshitting me? And how do you get from No God to no rights? You have an opinion that's beyond redemption.

He writes about controversial issues and fires the debates. Whether he likes it or not he knows that his blog will cause debate.

Of course I like it, I like discussing philosophy

And the free market? It's pretty good, but it isn't perfect for things like pharmaceuticals. Companies will always want to make a profit, and they won't make that profit by developing medicine for life threatening diseases, which few people have. They'll concentrate on balding hair, since that's what people will pay up for.

 

And you're for the top money makers? I mean, come on. They were protesting how the government was owned by the rich. How Wall Street was the fall of the economy. How they were being left behind. They weren't against prosperity. We were against greed, greed that hurts almost everyone.

 

And they mentioned Thomas Edison. A businessman before an innovator. What a fail.

A businessman that puts forth effort in able to claim his days fill of food, you are against this? To tell someone they should not want to earn money through their effort is to ask them not to eat. You might say they earn too much money through their efforts and that they don't need it all - and you're right, for that moment they probably don't need it all - but the value of money fluxuates and to be so arrogant and simply give it away as if assuming you'll never need to worry again is just stupid. It is the equivalent of giving food away in the harsh winter months of alaska because you've found you've garnered an excess.

Not to mention, these men are producers of things you have no right to. These men are not in your debt and do not owe you anything. You call them greedy for not working expressly for your benefit lol.

I suspect either the sociology professor is extremely radical, or you're just hearing what you want to hear.

I once had a political science professor who was nakedly biased and unfit for his job. I made a habit of sitting in the back and listening to death metal on my earphones during his class because I already knew what he was going to say. First 30 minutes of class, spout propaganda. Second 30, repeat the textbook verbatim. Last 30, talk about what was on "24" last night. He was an idiot, but not evil. There's nothing evil about people who think differently from me.

Your sociology prof made at least one legitimate point: you are young, and you still have a lot to experience. I'm a different person now than I was in college.

Ironically, I agree with you that we have no rights. Not for the same reasons, because I have no use for religion whatsoever. But I will suggest that, as George Carlin so persuasively argued, rights are just "a cute idea" that exist only on paper.

A businessman that puts forth effort in able to claim his days fill of food, you are against this?

I'm not saying tax the rich to the point where they're the poor. I'm not saying tax them $0.99 for every dollar made. I'm saying tax the rich fairly (which is more than the poor), because the way they're doing it now, is not right. The rich bribe politicians to stay rich, hurting those below. If screwing the poor is pulling their weight, we are speaking on separate trains of thought.

And even then, they don't give it directly to the poor. They give it in taxes, which I may remind you, fund everything. From the wars overseas, to the man taking out the garbage. They benefit in the long run from the benefits gained by tax. It's an investment, which helps the community as well.

And let's assume that these don't matter. Culturally, we have evolved past the point where we are only concerned for ourselves. A civilized nation is one that takes care of it's less fortunate denizens. We are caring of our own kind, and if you think we haven't come to this point yet, it's a sad world in which you live in.

That is the end result of people who did not do well in high school. I'm not going to school to become a burger flipper. Hell, my friends do that already. Society isn't dumb enough to do that. We go to school to train for jobs that require more than basic math and language skills.

Yet people graduate from college with 4 year degrees, can't find a job, and end up becoming a burger flipper anyway.

Really, it's impossible for me to do it. How about the common thief? In fact, why not just let someone take your house away? I mean, clearly you would raise no objections to that, considering you do not own the land on which you live.

I invite anyone to try to take anything that I need for survival, that is the moment I will prove my intentions to live. It is much easier to defend yourself from a common thief than from the government using the police.

What? What does that even mean? So what you're saying is that if we have a right to something, we would already have it? So what about those being raped? Murdered? They deserve to die?

No one deserves anything.

What is this based on? So no one has any rights? Really? No right? None at all? Are you bullshitting me? And how do you get from No God to no rights? You have an opinion that's beyond redemption.

No single person or any group is in a position on this Earth to claim they have a right to anything. Even if 100% of the population agreed they have a right not to die, that will not stop them from dying. If they agreed they have a right not to be raped that will not prevent someone from being raped. Agreeing they have a right not to be murdered or afraid will not prevent them from being murdered or scared.

Only by God could these be ensured as true rights.

Yet people graduate from college with 4 year degrees, can't find a job, and end up becoming a burger flipper anyway.

Because of the state of the economy. The aim of education is not to make a generation of burger flippers. How hard is that to understand?

I invite anyone to try to take anything that I need for survival, that is the moment I will prove my intentions to live. It is much easier to defend yourself from a common thief than from the government using the police.

Okay, so you're willing for anyone to come in and take your stuff, which you'll defend yourself. Now, multiply this across the world, and tell me how the world would be better off. And let's say everyone wanting to kill everyone somehow made everyone scared to attack. They're will be no cooperation and any and all advancement will be seized. You're world has no rules, and will fall into chaos. You must realize, that even then, passing you DNA is useless.

No one deserves anything.

So no one deserves the security of not being raped? What world do you live in, where that is accepted? What reality is that?

No single person or any group is in a position on this Earth to claim they have a right to anything. Even if 100% of the population agreed they have a right not to die, that will not stop them from dying. If they agreed they have a right not to be raped that will not prevent someone from being raped. Agreeing they have a right not to be murdered or afraid will not prevent them from being murdered or scared.

Just because something is a right, it doesn't mean that said right is always kept. It's a right, and some people don't care for rights such as those. So they rape. They're still rights. But they're transgressed. And we are to keep those rights intact, as best as possible,without infringing (too much) into other rights. Without rights, we have justification for anything and everything and any code or set of ethics you may have is pointless.

Because of the state of the economy. The aim of education is not to make a generation of burger flippers. How hard is that to understand?

And the government is responsible for the state of the economy, correct?

Okay, so you're willing for anyone to come in and take your stuff, which you'll defend yourself. Now, multiply this across the world, and tell me how the world would be better off. And let's say everyone wanting to kill everyone somehow made everyone scared to attack. They're will be no cooperation and any and all advancement will be seized. You're world has no rules, and will fall into chaos. You must realize, that even then, passing you DNA is useless.

This is what it comes down to - having no faith in the rest of humanity. Where did I imply anyone wants to kill anyone?

So no one deserves the security of not being raped? What world do you live in, where that is accepted? What reality is that?

Whether it's accepted or not it's the way things work in the real world. People get raped every day, and ultimately the only security they have against it is themselves.

And the government is responsible for the state of the economy, correct?

Yes, and it's the greedy rich who drag the economy down, to make a buck. Had the people been represented by a real government (many governments forget their purpose). then the economy wouldn't have crashed.

This is what it comes down to - having no faith in the rest of humanity. Where did I imply anyone wants to kill anyone?

I have faith in humanity because I don't have these ridiculous notions which you possess. And eventually, what you do will eventually escalate into murder. Where anyone can take another persons stuff. Maybe you start with a baseball bat. Then the next lot come in with a gun, so they won't get hit by the aforementioned bat. What do you think's going to happen? Either you lose your life or all you possessions.

Whether it's accepted or not it's the way things work in the real world. People get raped every day, and ultimately the only security they have against it is themselves.

Clearly, you have no idea how society works. And you know what? I can see why your sociology professor has a hard time with you. You are saying it's the rape victim's fault for being raped as they can't defend themselves. I don't even know how you can function in normal society, if you blame the victim, in the slightest.

Yes, and it's the greedy rich who drag the economy down, to make a buck. Had the people been represented by a real government (many governments forget their purpose). then the economy wouldn't have crashed.

Is the economy not created by those greedy rich who set out to "make a buck"?

I have faith in humanity because I don't have these ridiculous notions which you possess. And eventually, what you do will eventually escalate into murder. Where anyone can take another persons stuff. Maybe you start with a baseball bat. Then the next lot come in with a gun, so they won't get hit by the aforementioned bat. What do you think's going to happen? Either you lose your life or all you possessions.

I would argue you have no faith because you obviously believe in times of struggle they'll be reduced to killing each other in the streets....

Clearly, you have no idea how society works. And you know what? I can see why your sociology professor has a hard time with you. You are saying it's the rape victim's fault for being raped as they can't defend themselves. I don't even know how you can function in normal society, if you blame the victim, in the slightest.

I have a perfect understanding of how society works and how you think it works, I just reject it.

Sometimes things happen that we have no control over - you can either run from it or learn from it. That is what I believe.

Is the economy not created by those greedy rich who set out to "make a buck"?

Do I have to say it? The greedy minority hurt the majority of the society, in order to make money. The economy suffers and society suffers. The free market works for some industries. It doesn't work for others.

I would argue you have no faith because you obviously believe in times of struggle they'll be reduced to killing each other in the streets....

I don't have faith in a version of humanity where everyone has your morals (which don't exist in your world). I have faith in this reality. Because not everyone is like you. I don't believe we'll be reduced to our basest desires in times of struggle.

I have a perfect understanding of how society works and how you think it works, I just reject it. Sometimes things happen that we have no control over - you can either run from it or learn from it. That is what I believe.

You reject what you don't understand. You think you understand, the way a child may understand Schrodinger cat. He understands what the thought experiment says at the face, but no idea of it's implications or it uses.

Sometimes things happen that we have no control over - you can either run from it or learn from it. That is what I believe.

We have control! We do! By keeping rape illegal, we are controlling the amount of rape. Just because we haven't completely weeded it out doesn't mean we don't control it. We just don't full control from it.

And you can't run away from rape and what can you learn from it?

Does compassion, does empathy exist in your world? Do you believe in altruism?

Do I have to say it? The greedy minority hurt the majority of the society, in order to make money. The economy suffers and society suffers. The free market works for some industries. It doesn't work for others.

I don't have faith in a version of humanity where everyone has your morals (which don't exist in your world). I have faith in this reality. Because not everyone is like you. I don't believe we'll be reduced to our basest desires in times of struggle.

You're confusing my desire for freedom with my moral code. I have a very strong moral code that no one seems to care to believe in either lol, the difference is I don't want to force others to abide by it through the power of government

You reject what you don't understand. You think you understand, the way a child may understand Schrodinger cat. He understands what the thought experiment says at the face, but no idea of it's implications or it uses.

We have control! We do! By keeping rape illegal, we are controlling the amount of rape. Just because we haven't completely weeded it out doesn't mean we don't control it. We just don't full control from it.

Not only does no one have any actual control, but the means by which you're trying to control it is through fear. You will never weed it out this way and you certainly will never have full control over it.

And you can't run away from rape and what can you learn from it?

How about learn some fighting techniques and carry a weapon around with you?

Does compassion, does empathy exist in your world? Do you believe in altruism?

Sure I just don't see how feeling sorry for people actually helps them. I don't think throwing money at people actually helps anyone either

I tend to feel you are trying to take a simple approach to a problem you don't actually understand, and I mean, it's easy to try and unobfuscate things. But chances are, you yourself are not the man for the job.

Structures tend to be complex and not very intuitive at times, Which is why there is lots of confusion. I would say, perhaps you don't have the right toolset to be making such statements.

I understand some of the problems you have pointed out, but their roots tend to be far more connected and far more intricate then you make it out to believe. Often coming to a systemic problem, Education as an example is the very point of a system way behind it's time and in dire need of complete replacement.

This doesn't answer my question ^^

The government is controlled by the rich, who then uses bills to help themselves. This causes a deficit in the budget, and causes us more debt.

You're confusing my desire for freedom with my moral code. I have a very strong moral code that no one seems to care to believe in either lol, the difference is I don't want to force others to abide by it through the power of government

You're "moral" code takes back humanity, culturally. You're confusing a government for a thinly veiled tranny. You're "desire for freedom" is so extreme, that it helps no one. The question is never black and white, but what shade of grey.

I understand them fine. You're just sitting there telling me I don't understand without telling me what I don't understand....

Many things! You confuse the purpose of school for it's outcome. I may want to eat a sandwich, but instead I get a free lunch. I still wanted a sandwich. To go into detail as to how you're mistaken would take up too much of my time.

Not only does no one have any actual control, but the means by which you're trying to control it is through fear. You will never weed it out this way and you certainly will never have full control over it.

I can control how much I eat. That doesn't mean I have full control. I have a degree of control and I've already stated that we don't have full control. And if we want to make rapists scared or raping people, good. I want them to be scared.

How about learn some fighting techniques and carry a weapon around with you?

I'd rather not have to deal with rape at all, rather than have to harm everyone just to be safe.

Sure I just don't see how feeling sorry for people actually helps them. I don't think throwing money at people actually helps anyone either

What world do you exist in? Would you like for all the supplies thrown at you to be stripped? Because if so, you can't live.