Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Posts by avogadro
you do understand that what you are talking about doing, you are talking about brainwashing all humans and then you want to see how long the brainwashed humans can last as a whole, and if its some long period of time, you'll call it a success and the human race will be a success because they lasted a certain period of time?
lol, good luck finding people to support such a thing; you might want to try N Korea...
> Inviltrist wrote:
> > avogadro wrote:
> you constantly contradict yourself, its full of contradiction. your philosophy is bogus.
Really?
Give me an example of one political or social philosophy that has absolutely no contradictions. 
ok, then i'll give you a free tip.
you look like a moron when you contradict yourself in an argument even 1 time, let alone the dozens of times you have in this thread.
"At some point you have to accept the eternal. Remember, even time itself is linked to matter and space. Universe expanding and collapsing in on itself for eternity. At some point we reach a limit of human knowledge. I like Camus's philosophy of the absurd; man's futile search for meaning, unity and clarity in the face of an unintelligible world devoid of God and eternity. I leave it at that."
wait, who's trying to hide truth? the religious looking for truth and the beginning of the atheist calling any attempt absurd?
yes, matter, space, and time are all linked. whatever came first couldnt be physical anyways because to be comprised of something is to have come after it. so this first action cant be purely physical, it has to be metaphysical. in reality its science that has reached its limit, not human knowledge. because science has no place in the metaphysical, but humans do.
you constantly contradict yourself, its full of contradiction. your philosophy is bogus.
"
I was merely stating the system I would want in place, which is very socialistic. I laid it out to show you that not all socialists want to give "free hand-outs" to lazy idiots."
if you're going to list a government that doesnt work with today, but only in a fantasy, why would you need any government at all? if all the people are saints, theres no need for government.
"I'm beginning to see weaknesses in you arguments here."
you better be, i've be punching holes for awhile 
"
Everyone technically exists for the sake of existence. If that's not the case, why not just end your life right now?
We all are left to deal with the existential mind-f*ck that is reality. There is no real meaning to anything, all we can do is invent one for ourselves."
why are human made inventions for existence not real in your eyes? if the only meanings for existence are human made, what makes them invalid? if not from humans, where would you expect the meaning of existence to come from? God? you yourself said right and wrong are subjective, so if they're subjective, how can you state something as fact?
i think we're making alittle progress, this is good.
im not saying all emotions. im saying some emotions. if you dont want to address my points, then be like that, admit defeat. if you're to stupid to differentiate between when im saying all emotions and when im not, a forum isnt the right place for you.
most my responses was just repeating exactly what you said earlier, so i dont get how you can claim im the one thats saying all emotions.
"I'm talking about bringing ourselves to a post-human state."
you are talking about forcing all humans to believe in the goal that you believe in. plus your goal is pretty gay. existence for the sake of existence is pretty pathetic; your argument is pathetic.
"What I suggest seems horrible to you because you are basing it off human emotions. However, if you weren't equipped with those weak instincts you'd not suffer in the slightest."
yes, it seems horrible because of my instincts and if i didnt have instincts, i would be indifferent to everything including your stupid idea.
"The human animal as it stands today.... has absolutely zero chance of avoiding extinction, or at the very least coming damn close to it."
What you suggest seems horrible to you because you are basing it off human emotions. However, if you weren't equipped with those weak instincts you'd not suffer in the slightest.
"
I intend for my offspring to be successful. I will tolerate no less. Afterall, they are just the continuation of my dna. I will make damn sure my DNA prospers."
What you suggest, about your offspring not prospering seems horrible to you because you are basing it off human emotions. However, if you weren't equipped with those weak instincts you'd not suffer in the slightest.
"A christian/muslim/wiccan or a republican? THE HORROR. I'd still care for them, but they'd be instantly taken out of my will. I'd never let my life's work fall into the hands of a person with such a disgusting belief system.
but then again, there is always that chance. If I could stop any potential of that at the DNA level, it would eliminate the need for me to shield my children from negative influences such as religion."
What you suggest seems horrible to you because you are basing it off human emotions. However, if you weren't equipped with those weak instincts you'd not suffer in the slightest.
> Inviltrist wrote:
> > avogadro wrote:
> lol, Inviltrist, how about you address my points?
hmm, you addressed part of 2 of my points and i made 6 pts; is this Inviltrist admitting defeat?
What points are you talking about?
Do me a favor and lay them out in order of importance. I promise you I'll address any points you bring up. This thread got a little chaotic when kemp got in it, and much of my focus was on him. So I must have missed your points?
Before you bring up any points, please note for the millionth time, I did not say eliminate every single emotion. Merely fine tuning them so we are better adapted. So any argument that is along the lines of "ha! see! you need emotion to do that!" is invalid.
i useually bring them up in the order of the points you made.
McCain wants to give tax cuts to the middle class and to companies which employ the middle class.
Obama wants to tax the companies that employ the middleclass which will result in job cuts. and he wants to give tax cuts to the middle class which historically has used tax cuts almost exclusively to pay off debts, which wont help the economy at all.
> Inviltrist wrote:
> >
haha, but nah, you're not such a bad guy kemp. The only problem I have with you is that you're about as much of an asshole as I am, and I can't stand people who match my level of dickishness.
get a room, you [w00f!].
> BC Cougar wrote:
> i think that the problem is that with our enlightenment, we have un-evolved as well.
meaning that our fore fathers had the right idea of a free democratic nation, but the enlightenment of the greedy of how to take advantage of those less motivated by it has turned it upside down.
and the pursuit of happiness has been taken over by the power hungry, money mongers.
they seem to believe that you shouldn't be happy unless you can afford it, which is basically just evil.
basically you've been brainwashed to think that you cant be happy without lots of money, you've been programmed to be a consumer, and only happy after spending money on things that arent needed. the big greedy people didnt take anything from families that they need to be happy, and is selling it back to us at inflated prices.
lol, Inviltrist, how about you address my points?
hmm, you addressed part of 2 of my points and i made 6 pts; is this Inviltrist admitting defeat?
i made points to your points. why cant you get off the science and talk philosophy. i've never attacked the science, i dont give a damn if its 5 years away or 5,000 years away.
it is all subjective, but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist. right and wrong is in the eyes of the beholder.
and human beings are more special then other species. why? because im a member of them.
you are talking about forcing all humans to believe in the goal that you believe in. plus your goal is pretty gay. existence for the sake of existence is pretty pathetic; your argument is pathetic.
yes, it seems horrible because of my instincts and if i didnt have instincts, i would be indifferent to everything including your stupid idea.
why should the human animal want to avoid extinction? the only reason you see human extinction as horrible is because of your emotions
your whole argument is that your emotions are more valid then everyone else's so you should be able to force everyone to beleive in your goal. you're no different then a tyrant, other then you're weak and pathetic and have to resort to posting on forums instead of attempting to achieve your goal.
> V.Kemp wrote:
> Defeat? Sorry, I'm not interested in listening to a little kid whine.
yeah, his personal philosophy could of been invented by a 10 year old... pretty weak.
"Why can't we use our intelligence to decide the right course for humanity? and emotions are merely chemical reactions in our brains, they all are rooted in instinct. Maybe crack open a science text book? Study up a bit on neuroscience, it will do you wonders.
We are merely biological machines. What makes us human is our dna. Emotions all spawn from instinct. To argue that would be to argue against all of modern neuroscience.
...what? Do you believe the human being has some silly little magical soul? Nope. All just brain chemistry.
You seem to be in the habit of making baseless assertions. Back up what you say. Why can't intelligence be used to mold the human being at not just a social level, but a biological level as well?
Social philosophies are all well and good. However they will all be destined for failure if you don't radically alter the human being to co-exist with that given political philosophy or theory.
Our ability to adapt is amazing. We now have the chance of using technology to adapt our species to meet the demands of a radically different world. A world created mostly by the success of the human animal..
We have the ability to become our own gods. Design our own children. Change what it means to be "human".
I'm going for a PhD in biochemistry and I plan on working in the field of biotechnology. Believe me, within 20 years the option for designing your own offspring will be a very real thing. Not just science fiction. It sounds crazy now but do some research, we are rapidly moving in that direction.
As a father, I love my children. However if I had the chance to be involved with their creation at the very base DNA level, I'd without a doubt do it.
Mankind has the chance to become the gods that we've always created."
we cant use chemistry to decide the right coarse, because immediately when we do so, "right" loses all meaning.
if we are merely biological machines, we are no different then other life and life is no different then death, and indifference occurs and any advancment that you may want is defeated.
no, i dont beleive humans are special because we have a soul, i think we are special because the race is lucky enough to have me as one of its members
intellect cant control our biological senses, because if it does, we are nothing but machines programed to do what the master programmed us to do. we loose free will. we are no longer beings, we're puppets. and because we're no longer beings, we cant be human beings.
why would you want to take away from your children the abillity to feel what they want to feel? why would you want to take away their free will; you're not talking about the chance to become Gods; you're talking about your chance to gain power over individuals, your greed and lust for power; you're talking about tyranny.
"I did not say ALL EMOTIONS ARE BAD. Now. read that. Understand that."
i understand that perfectly, i was just doing what you asked someone to do in the OP.
"That until the human animal is forced to evolve to a point where intellect over rules instincts(Emotions fall under the category of instincts IMO), any economic or political philosophies mankind dreams up with will forever be destined for failure.
The pathetic state of the experiment that is American democracy and Free Market Capitalism is the direct result of my above statement.
I challenge someone to argue otherwise."
if you cant handle someone arguing against exactly what you asked them to argue against in your Original Post of a thread, maybe this isnt the best place for you.
"We need to use our intellect to determine what emotions are suitable for our advancement, and which emotions/instinct are barriers.
So, while our intellect will never truly be free of instincts, it can be used as a tool to determine which ones are most useful. We have the chance to change the very essence of what a "human being" is.
So please, understand that emotions will always be there, as they are just instincts we are consciously aware of. However, our intellect can directly alter the instincts we feel using technology, which in return makes our emotions more suitable for the environment we have created for ourselves."
we cant use our intellect for what you claim because you cant logically say which emotional goal is right. you cant say logically whether the human race should strive for stricter adherence to the bible or whether we should strive for complete freedom or we should strive for equality. conflict isnt a result of no one using their intellect, conflict is the result of billions of people with different emotional ideas on what advancement is.
and emotions are not just instincts that we are consciously aware of. emotions define us as human beings.
lol, such a noob. no understanding of ancient culture. "some guys" wouldnt even be able to write. yes, it could be a fictional story, but definitely has some elements of truth in it, the question is how much truth. and no, i dont have it memorized. and im no drone
i think alot of people would identify with the definition of God as being just a prime mover. sure theres alot of people who like to think that God takes an active role in our lives, but there are also alot that dont think he does.
> Justinian I wrote:
> Well here's the thing about the first cause argument. If you want to call it God, then you also have to apply various properties such as that dude who is watching the world, issues moral laws, and communicates his will through prophets etc.
No. God by definition doesnt have to be watching over us, or issue moral laws to us or communicate his will through prophets...
do you have the alphabet memorized too? that would really pwn!
i would imagine that after a certain point our brains developed to the lvl where we did do it for fun, and any previous signals to indicate ovulation was no longer needed and faded with time.
Imperial Forum → Posts by avogadro
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.