Home     Graffiti Shop     Forum
Earn / Redeem Credits
Page 55 of 61 FirstFirst ... 535455051525354555657585960 ... LastLast
Results 1,081 to 1,100 of 1212
  1. #1081

    Default

    Yeah, but philosophy isn't made from scratch: new ways of thinking dont come from nowhere, theyre usually made by seeing the thoughts of old people and seeing what's right or wrong with them.

    some of Nietzsche's ideas are made by critics of the ideas of kant. Now when you read Kant, you see the influence of christian philosophy. And if you read crhistian philosophy, you see that its mainly based on Plato's ideas. So all its just like a big building which is being repaired and built all the time. Its true that you cant start a new building by youself (or at least it doesnt seem possible), but at least if you know whats there you'll be able to build a new floor.

    And its true, all you have in your mind has been put there by others... but you can view old ideas in a new way. The others have given you tools, now what you build whith them depends on you.

  2. #1082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kace91 View Post
    Yeah, but philosophy isn't made from scratch: new ways of thinking dont come from nowhere, theyre usually made by seeing the thoughts of old people and seeing what's right or wrong with them.

    some of Nietzsche's ideas are made by critics of the ideas of kant. Now when you read Kant, you see the influence of christian philosophy. And if you read crhistian philosophy, you see that its mainly based on Plato's ideas. So all its just like a big building which is being repaired and built all the time. Its true that you cant start a new building by youself (or at least it doesnt seem possible), but at least if you know whats there you'll be able to build a new floor.

    And its true, all you have in your mind has been put there by others... but you can view old ideas in a new way. The others have given you tools, now what you build whith them depends on you.

    agreed.
    i was refering to a post on like the first page when i came up with the idea of originality.
    he said something about Rasta's not being thikning for themselves and i was really just trying to prove to him that no one thiniks for themselves...
    i don't mean to sound like an asshole of anysort but what you just said i already knew.
    shakin singles out my socks.

  3. #1083

    Default

    then were agree

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
    I hate "save the humans!" rants such as this one.
    Hunger is a product of an inflated population.
    Feeding ever person in the world is NOT going to end hunger.
    It's just going to raise the population, and then even more people will be hungry.
    When a population of any animal gets too large and the food becomes scarce, the population declines by starvation. Once the population reaches the carrying capacity of the food supply, it levels off and everyone is fed. Food supply rises, everyone is fat and happy, population rises. Food supply decreases, people go starve, population decreases.
    These fluctuations are a natural occurrence in ecosystems and happen slowly.
    The solution to hunger is starvation.
    .
    If we feed everyone, protect everyone, cure everyone, and make sure nobody dies, then we're going to be crawling all over each other.
    Fucking culture is so ignorant to the order of the natural world.
    i have to disagree with that.

    Its true that nature works that way, but what made us humans is the hability to change the order of nature.

    Its true that when a country starts growing, the population increases a lot, but thats not permanent. Just look at graphics of population by age in european countries (and i think its also valid in north america):

    We are starting to have a problem, cause there isnt enough young people.

    That's it, right now we are depending on inmigrants to fill the hole made by the reduction of young people in relation to the older population. once the country is "developed" ( i dont like to use that term, cause tecnically we all are developing, no country have come to perfection ) the population stops growing.

    Following that, it should be possible to stop the overpopulation by developing all countries until they all come to a similar level, and if its needed we even can use birth control like the chinese goverment does (its not something completely fair, but at least i think its better than letting people die).

    The problem is not that we cant all be fed. the problem is that the excesive growin of north america and europe is based on other countries' poverty. we wouldnt be able to have our clothes, computers, tvs, etc. if it werent made in poor countries with cheap labor, which by the way is often formed by kids.

    oor countries are not only poor by theirselves. the main reason of their poverty is globalization. its not that we should help them because we are all humans: we should help them because we are the ones who are causing their hunger.

    How? thats really complex. But IMO the first step is clear: we must stop companies to set their fabrics in countries with no law against abuse. the world is becoming global, and we need laws which can be applied worldwide.

  4. #1084
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    crappleton, wi
    Posts
    4,134
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Your birth control statement is invalid. Birth control is always given as the end all to population growth.
    But if that worked then populations wouldn't continue to grow at an exponential rate even with the advent of birth control.
    Last time I checked, china, even with their "extreme" birth control, is one of the most populous countries on the planet. And they're still growing.
    The planet is not capable of sustaining the number of people we have now, with the majority living in societies that are not sustainable, and you think the problem would be solved if every country was developed, and had the same number of people?
    The only way nature can be controlled is by destroying it, so yes I suppose you are right that humans can, and are very good, at controling nature.

  5. #1085

    Default

    its just basics maths.

    Lets say that its made a law which only allows 1 child per family.

    In the best case, thats it, if every single person in the world is able to form a family before dying, we have that the next generation will be exactly 1/2 of the one we started with.

    It is an extreme case, of course, but you cant deny that with birth control the growth can be stopped, or at least controlled.


    that's refering to the growth of population, without caring about the resources. BUT we have to add to the ecuation our modern life style: According to capitalism, theres no limit about what a person can have, as long as he earned it fairly. you can have 20.000 houses and 300 cars, nobody will care.

    If you dont limit that, then the world population doesnt matter: a small percentage of people will take as money as they can, and with money comes power, terrain, etc. if the resources arent equally distributed, then who cares about how many people are in the world? resources wont be enough anyway.
    Last edited by kace91; 05-15-2010 at 06:59 PM.

  6. #1086
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    crappleton, wi
    Posts
    4,134
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    thinking you could enact a global law that says people can only have one child is like telling a dog it can only bark once.
    besides, birth control is not even permitted in some religions.
    you're not thinking about our "modern lifestyle" and the impact it's enactment has on the environment.
    the way the 1st world nations live is directly detrimental to the health of the planet.
    we want everything we desire, no matter the cost, and we will get it because we think we are rightly entitled to it, being the assumed pinnacle of evolution (or creation, if you're prone to following fairy tales and blind faith)
    a species at the top of the food chain has only disease, starvation, and natural disasters (not factoring in deaths attributed to our technology or each other) to keep it's population in check, and when that species attempts to overcome these natural boundaries it will continue to grow and consume.
    the world is not infinitely vast. it cannot support an ever growing population.
    if we keep growing, we will consume everything that there is to consume on this planet, and then we'll be forced to migrate to another planet, or sack it for its resources to send back to earth.
    but it is very unlikely that our planet would even last that long.
    ecosystems will break down. energy sources will become more scarce as it takes more and more energy just to obtain the energy we would need to support the population.
    domino effect. mass extinction.
    the planet cleans itself and the remaining organisms left repopulate the world until it reaches a stable state and a balanced ecosystem.

    So which do you prefer? Becoming that alien species that conquers worlds and destroys them in the process, then moving on in a never ending quest to consume and support it's evergrowing size and desire for McGriddles and HDTVs; or becoming extinct?
    These are the only two options our civilization has.
    Unless we get our heads out of asses and return back to the way our species lived for millions of years prior to our modern day life style; in harmony with nature, not in a battle against it.

    I know more about this than you.
    They're called books. Read them.
    Last edited by Vagrant; 05-15-2010 at 08:01 PM.

  7. #1087

    Default

    hahaha, you're right. But seriously, no matter how ''intelligent'' humans are, no one will ever get his head out of his ass because we are not intelligent that way, and because we just don't fucking care or at least, those who would make a difference to something don't. And we will destroy ourselves much before being somewhere in space or on another planet i think. Personnally I don't have any problem with the concept of us becoming extinct, thats what i think have more chances to happen, and i prefer that in a way. we'll just get what we wanted for ourselves

  8. #1088

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
    thinking you could enact a global law that says people can only have one child is like telling a dog it can only bark once.
    besides, birth control is not even permitted in some religions.
    As i said, it was an extreme case, just to show that birth control doesnt fail as a theory. Of course you cant apply its most extreme way just directly, the same way you cant cure al diseases in a moment, but thats not a barrier to try it gradually. Anyway, as i said, i dont think that overpopulation is (still) a problem.

    you're not thinking about our "modern lifestyle" and the impact it's enactment has on the environment.
    the way the 1st world nations live is directly detrimental to the health of the planet.
    we want everything we desire, no matter the cost, and we will get it because we think we are rightly entitled to it, being the assumed pinnacle of evolution (or creation, if you're prone to following fairy tales and blind faith)
    Maybe i dindt explain well my point of view. Of course our society its growing without control (in terms of resources wasted by person, not of population), and of course we have to change that.

    BUT, there is a long way between changin our lifestyle, and saying that we shouldn't worry about people dying of starvation.

    (and im an atheist, by the way)

    species at the top of the food chain has only disease, starvation, and natural disasters (not factoring in deaths attributed to our technology or each other) to keep it's population in check, and when that species attempts to overcome these natural boundaries it will continue to grow and consume.
    This is not exactly true, cause, as you said, you are not factoring humans will.

    I mean, we will live longer, this resulting in more population, but theres no reason why we will have to grow in population. Just have a look at this (taken from wikipedia):




    its clear, the more developed the country is, the less fertilty it has.

    So overpopulation is not a problem, the problem is the use of our resources in modern societies.

    which lead us to the key:


    the world is not infinitely vast. it cannot support an ever growing population.
    if we keep growing, we will consume everything that there is to consume on this planet, and then we'll be forced to migrate to another planet, or sack it for its resources to send back to earth.
    but it is very unlikely that our planet would even last that long.
    ecosystems will break down. energy sources will become more scarce as it takes more and more energy just to obtain the energy we would need to support the population.
    domino effect. mass extinction.
    the planet cleans itself and the remaining organisms left repopulate the world until it reaches a stable state and a balanced ecosystem.

    So which do you prefer? Becoming that alien species that conquers worlds and destroys them in the process, then moving on in a never ending quest to consume and support it's evergrowing size and desire for McGriddles and HDTVs; or becoming extinct?
    These are the only two options our civilization has.
    Unless we get our heads out of asses and return back to the way our species lived for millions of years prior to our modern day life style; in harmony with nature, not in a battle against it.
    I want to make a distinction here:

    Im absolutely in favor of stopping our actual way of develovement. People can live without havin one car per person to contaminate just because they dont want to walk, use unnecesary tecnology and etc.

    but im against the line of thought that says that the solution is going back to the past. There is no state of harmony with nature in the past, that is a lie.

    If people in the past didnt live as we live now was just because they couldnt.

    You cant just walk back the path, or the history will be repeated.

    The solution is changing our world? sure. but not to left it as it was before, but learning about our mistakes. Sustainable development is the key.


    I know more about this than you.
    They're called books. Read them.
    Theres no knowledge which cant be questioned (not even in science), therefore the argument of authority its not valid. Even if you know more about this than me (which can perfectly be true), testing the strenght of your arguments is always necesary.

    And you can be sure that i read a lot, thanks.
    Last edited by kace91; 05-15-2010 at 08:44 PM.

  9. #1089
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    back of a cats head
    Posts
    251
    Credits
    104
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
    I hate "save the humans!" rants such as this one.
    Hunger is a product of an inflated population.
    Feeding ever person in the world is NOT going to end hunger.
    It's just going to raise the population, and then even more people will be hungry.
    When a population of any animal gets too large and the food becomes scarce, the population declines by starvation. Once the population reaches the carrying capacity of the food supply, it levels off and everyone is fed. Food supply rises, everyone is fat and happy, population rises. Food supply decreases, people go starve, population decreases.
    These fluctuations are a natural occurrence in ecosystems and happen slowly.
    The solution to hunger is starvation.
    .
    If we feed everyone, protect everyone, cure everyone, and make sure nobody dies, then we're going to be crawling all over each other.
    Fucking culture is so ignorant to the order of the natural world.

    ..
    <3Ishmael best books
    Quote Originally Posted by CrustOner View Post
    I'm far too hardcore for all of you. I write Penis.

  10. #1090
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kelowna BC Canaduh
    Posts
    647
    Credits
    648
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
    I hate "save the humans!" rants such as this one.
    Hunger is a product of an inflated population.
    Feeding ever person in the world is NOT going to end hunger.
    It's just going to raise the population, and then even more people will be hungry.
    When a population of any animal gets too large and the food becomes scarce, the population declines by starvation. Once the population reaches the carrying capacity of the food supply, it levels off and everyone is fed. Food supply rises, everyone is fat and happy, population rises. Food supply decreases, people go starve, population decreases.
    These fluctuations are a natural occurrence in ecosystems and happen slowly.
    The solution to hunger is starvation.
    .
    If we feed everyone, protect everyone, cure everyone, and make sure nobody dies, then we're going to be crawling all over each other.
    Fucking culture is so ignorant to the order of the natural world.


    Vagrant, I have nothing but respect for you but ur facts aren't straight. NA has 20% of the people and 70% of the food, poverty and lack of proper medical services and education increase the population in third world countries, you share a common opinion that is unfortunately misguided. And I am not saying just saying, a lot of folks think this way but it isn't true.

    Micro loans are actually saving entire villages... what is a microloan, it's $200-$2000 loaned to a thirdworld man or women so they can complete a plan of action, it's amazing what a small amount of money can do, for us it's a couple weeks worth of food, for them it's an entire livelyhood.


    they is more than enough food for everyone, how does india survive?



    Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day.

    for more info check out: http://www.globalissues.org



    Vagrant: while rereading ur post I realized we agree about the state of the world, the difference seems that you'd rather not have it discussed. Like you said about the head and asses, if this one little microloan or eductation or this or that can help bring that person back into the big picture isn't it worth it?

    i totally agree with you about our common future. it's time to remove the head form the ass. and do our part, each individual. who ever will listen, haha, no offence but you sound like a nihilist.
    Last edited by soath; 05-16-2010 at 06:00 AM.
    "True merit, like a river, the deeper it is, the less noise it makes." ~Edward Frederick Halifax

  11. #1091
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    crappleton, wi
    Posts
    4,134
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Actually, my opinions are more anarcho-primitivist, but I understand where you might get nihilist from.
    However, I don't believe in the destructive chaos that nihilism favors.
    I think the runaway train that is modern day civilization is heading toward a cliff, but that doesn't mean we blow up the train.
    It means we stop the train, then get off and walk.
    .
    My points are sound, I just have difficulties fully explaining some parts.
    .
    @medacog1: Among others.
    Last edited by Vagrant; 05-16-2010 at 07:41 AM.

  12. #1092

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FOCUS1 View Post
    why is it that africa has the most resources of a single nation and is one of the poorest nations?
    They had no means of production. The first nation to industrialize was Britain, and they were able to do so because they had coal deposits as well as a middle class that emerged and was willing to work. Sure Africa had resources, but they had no way to use it.

    On overpopulation, forcing people to have only one child will create another problem that wasn't mentioned. If you look at China's distribution of gender, they have like 65% male, which is really unnatural. Infanticide has to be occurring because people have only one chance at having a child.

    I think American's would rather spend $200-2000 on ipods and laptops than on other people's lives. People are greedy and selfish, and I doubt that will change before it's too late.

  13. #1093
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    353
    Credits
    1
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    this is something i thought of when me n my friend were talking bout religions..

    ok so why do you have deja vu? Why cant no one explain the fact that you see things in the future as thier happening..but than later on experiance it?

    I figured out that maybe after we die, were reborn into our lives again. so we alwayz continue to live in our own body and thats why we have deja vu(imo of course) because we've already lived through it.

    does that make sense?
    "my blackbo0k is like my bitch,cause everybody tryna get up in it"
    want a discount off karmaloop.com? Hiit me in a pm
    South Bay Writers Get At Me

  14. #1094
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,830
    Credits
    38
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Personally I think my deja vu come from dreams where i've changed into parallel-universes and the space time continuum gets crossed up.
    Regardless of what I post I don't condone any illegal graffiti, although I stayed at a holiday inn once.

  15. #1095
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    crappleton, wi
    Posts
    4,134
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    What if the universe will end in a big crunch, and then is reborn in a new big bang, and history repeats itself exactly the same. like some cosmic rubberband of destiny.
    And deja vu is the flash back as you said.

  16. #1096
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    353
    Credits
    1
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
    What if the universe will end in a big crunch, and then is reborn in a new big bang, and history repeats itself exactly the same. like some cosmic rubberband of destiny.
    And deja vu is the flash back as you said.
    but what about when its deja vu about something youre gunna do?

    you cant have a flash back of something you havent done..

    or can you..... o_o!
    "my blackbo0k is like my bitch,cause everybody tryna get up in it"
    want a discount off karmaloop.com? Hiit me in a pm
    South Bay Writers Get At Me

  17. #1097
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Pomona/L.A.
    Posts
    2,042
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    What a depressing concept.. That instead of reincarnating as something else, we reincarnate exactly into the same lives we just led. How boring. But then again, it's plausible.
    No More Weekly Toy Battles.

  18. #1098
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    353
    Credits
    1
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    at least deja vu visions could steer us to maybe living a better life this time around.
    "my blackbo0k is like my bitch,cause everybody tryna get up in it"
    want a discount off karmaloop.com? Hiit me in a pm
    South Bay Writers Get At Me

  19. #1099
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    crappleton, wi
    Posts
    4,134
    Credits
    0
    Earn / Redeem Credits

    Default

    indeed.
    however, i'm not saying that one would be reincarnated into their old life again upon dying. that wouldn't work because we would be able to notice that.
    especially with the people that die very young.
    i'm saying the universe reincarnates into itself if it shrinks back into a big cruch/big bang

    deja vu is fucking crazy though. i love it
    i also love all of the little coincidences that happen when i'm high.
    i swear marijuana has some sort of supernatural power which allows one to be more connected with the fabric of the universe.

  20. #1100

    Default

    The fact you have a beard while u typed out that last paragraph wants me to break a dream cather or concrete over some nature


 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back Top