| |
| Author
|
out of curiousity, How many of you guys make a good living with music alone?
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Jun 26, 2008 22:08
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Jun 26, 2008 22:44
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 11:00
|
Colin - labour  yah, digging holes anyone can do, even stone age savages.
I mean something that is a unique product of their culture that could enhance ours, or more importantly that we couldn't have done ourselves.
upavas - Evolution is a theory which is logically stated in a format of arguments comprised of premises and deductive conclusions. Whether those premises and conclusions are true or not doesn't make the argument for the theory of evolution any less logical. Do you understand?
What is logic? Its an abstract mathematical discipline for expressing languages features (even pure mathematics) symbolically. What results is a method for representing reason in such a way that it cannot be ambiguously interpreted, or even incorrect - depending of-course on the strength of the premises.
Did I actually say evolution is logical? If I did,
All I meant was that it was a well structured, well argued theory with a host of evidence, so much so that it is taken as de-facto truth by almost all serious scientists on the planet. |
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 11:15
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 15:05
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-27 11:00, bukboy wrote:
Colin - labour yah, digging holes anyone can do, even stone age savages.
|
|
You sound like the foolish people here that complain about Poles/<insert nationality of choice> taking their jobs ignoring the fact that no one here wants to do those jobs...
UnderTow |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 15:55
|
Colin (u sound almost friendly) - Im sorry if I didnt make myself clear. After all English is an adopted first language for me. But I really did not mean what you took me to mean.
How do I express "a positive cultural contribution that is not a default contribution of anybody that has two legs and arms"? Im looking for ideas, some decent thinkers, artisans, whatever, something that distinguishes as a rational entity not an animal. And Im not talking about race Im talking about the culture of the indigenous indigents.
Undertow - Im just trying to prove a point that the hippy point of view is unsubstantiated by anything except idealism and faith, and the corresponding fanaticism is just brainwashed adherence to spiritual dogma. bear with me dont u feel entertained? |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 16:17
|
bukboy: The "Hippy point of view", especially the way you present it, is a load of bollocks. I don't see any intelligent people here arguing in favour of the hippy approach. That doesn't make the opposite true.
I find your views not vastly better than those though. You make some good points but you also make some very silly points. (Hitler not religious? Hitler realistic? Hitler efficient? How any one can say that after his massive failure is beyond me). You also look at things a bit too simplistically. Humans are not just animals following instincts. Our thought patterns also have effect and that is exactly what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom.
If you look at history, there is a continuing upwards trend towards a more social and less survivalist point of view. Historically speaking it is only recently that slavery was common place throughout the world. Today, there is not one nation that will openly condone slavery (even if some countries still use it). That is quite a shift of the global perspective. There are more such examples: Women's rights, racist discrimination etc.
You say that the survival of the strongest is the accepted norm yet most nations in the world have signed and support the universal declaration of human rights. Nor is this a western concept as most nations agree on these notions.
The examples you cite (like Hitler) are becoming aberrations rather than the rule. Even in a rather insular society like the U.S., most people now realise that Bush is a bad president and is destroying their nation and it's reputation. These things take time but they are definitely shifting towards a more enlightened approach.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 17:15
|
Undertow - Ok the Hitler thing I dont really see the point in working to defend for the sake of argument (if possible that is ), so write it off as capricious BS. Although his success must have some roots in a high level of understanding of how the world REALLY works, but thats for another days argument.
My point is that the underlying necessities of life (resources, social structure evolution for growth) eventually correct irrational idealism like tolerance and mutual respect. Right now or very soon we will see what happens when the western evolved solution conflicts with the eastern evolved solution, who will be the victor and what ultimately will be our destiny as a species.
Do you think that it will be a seamless integration of one into the other? All I see is that the American allies will be allowed to pick off non allies for growth. Until it reaches a critical point.
Do you disagree with that?
After that even if one side wins, when there are no more borders to conquer the system which thrives on expansion will come under pressure and fracture, until another expansionistic entity will again rise to king of the hill, making the species stronger, until it fails and the next cycle ...
In any case I see this pattern everywhere, whether we like to pretend or naively believe that enlightenment guides our actions, it is actually conflict and strength (whether physical or logistical) which drives our evolution.
But I could be wrong. We'll have to wait and see because you don't have enough evidence to the contrary.
Personally I rate conflict. Conflict generates real progress and functions as a wonderful evolution tool.
The fact that it is eternal is self defeating I know, but it is our reality. ( ascendancy would be lovely, but the cynic in me just doesnt see it happening )
The people who reckon that a new world consciousness is emerging have no substantial evidence to back it up, which means that its wishful thinking, because any real proposition has at least a smidgen of real evidence, or is at least testable.
In any case it is not the idealistic approach (generally present in the members of this forum I think) which world leaders care about. They care about realpolitik and real numbers of dead people traded for dollars from resources.
P.S. Man Y don't you try taking my side for some fun instead of doing the boring PC thing. |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 17:27
|
|
Undertow - Actually I think the only way you will prove to me the enlightened approach is by showing me that we either dont need evolution anymore, or that conflict is not a necessary component of evolution of a strong, surviving species. |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jun 27, 2008 18:41
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-27 17:15, bukboy wrote:
Undertow - Ok the Hitler thing I dont really see the point in working to defend for the sake of argument (if possible that is ), so write it off as capricious BS. Although his success must have some roots in a high level of understanding of how the world REALLY works, but thats for another days argument.
|
|
He killed himself in the end. He achieved total and catastrophic failure. He had temporary success but that is easy. Achieving long term success is much harder and needs a totally different, more enlightened, approach. IMO Hitler is a good example of having absolutely no idea how it REALLY works.
Quote:
|
My point is that the underlying necessities of life (resources, social structure evolution for growth) eventually correct irrational idealism like tolerance and mutual respect.
|
|
And my opinion is that what you call irrational is the only rational thing. Following one's basic instincts in not rational in any way whatsoever. Every animal does that. Going beyond and above those animal instincts and using one's mental faculties is what rationality is all about.
Quote:
|
Right now or very soon we will see what happens when the western evolved solution conflicts with the eastern evolved solution, who will be the victor and what ultimately will be our destiny as a species.
|
|
What is the western evolved solution and what is the eastern one? IMO they are the same. Or rather, you have all types of people in each culture. You missed my point about the universal declaration of human rights: It is signed by countries all over the globe. It is not restricted to one nation or culture.
Reason and rationality is something common to educated, intelligent people from any nation and not dependant on race or culture.
Quote:
|
All I see is that the American allies will be allowed to pick off non allies for growth. Until it reaches a critical point.
Do you disagree with that?
|
|
I don't agree or disagree on the short term. We will have to see what the next presidency brings us. On the long term, I disagree. Either things will come to a catastrophic head (for all parties involved) or things will slowly evolve to a more humanistic and global system (with no nations any more).
Quote:
|
After that even if one side wins, when there are no more borders to conquer the system which thrives on expansion will come under pressure and fracture, until another expansionistic entity will again rise to king of the hill, making the species stronger, until it fails and the next cycle ...
|
|
This I totally disagree with. I don't believe conflict or expansion is needed. That is too simplistic.
The question is whether armed conflict can be avoided: I believe it can. The best solution IMO is to have all the interests so deeply inter-weaved that any aggressive expansionist tendencies can only have negative effects on one's own interests. That is the model of the EU. It is actually the raison d'etre of the EU. (And that is why I am pissed off at the stupid populist Irish politicians that allowed a referendum on the Lisabon treaty but anyway...).
Quote:
|
In any case I see this pattern everywhere, whether we like to pretend or naively believe that enlightenment guides our actions, it is actually conflict and strength (whether physical or logistical) which drives our evolution.
|
|
Biological evolution has always been driven by such things (and chance and other factors) but biological evolution is not the only determining factor. Just look around you. The world is very different to what it was 10.000 years ago yet we haven't evolved much biologically in the last 100.000 years. If anything this points towards the idea that evolution has zero impact on the evolution of our human society. (By that I don't mean that the results of evolution have zero impact which they obviously do but that evolution itself is not shaping society).
Some of the changes are very recent historically speaking yet people from all nations of the world seem to agree on these new ideas.
I would say that as medical and scientific knowledge progresses, evolution and the results of evolution will have even less impact on humans. Only looking at biological evolution is really being stuck in the passed and ignoring the vast majority of the available evidence.
Quote:
|
But I could be wrong. We'll have to wait and see because you don't have enough evidence to the contrary.
|
|
There is plenty of evidence. Even when you look at some news bulletin condemning, let's say, Mugabe's behaviour right now, this is proof for the ideas I (and others) here are defending: The fact that it is news and that it is being condemned by most nations of the world should tell you that we are in a very different world than say 1000 years ago or even 100 years ago.
The fact that you can even come up with examples like Hitler is because the world at large condemns such behaviour and it has been documented as such and that animalistic approaches based purely on greed and other animal instincts (like racism) are not acceptable any more.
Quote:
|
Personally I rate conflict. Conflict generates real progress and functions as a wonderful evolution tool.
|
|
But is it the most efficient path? Two people competing for the same resources are less efficient than two people working together to harness and use those resources.
Conflict is great when there is no thought behind the process (like for instance evolution) but by no means is it the most efficient system.
Nature has "used" conflict as a tool but that is because it lacks any form of intelligence. Nature doesn't have what we humans do have: Intelligence. We can be more efficient than evolution and just judging by what we are doing to our planet right now, can do it on a global scale.
A simple example of evolution's lack of efficiency is animal breeding: We can create and sustain new breeds of animals much much faster than evolution ever could. Now we can even create new species through genetic engineering that evolution would have NEVER produced!
Still convinced that conflict is the most efficient motor to change?
Quote:
|
The people who reckon that a new world consciousness is emerging have no substantial evidence to back it up, which means that its wishful thinking, because any real proposition has at least a smidgen of real evidence, or is at least testable.
|
|
See my points above. The evidence is EVERYWHERE YOU LOOK! If you can see it...
Quote:
|
In any case it is not the idealistic approach (generally present in the members of this forum I think) which world leaders care about.
|
|
Complete and utter rubbish. As I have pointed out before, most nations in the world have signed the universal declaration of human rights. More examples: The European Union which was created after the 2nd world war to never have to go through that again. Or the United Nations or the universal court of law in the Hague or a multitude of national and international organisations and structures that do exactly the opposite of what you believe politicians and governments do.
Quote:
|
They care about realpolitik and real numbers of dead people traded for dollars from resources.
|
|
Some do. Some don't. If you were arguing that there are some opportunists that live by your animalistic rules then I could only agree. If you argue that the whole world works according to those rules, you are completely and utterly wrong.
Quote:
|
P.S. Man Y don't you try taking my side for some fun instead of doing the boring PC thing.
|
|
I'm not PC by a very long margin. I agree with some of your comments. (Like the respect comment. IMO respect is something that needs to be earned. Not something received at birth). I also realise that some of your comments, although correct in nature, where specifically designed to create reactions in some of the readers. (Called trolling). But essentially I disagree with your underlying premise and I don't think it is much fun at all.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 28, 2008 00:27
|
Undertow I respect your answers. especially the bold IMO's.
I think there is only one way to settle this. By answering my last two questions.
Do we not need to evolve anymore at some point?
And I dont mean only biological evolution since our societies now evolve using memes for superiority, and the stronger always trump. Technology of a society is also a type of meme.
I think the only way that you could have a peaceful stable enlightened society is if you destroyed that which makes us human. i.e. our individuality, our need for diversification, our will to survive at any odds. Our very basic need to compete which is so good at making us survive.
And how would it be possible for evolution to occur without meaningful losers or winners? How could the strong winners that are the next generation possibly carry on if the weak losers didnt get removed from the population?
Any consensus of rights will make humanity weak, and in that opportunity again the strong will flourish.
The enlightened ideals of the world catch so much attention in the news because they capture the lazy public's imagination. It doesnt occur to anyone that the whole purpose of their life will be meaningless without struggle, since that is all we've evolved to do. |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Jun 28, 2008 01:01
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-27 11:00, bukboy wrote:
upavas - Evolution is a theory which is logically stated in a format of arguments comprised of premises and deductive conclusions. Whether those premises and conclusions are true or not doesn't make the argument for the theory of evolution any less logical. Do you understand?
What is logic? Its an abstract mathematical discipline for expressing languages features (even pure mathematics) symbolically. What results is a method for representing reason in such a way that it cannot be ambiguously interpreted, or even incorrect - depending of-course on the strength of the premises.
Did I actually say evolution is logical? If I did,
All I meant was that it was a well structured, well argued theory with a host of evidence, so much so that it is taken as de-facto truth by almost all serious scientists on the planet.
|
|
Bukboy, you don't understand.
Logic is a dualistic aproach to things. Either yes or no. It is not very abstract in it's core. Only 2 things are needed, yes and no, death and life, - and +. and so on...
On a physical level you can analyze, theorize and interpret in many different ways, however you do it, you will always end up with the dualistic approach of logic.
Life and therefor evolution goes beyond a physical level. There is a physical aspect to it, as far as we know it. We do not know where the spark of life comes from, yes, we can speculate, theorize and interpret all kinds of things about it.
Life (evolution)is more than just Will to power, in case of humanity it is all we are. People like Socrates, Moses, Buddha, Mahavira, Gurdjeff and Jesus would not have happened if it were otherwise. They are the peak of evolution of humankind as far as I am concerned. They had no will to power and for the most part were killed because their ideas went too much against the establishment.
Apparently none of them really minded, as they obviously had an inkling that there is more to life then just the body.
You wanted a logical explanation for something that is NOT logical. Evolution cannot be explained in a mathematical formula and therefor logically. It is more than just physical.
And evolution is not a theory either, interpretations of it are.
Evolution is happening here and now. It is practical. How can it be a theory???
We can philosophize about it, we can interpret it in many different ways, and all that is theoretical.
Evolution doesn't have anything to do with anybodies theory about it.
It does not matter how you are trying to put it. It happens regardless of your theorizing about it or not.
On another note I believe the western and the eastern approach combined is what we really need to evolve. Both are lopsided and lack on their own, when combined we have the view of the inner and outer together. The western mind needs to lose it's fear of death, the eastern mind needs to lose it's fear of sex.
Maybe the enlightened views in the media catch so much attention from the broad media because we are evolving??? Not on a physical level but also on a conciousness level. I would certainly say that on a whole we are much more conscious than lets say 500 years ago, when Mugabe's and Kim Yong Ils ideas were pretty much a reality everywhere..., just think about it. For saying what you said on this forum you would have been horribly killed, mutilated because it went against someones will to power...
So...
there is hope for us yet...
 Upavas - Here And Now (Sangoma Rec.) new EP out Oct.29th, get it here:
http://timecode.bandcamp.com
http://upavas.com
http://soundcloud.com/upavas-1/ |
|
|
|
Fright_Rate
Fright Rate
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
128
Posted : Jun 28, 2008 09:33
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-04-03 10:49, shamantrixx wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2008-03-22 11:48, heretical wrote:
you almost certainly will profoundly disagree with yourself when you are older...
|
|
hard likely... There is no one single reason why life should really go on. People just believe that it is important to continue living as long as it's possible. More often than not they live unhappy, frustrated, worried, afraid, attached and they have jobs that they don't like. What's the point in living that kind of life? Why should I change my mind? The older I am the less I believe in that utterly stupid concept of "life MUST go on".
|
|
wow dude. pull the trigger.....
www.soundcloud.com/fright-rate
www.soundcloud.com/psydefects-sa
www.soundcloud.com/cryptic-symmetry-records |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Jun 28, 2008 09:42
|
upavas I dont think u know what logic is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
also
Quote:
| Life and therefor evolution goes beyond a physical level. There is a physical aspect to it, as far as we know it. We do not know where the spark of life comes from, yes, we can speculate, theorize and interpret all kinds of things about it.
Life (evolution)is more than just Will to power, in case of humanity it is all we are. People like Socrates, Moses, Buddha, Mahavira, Gurdjeff and Jesus would not have happened if it were otherwise. They are the peak of evolution of humankind as far as I am concerned. They had no will to power and for the most part were killed because their ideas went too much against the establishment.
Apparently none of them really minded, as they obviously had an inkling that there is more to life then just the body. |
|
All that stuff afterwards is all spiritual gobbledegook that u have given no substantiating evidence for. My apologies but I cant take it on faith
and the statement
Quote:
|
And evolution is not a theory either, interpretations of it are. |
|
is just false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
You should check out stuff on philosophy of science, I think it would do you a load of good, i.e. Karl Popper |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Jun 28, 2008 14:15
|
Bukboy,
There is scientific evidence to what I am saying.
Please tell me where life comes from. I want a logical explanation from you why life exists and where it comes from!
Not the mechanism, the body, but where it comes from, where it goes to when we die. Since nothing in this Universe can be taken away(scientifically proven) life cannot be taken away either. So please tell me logically where it goes.
Meanwhile read some Aristotle, the father of western logic. You will see that all his statements come from a dualistic approach.
As to theory, please go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory
Since evolution is neither a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena nor a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis I think we are done here.
Upavas - Here And Now (Sangoma Rec.) new EP out Oct.29th, get it here:
http://timecode.bandcamp.com
http://upavas.com
http://soundcloud.com/upavas-1/ |
|
|
|
|
|
