what will be our living conditions, if... (->300 years)

oh please

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm a bit stoned now myself but look at the drug adicts!, at the morally / mentally degenarated folk which make more than 2/3 of our population
they are not great, just miserable trash with nothing to give to our species apart from bad gene combinations

agree, we need a new way of thinking, but it musn't be a religious one
and it musn't have any imposed "comandments" such as you gave, it must be fully integrated in the world preception of humans.

anyways, evolution of the mind is a slow process, but right now we need a quick technological answer, like genetic engineering, birth control methods, making deserts livable again, etc

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Which part of my posts said anything about commandments????
I didn't say that you have to do this and that, in fact you don't have to do anything, but the question is what you choose to do? To be or not to be, that is the question.

It is precisly these kind of attitudes that created those problems. Can't you see that? Drug addicts they need our help but instead we do nothing, and think they are "lower" than us because their behavior is not acceptable to us. There are many people who go hungry when we throw out tonnes of food. We do have enough, but we keep them to ourself, we don't share them with others, because we imagine them to be separate from us. But we are one, as a specie, we cannot ingore them anymore. If not now, when? If not us, who?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

the weak must die out the natural way , not be artificially sustained
from there comes our problems (overpopulation, waves of imigrants), we too much mess with our less capable/fortunate ones. Let the nature (evolution) take it's share.

In some way it is good that there is a huge aids problem in africa and if it weren't for it, I'm sure that the nature would come up with something other to cleanse itself

The survival of the fittest is what keeps the species alive, not legions of those who are only a burden to the kin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Survival of the fittest, this is the idea that starts wars, terrorism, it comes from the belief that we are separate. You think the purpose of life is survival, but it's not. It is much larger than simply surviving. The purpose of life is to evolve, to experience life. If the idea of survival of the fittest describes you, than that is a reflection of who you are. But life is more than just surviving. And everyone of us is striving to be bigger than who you are right now. Therefore, try not only to survival but grow as a specie, and we can all do that when we finally see that we are one.

 

I think you and I were talking about the survival of the species! You brought in the concept of purpose, not I.
survival is now important, if we look at the problems in the context of this thread.

I think that our species must survive (simple yet deep self protectinon instinct), and I did say no thoughts about my views on any ideas about some purpose of life.

Humans give the purpose, not nature, nature gives the chance to live.

Our species is one, but to think that all it's members must survive and evolve due to some moral concept in inadequate. Indeed we are one, therefore the death of a few doesn't really mater if we look at the big picture.

and if you're talking about purpose, then I agree with you in the aspect that each individual must strive to become smthing better, smthing higher. As Nietzsche (my fav filosopher btw) said:
"Humans are only a bridge from an animal to a god."
I want us to become gods, and I want to be one, but the genetical and society destructive trash that we carry with ourselves is slowing the pace of the evolution and threatening the very existance of our species. (see. overpopulation and the related problems)

 

You say that our specie has to survive, but from your post, you are willing to loose other in order for some others to survive. Is this the best we can do? You still based your idea on the belief that we are not one. If we are one, you wouldn't hurt others, because hurting others is hurting you. You would want the best for everyone, because you want the best for yourself.

You said you want us to become Gods. But we are God. God is everything that is and everything that is not. God is life and we are life. Furthermore, God is love. A God of love would never end someone's life without their acknowlegement.

You refer some human beings as trash. Can you tell me that you truly believe that we are one? Remember, when you call someone trash, you are not only lowing them, but also you, for we are one.

 

of course - that is the most reasonalble way to go
have you any other solution to overpopulation?

we are one species (in english this word is used only in plural btw) not one individual and the whole interests of the specie may be other than of seperate individuals

medicine does not have to be tasty, it has to help and that is what counts.

the best for our species is to advance and to evolve and evolution means the survival of the fittest so all population gets to a higher point in evolution

I was refering to the capabilities of our mind. don't think they are godly now.

that is empty dogma you are speaking, these are sciforums
love is undefined and very relative and to each different

I am talking about sanity and logical survival not spiritual god of love

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

again... we are one species not one individual. If you refer to the Jung's mutual subconsciousness then I must object that he told of it as a field of interactive medium, not as one big super-mind.

and I see and acknowledge that I am not perfect and that many others are much less perfect .

we are on the way to become gods, maybe we are just the starting matereal for those who shall be gods , we are not ones today

and your (sorry to say) silly concept that we are one ... do you place Buddha on one step of spiritual and mental evolution with a canibal from Congo?

edit: sorry, will continue the discussion later, I have to go

 

We are constantly trying to solve the problem but not its cause, because we, as a specie still can't look ahead long enough to realise what we are doing here will cause a problem, even when we do, we deny it. We let the current pleasure take over. The problem of overpopulation can be temporarly solve by just letting people die, but the problem will return. Because all behaviours comes from our belief, without changing our beliefs, all problems will return. We should start educating people about the protential damage of overpopulation. This is the same with all other problems. Currently we are trying to solve world's problems using economical, military means, but the root of those problems are our beliefs. If we are willing to let others die and don't do anything, we will be in a state of despair. Despair had created the problems, allowed them to remain, and certainly not going to solve them. It is the time for repair.

Yet the interests of individuals have the power to create. Whether it's a creation for the best, or for the worst. Individuals affects our species as a whole.

Hurting others to save you, is hurting nontheless. And does it really help? Does the war on terrorism stoped the terror? No. Using violence againest violence, is violence still. It does not work to create peace.

Really? Now we have huge population worldwide, but are we at a higher point? We still kill eachother, we still hurt eachother, we haven't yet learnt tolerance, love and can't even be peaceful with others. We have evolved technologically, but spritually, we haven't evolved much. And without sprutuality, there will be a day when the technology destroy us, as we would nolonger be able to handle the technology.

The only part that is godly now is that we don't believe that we are god. We can't believe that because we social structure, our belief system had trapped us, for thousands of years.

In comparison to the not so dogma things you talked about? Love is life, without love, there would be no life.

Stop saying that, every individual is perfect, life is perfection. You see others as not perfect because they are different to you and against your beliefs. But in the absence of which that is not, which that is, is not. We are living in a relative world and this relativity has to be there in order for us to experience things. Without those who makes you sad, you will never experience the feeling of happiness, without hot, there is no cold. They are not not perfect, but perfect in its own way so that you can also experience perfection.

Same as before.

 

Hevene,
You still don't get it. This has nothing to do with beliefs. This has to do with scientifically defined facts. Belief is a vague idea in which some confidence is placed. This is not what education is supposed to be. Belief in itself is unfounded unless you have somehting to back it up. As such, please stop talking about 'belief' (which should just be an echo of the facts) and address the facts directly. If you can not do this, then your belief is unfounded.

This is not a religious thread. If you want to go in that direction, please take it too the right place. What could have been a good thread is effectively dead.

 

unless the second page is deleted...

 

The problem started on the first page when Hel quoted "it's not really about spirituality, just self-interest" and then argued the point.

 

Unless it's not.

I still don't get it? To me it seems like you still don't get it. What you don't understand, you'll deny.

I am arguing. I'm arguing that it's all about sprituality, and self-interest is part of sprituality.

Is it really? Haven't we seen enough what belief had created? We belief it is ok to hurt others to get what we want, so we do hurt other to get what we want, like wars for example. If we believe the opposite that it is not ok to hurt others to get what we want, we wouldn't have war. Just like I believe it's not ok to kill people, so I don't kill people.

And I'm not not religious at all, sprituality is compeletly different to religion.

 

Tell me why it isn't about sprituality but self-interest.

 

Originally posted by Hevene
Is it really? Haven't we seen enough what belief had created? We belief it is ok to hurt others to get what we want, so we do hurt other to get what we want, like wars for example.
A belief which is not based on fact.... which is the problem you are proposing. Stop talking about shit 'beliefs' and get to the facts.

If we believe the opposite that it is not ok to hurt others to get what we want, we wouldn't have war.
Someobody attacks me. I want to live. I can't use the force necessary?

Beliefs are useless without facts to back them up. All your posts to this thread fall into that category.


And I'm not not religious at all, sprituality is compeletly different to religion.
Yes, but you are still a lemming basing your beliefs on things that may or may not be right. Unless you have facts to back them up of course, in which case THEY are the point of discussion... not your beliefs.

Tell me why it isn't about sprituality but self-interest.
I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that the facts are the only meanigful point of discussion here. If you read what I said, you'd see that I was pointing to that response of yours as the one that started this thread on it's downhill spiral.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion talk about the facts, otherwise visit the philosophy forum (although they'll have the same complaint)

 

What I'm sayig is that beliefs are the source of all behaviours, with a change in beliefs, we can change our destructive behaviors.
Tell me a way that we can save the world from destruction without altering our beliefs then.

 

But you don't change our beliefs by saying 'we need to change our beliefs'.

First you have to explain why our actions are going to cause the destruction of the world, and base that reasoning on certain facts and assumptions.

Second you have to propose a set of actions which you believe will result in a better situation, explaining why based on facts and assumptions.

If we agree with your logic in both steps, then we will believe the same thing as you. Altering beliefs is mearly the result of explaining what has to change. The value is in explaining what has to change, not in pointed out that our actions are based on belief.

 

All action comes from a thought.

True, but it's that thought that provides the momentum for all changes. First comes the thought, thought produces actions, then follows the experience of that action. Everything is like that.

Those assumptions are based on your beliefs.

The explaining part of what has to change is the thought. This though is your idea and this idea is based on your beliefs. If you believe nothing needs change, then no thoughts of change will ever come up.

 

Water...

Will become the new oil btwn that time frame, many nations water supplies are either very low, very polluted, or in danger from another nations water designs. For instance the Iraqi's and Syrians are angry at Turkey's dam project that will reduce the flow to the Euphrates river. This could in future cause a war, or the water battle btwn Israel and Lebanon and Jordan. Then there is the potential for war btwn Egypt and Ethiopia if Ethiopia develops the blue nile, and lowers flow to the Aswan dam, and essentially to the delta. Also water will sadly eventauly become a commodity, for instance the Japanese and Americans have their greedy eyes on Canada's emmense water resources. Water would then essentially become like oil. De-salinatzation is being employed in regions that can afford it...not many. Also look at China's yellow river, and the Colorado in the US, the barely made it to the sea! Water resources will become a huge issue in nations that cannot afford new tech, and even in developed nations.

 

Re: Water...

Well, you may be correct. The only reason I'd see this not being corect is if plentiful energy is available... in which case desailinatio would be possible enmass.

 

The increasing population comes the increasing demand for energy. And then we will use up all our natural resources. And then the population crash and etc etc...