View Poll Results: which of the following good causes would you choose to invest your life in?
safer world 0 0%
cleaner world 0 0%
better world 2 20.00%
changing and dynamic world 0 0%
perfect world 1 10.00%
non-evil world 0 0%
never ending world 1 10.00%
all of the above 1 10.00%
two or more of the above 4 40.00%
other 1 10.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

Register to reply

Living for a good cause

by default_
Tags: living
Share this thread:
default_
#1
Apr3-07, 07:04 AM
P: 1
which of the following good causes would you choose to invest your life in?

investing for a :

-safer world
-cleaner world
-better world
-changing and dynamic world
-perfect world
-non-evil world
-never ending world
-all of the above
-two or more of the above
-none of the above
-other
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Flapping baby birds give clues to origin of flight
Prions can trigger 'stuck' wine fermentations, researchers find
Socially-assistive robots help kids with autism learn by providing personalized prompts
Astronuc
#2
Apr3-07, 07:15 AM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,871
Well better probably includes safer and cleaner.

I don't think the world can be 'perfect' assuming we could find a consensus on 'perfect'.

The world/nature/universe is inherently 'changing and dynamic'. Our challenge it to adapt.

The world is never-ending. Our compatiblity with the world is what we must address.

As for a non-evil world - one can simply set a good example and 'do the right thing'.
moe darklight
#3
Apr3-07, 07:44 AM
P: 411
I chose all (even though to me "perfect" would be imperfect). but if I had to chose one single cause, I would choose a just world. where everyone gets what they deserve (for better or worse). then everything else just falls into place.

JasonRox
#4
Apr3-07, 08:14 AM
HW Helper
PF Gold
JasonRox's Avatar
P: 2,327
Living for a good cause

Quote Quote by moe darklight View Post
I chose all (even though to me "perfect" would be imperfect). but if I had to chose one single cause, I would choose a just world. where everyone gets what they deserve (for better or worse). then everything else just falls into place.
Perfect is imperfect?
JasonRox
#5
Apr3-07, 08:16 AM
HW Helper
PF Gold
JasonRox's Avatar
P: 2,327
I try my best to live a life that is not destructive. Our society is shifting into a destructive one, and it's not good at all.
russ_watters
#6
Apr3-07, 08:52 AM
Mentor
P: 22,297
Has society ever been non-destructive? Is such a thing even possible for biological organisms? To me, that's the biggest fallacy in environmentalism - that such a thing could, much less should be done.
radou
#7
Apr3-07, 09:24 AM
HW Helper
radou's Avatar
P: 3,220
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
Has society ever been non-destructive? Is such a thing even possible for biological organisms?
Good question. The answer to the former is no. The answer to the other one, is, I believe, for a smaller number of organisms of higher intelligence, probably yes. But then again, it's a smaller number, and definitely not the mirror of the majority. So, the answer is, sadly, no.
moe darklight
#8
Apr3-07, 09:34 AM
P: 411
Quote Quote by JasonRox View Post
Perfect is imperfect?
I mean it would be no fun if everything was as good as it gets .

Quote Quote by JasonRox View Post
I try my best to live a life that is not destructive. Our society is shifting into a destructive one, and it's not good at all.
in my eyes, the opposite is happening... we're rotting into lethargy.

in the past, society's problems came from people doing too much of the wrong thing. now it comes from people doing to little of the right thing. everyone wants to do as little as possible.

this new thing, "political correctness" is sick. censorship, oppression, and tyranny have always existed, but at least in the past it was so aggressive and in your face that you were driven to do something about it. oppression was a sword or a guillotine, now it comes in the form of a polite little passive-agressive smile.
it was painful, now everything is made so pleasant that no one takes notice of social degradation.

we can say that we have a gun problem, that kids are taking guns to schools, that kids spend all day doing drugs and having unprotected sex, that we have lost our values, etc. etc. ... yet murder and crime rates have gone down considerably in many north american cities (per capita). yes, even since the good ol' 50's..

... murder rates have gone down even more considerably since the 1500's!! ...

so why is it that we've become so obsessed with convincing ourselves that people are becoming increasingly immoral, sadistic, and pure evil with each passing generation --- when the exact opposite is true?

I think it's because we feel empty as a society.

we have to convince ourselves that we have never, as a human race, EVER been this bloody, and this sinful, and this eeeeevil because that's the only way we feel alive: because the truth is that we have never been this bored and lazy and dull and polite.

the good thing is that we are living in the best possible times, we are at a peak: we have never been so free, so rich, or so healthy. not ever before in human history. a relatively large percentage of today's world population lives freer, healthier, and wealthier lives than even the richest of the rich could have hoped for 300 years ago. our problem is that humans, by nature, always get greedy or sloppy and eventually ruin anything we build.

wow, that was a rant an a half ... I don't know where all that came form, I swear I'm not as pessimistic as I sound!
russ_watters
#9
Apr3-07, 10:08 AM
Mentor
P: 22,297
Quote Quote by radou View Post
The answer to the other one, is, I believe, for a smaller number of organisms of higher intelligence, probably yes. But then again, it's a smaller number, and definitely not the mirror of the majority. So, the answer is, sadly, no.
All organisms need to eat. Eating necessarily destroys that which is consumed. So all organisms at the very least have some minimum level of destruction of their environment that is proportional to their population.

That's only the most basic example, of course. There are plenty more. Plants, for example, essentially fight each other (and any other organism that gets in their way) to the death for sunlight and water, decimating the area around them.
JasonRox
#10
Apr3-07, 10:09 AM
HW Helper
PF Gold
JasonRox's Avatar
P: 2,327
Quote Quote by radou View Post
Good question. The answer to the former is no. The answer to the other one, is, I believe, for a smaller number of organisms of higher intelligence, probably yes. But then again, it's a smaller number, and definitely not the mirror of the majority. So, the answer is, sadly, no.
They've answered these questions already?

It seems like in the study of Cellular Automata (spelling?) they're bring structure out of chaotic biological behaviour. In a sense, that seems to direct us to the idea, that constructive life can exist.
JasonRox
#11
Apr3-07, 10:11 AM
HW Helper
PF Gold
JasonRox's Avatar
P: 2,327
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
All organisms need to eat. Eating necessarily destroys that which is consumed. So all organisms at the very least have some minimum level of destruction of their environment that is proportional to their population.
I meant destructive in a large sense.

Look at how much we consume! Dang! Eating habits are just horrendous. Not only our we destructive to other fellow members of our society, we are also destructive against our own very body! I mean this in a direct sense, and not the...

Well, people get older and therefore that's destructive.

That's not an counter-argument.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Are We a Living Thing? General Discussion 17
Living with the Mek General Discussion 3
Living in newyork General Discussion 10
Living For What? Academic Guidance 14
What differentiates the living from the non-living? General Discussion 28