- #1
expscv
- 241
- 0
why is humanity so unkind to one another, just to fight for anything that they wanted to get?
expscv said:why is humanity so unkind to one another, just to fight for anything that they wanted to get?
I hate people who behave like that; death is too good for them... (:grumpy:)expscv said:why is humanity so unkind to one another, just to fight for anything that they wanted to get?
cliche
n : a trite or obvious remark.
olde drunk said:understanding the nature of our fears will eliminate wars, racial bias and religious intolerance.
olde drunk
olde drunk said:i have no difficulty accepting aggressive competition in nature or in sports among humans. it is the emotional need to harm - injure another that has fear as the most probable root.
Much is discussed about this subject, but I seldom see anyone explain why it is necessary, possible, or even desirable to put an end to violence. Does anybody really believe a world filled with angel-like people, completely incapable of doing anything unpleasant to each other?
Moonrat said:If conflict is a neccesary strategem of nature, which it seems both you and I agree on this matter
we human beings in the 21 century, as intelligent as we are, can use this natural function to enhance us instead of eventually destroy all of us.
So it is more about the basic biological need to 'win' that pushes us to it, making others 'lose' as the only way to accomplish those goals of winning.
What I suggest is entirely possible for us as a species in this moment in history is we can create, through our advanced technologies, win'win systems of administration that embarces everyones need to 'win', without creating loss.
There are many who suggest, and I agree with them, that we are closer to world peace than you think!
confutatis said:This is a world of suffering, and suffering comes in many forms. If it's not by violence, it will be by disease, strife, hunger, boredom, loneliness, despair, mass destruction, misfortune...
We are born to suffer, and suffer we must. There is no way out of it other than death. If there is another life waiting for us beyond the grave, then we can dream of a perfect society completely free of evil. In the meantime, the best we can do is gather strength to endure our ordeal.
From a scientific perspective, it makes sense that a creature would avoid death until reproduction age, but it makes no sense at all that the creature should not welcome death after that, so as to save resources for the next generation.
confutatis said:But I don't agree with that. Nature could just as well be such that, when tired of living, the lamb would lie down with the lion, be eaten for breakfast the next morning, and feel the luckier for it. .
From a scientific perspective, it makes sense that a creature would avoid death until reproduction age, but it makes no sense at all that the creature should not welcome death after that, so as to save resources for the next generation.
I can assure you that, in terms of achieving peace, human beings in the 21st century have nothing that their ancestors in the 1st century didn't have.
It didn't happen then and it won't happen now.
At least our ancestors fought for the basic necessities of life, whereas we fight for the right to buy cheap gas for our luxury SUVs.
And that explains why a man would fly a jet airliner into a crowded building, killing himself and a few thousand others... where is the winner in that scenario?
Moonrat said:"How can you expect kindness and decency on a planet of sleeping people?"
Gurdgieff
confutatis said:Why do you believe in technology, when the single most important use of it is to develop arms? The wars of the 20th century were the deadliest in human history; thanks to technology we've had death and destruction on a scale unknown to mankind.
.
I feel bad pointing to the fact that the past is the most reliable source of information about the future, and that the past tells us that our future will bring more wars, some of them quite violent.
I feel bad because, personally, I don't feel the need to entertain dreams about this world; I know it's nature and I'm not sad about it. I used to be sad, but nowadays I understand why suffering exists, why it is important to our lives, and why we must accept our fate rather than try and change it.I do realize that understanding those things takes a lifetime
Moonrat said:Most scientists do not dream up death rays and the like, it is the neccesity of them that is encouraged by human politics, not human science, design, or technology.
And no matter how bad things appear, there is more pleasure and oppurtunity now for humanity than ever in the past, or, i.e things are getting better in spite of all the madness politicians cause.
do you think that maybe there is a design or goal/function of the human species? I mean, there either is or is not, right? chance or design/goal?
If nature does have a 'goal' for life, then life in space is either that goal or is apart of that goal, because now mankind is a permenant post terrestrial species, with the advent of the international space station.
Now the above is just a proposition, but if the above proposition has merit, then what would that make WW1 and WW2 but the background environment which led to the technology that would launch us into space?
I use this as an example to suggest again the nature of conflict inside of life that nature uses to keep us moving forward...forward toward what i do not know, but space must be a part of it because that is what is in front of us.
I am sorry you feel bad and not sad, bad or sad is not joy, hope, inspiration, and a bummer fer sure...
Accepting misery and suffering is resignation, not a path of spiritual nobility.
confutatis said:Trust me, without the work of brilliant scientists there would be no weapons of any kind. The team that built the first A-bomb had Nobel laureates amongst them. I'm sure people like Richard Feynman believed they were using science for a greater good when they built a device capable of killing 100,000 people and wiping an entire city out of the map, but the link between scientists and generals, between science and death, is there for anyone to see.
.
I'm not sure things are getting better. It's easy to claim that from the comfort and safety of the American way of life, or from the quarter of the world who calls itself "modern" and "developed". But I wonder where the pleasures and opportunities are for the masses that live in poverty throughout Latin America, Eastern Europe, Africa, India, China, most of Asia.
I do not believe in chance. I believe everything happens for a purpose, and we as human beings have a vague notion of what that purpose is.
I believe suffering has a purpose, but I believe that purpose is much more personal than building rocketships. I believe we must suffer so that we learn the true nature of our relationship with the cosmos. I know quite a lot about suffering and about learning, out of personal experience. I know very little about space exploration and its importance to mankind's spiritual evolution.
The things that are in front of us are often the hardest to see. You may think the moon and the stars are important; I think learning to love your neighbour as you love yourself is far more so.
Do not be sorry. I am far more optimistic than you can possibly imagine. You have faith in humanity, but I have faith in God. It's hard to think of anything that gives more joy, hope, inspiration, than unquestioning faith in the power that created the Universe.
Jesus Christ died on a cross. He accepted misery and suffering, he resigned to it and put everything in the hands of God.
For a Christian, nothing is more spiritually noble than resignation - it means you trust God so much, you realize you don't have to worry about your fate, even if you don't understand it.
When it comes to spirituality, what you believe determines what is noble. An Indian guru thinks of love as unnecessary attachment to an illusion; a Western Christian thinks of love as the essence of the universe. Both are noble in their own ways. Above all, spirituality is about understanding paradoxes. That is why it can't be explained
Nicomachus said:"A man is born, he suffers, and he dies." =)
*Nico
.
ah, there's the rub. what fun is there in taking advantage of anyone, someone who gives up whatever you want, willingly. as a philosophy, i suspect that if i am robbed, the robber needed the goods more than i wanted them. or, i over-valued them and had to learn to live without them. in either case, i give them up willingly.confutatis said:olde drunk,
Your motives are noble. If every single person alive shared your ideals, we would be in heaven. But if just one person takes advantage of everyone else's goodwill, then how are we to enforce our ideals without compromising them?
In essence, that's the dilemma facing mankind: we must be good, but we can't be good to people who are not good.
If humanity has a cosmic relationship, then us moving into space is highly relevant to see that
i would like to see more people realize that the 'american dream' of 2 homes, 2 cars, 2kids, etc etc. is hollow. it has no substance or sustenance.
confutatis said:Well, it's not everyday that you see two people, who apparenty share the same spiritual values, offer two radically different perspectives on teh same issue. One believes that 60 million dead in two world wars might have been a just price to pay for the development of spacecraft ; the other believes owning a car is hollow and has no substance.
Let us celebrate the paradoxes of spirituality!
confutatis said:Well, it's not everyday that you see two people, who apparenty share the same spiritual values, offer two radically different perspectives on teh same issue. One believes that 60 million dead in two world wars might have been a just price to pay for the development of spacecraft ; the other believes owning a car is hollow and has no substance.
Let us celebrate the paradoxes of spirituality!
Nicomachus said:Yes, it is absurd isn't it?
*Nico