Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Are all Men equal?

  1. Jan 11, 2004 #1
    I had a private discussion with olde drunk on this subject. My thoughts or questions are:

    Are all Men equal?
    Are all Men worth keeping?
    Should all Men be allowed to belong to a society?
    Should we bother feeding the people with lower intelligence quotient when the smarter have greater use of our resources?
    Are there too many people on Earth? Should we execute and get rid of 2 billion people or more?

    When you hear of hunters that shoot a certain number of animals from a species to save the sustainability of nature, do you ever think: "Why don't we shoot a certain number of humans because the number of human beings increase every day and there are allready to many of us?"
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 11, 2004 #2
    No, not everyone is equal, you can't compare Stephen Hawkings to some bum on the street, there is a definite value gap.

    But in a humane point of view, "bums" should be treated equally, and be kept in a society. However, it is true to some degree that these people are like parasites to society.

    Since you can't divide people into two groups, such as "Useful" and "Bums". It is better to take the humane approach for now.
  4. Jan 11, 2004 #3

    When you ask a question, you ask a question!

    Thallium:Are all Men equal?

    Drunk: I believe that in the greater reality there not such judgements; we just are. As respect 'human rights'; society functions better when we acknowledge and protect the rights of the individual. Needless to say, none of us has all the talents and abilities to be considered a superman. On the practical level we are not equally endowed.
    I suspect, however, that a happy contented ditch digger is more glorious than a sad, misbehaving, talented zillionaire; Glorious, not better. He is in touch with his total self and knows his place/role in the universe. The sad zillionaire is still searching.

    Thallium: Are all Men worth keeping?

    Drunk: Why not? who knows what their unseen contribution to the universe is worth. i refuse to serve on any such jury!(lol) Hey, equal rights time! 50% of all that are expelled must be women!

    Thallium: Should all Men be allowed to belong to a society?

    Drunk: A case can be made for the death penalty, BUT, has it diminished violent crimes??? Incarceration has become big business in the US. Why isn't more money directed toward understanding the nature of crime and/or eliminating the need for crime?? Would people kill for a pair of Michael Jordan sneakers if they weren't marketed into believing that having a pair was important?

    sidebar: have we also created a victim mindset within society?? In the US, if you are a victim, with a good lawyer, it can be like hitting the lottery.

    Thallium: Should we bother feeding the people with lower intelligence quotient when the smarter have greater use of our resources?

    Drunk: who the hell is going to haul away my garbage??? or fix my toilet when it clogs or does any of the ****ty jobs i dislike???
    seriously, we all contribute to the universe and, hopefully, human society. we just aren't aware of most contributions.

    Thallium:Are there too many people on Earth? Should we execute and get rid of 2 billion people or more?

    Drunk: NEVER! we are ALL here for a reason. who's to say that the greater reality isn't more crowded??? we might be practicing our powers of coexistence in a microcosm. let's learn in a temporal enviornment so that we can more properly prepare for the eternal world.

    good questions! i'm not sure i ever thought about these issues directly.

    Last edited: Jan 11, 2004
  5. Jan 11, 2004 #4
    I'll post my opinions later. I'll probably be attacked by most people in here.

    I am editing this message now. I do think we should get rid of a couple of billions. IUt is ironic how we are eager to put the other races on earth down in number when these animals use much much less of the earth's resources than we do. I am sure there are some insufficient people we can remove.

    Are all Men equal? No. What is the value that is within every single human being? There is none. Should we throw away food and provisions on people too much people? No we should not. You see by this that I am definetly not a communist.
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2004
  6. Jan 11, 2004 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Equal how? And who gets to decide?
  7. Jan 11, 2004 #6


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    when men judge who is superior and who is not, this breeds arrogance...when arrogance is allowed to rule, stupidity comes about...when stupidity comes about, all will suffer...

    my conclusion:

    put a woman in charge

    just kidding

    sincerely, a truly intelligent "superior" person will take compassion for all of humankind...
  8. Jan 11, 2004 #7
    No one is better than anyone else, but that doesn't exclude someone from being better at a specific task than someone else.
  9. Jan 11, 2004 #8
    Why not? Perhaps the bum, while not having the great mind of Hawkings, has more compassion and value for life since he lives in such a humble place.
  10. Jan 11, 2004 #9
    Good point. But how can arrogance breed stupidity?
  11. Jan 11, 2004 #10
    I was referring to their value to society. The bum probably have a negative value in his contribution to mankind. And do read my next paragraph.

  12. Jan 11, 2004 #11
    There is no greater threat to humans and any other life forms on Earth, than the quantity of people on this here planet. China Is one country that is trying to do something about thier own stupidity. They have already pushed the limit in terms of walking flesh.

    We could probably sustain 50 billion people on this planet. The question one might ask is why? One should ask - Would you rather live on a planet like ours with one billion people,and a host of other life forms, or 50 billion people with a few plants grown for the sole purpose of feeding 50 billion people?

    There are still plenty of people that think the most important thing anyone can do with thier life is to pump out rug rats.

    I can see it as being conceivable that we multiply to the point where nuclear war could be seen as a good thing.
  13. Jan 11, 2004 #12
    Perhaps the most important question, if you are going to rate people at all, which I think is folly, is not how intelligent, nor how rich, but how much joy that person can generate, both for oneself and for others?
  14. Jan 11, 2004 #13


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I met a traveler from an antique land
    Who said Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
    Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand
    Half-sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
    And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
    Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
    Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
    The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
    And on the pedestal these words appear:
    "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings
    Look on my works ye mighty and despair!"
    Nothing beside remains; Round the decay
    Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
    The lone and level sands stretch far away.
  15. Jan 12, 2004 #14
    This very interesting. Have you noticed how politicians and researchers theorise about how we are going to feed the billions of people that will occupate this planet in the near future and ignoring the fact that it is important to stop this population-growth? It annoys me so much!

    We could probably do this and probably do that. I do not trust probability. I would rather live on a planet with one billion humans and a great variety of animals!

    Save the animals. We have enough of humans.
  16. Jan 12, 2004 #15
    I completely agree, however, you cannot limit the right for someone to have at least one offspring. China has the one-child policy, they also limited the age for pregnancy (or was it marriage), it is not a perfect strategy, but it beats nothing. However, China still have a 0.4% yearly population increase (which is around 5.2 million more people every year). This just goes to show that there are more overall birth than death. And you should see the rate the Americans and Indians are reproducing.

    Plus, I don't think limiting child birth will gain politicians much support in most of the world, especially USA. As for social researchers, most of them just tell the mob what they want to hear, their main purpose is to support the politicians.
  17. Jan 13, 2004 #16

    Brilliant, I'll start the revolution in latin america, you go to asia, we'll meet back when we've killed or prevented the birth of 1 billion people each to re-organize, huzah!

    And bring bulldozers to give to the animals so they can plow down cities and plant trees while you're at it, just for a sense of irony.
  18. Jan 13, 2004 #17
    Re: !

    You know. With that sarcastic or ironic or whatever attitude, nothing will change. Go stick those words up your ass and use your energy on writing something more useful. And I also advice you to not respect me for what I am feeling. Or maybe you, wasteofo2, is one of those we should get rid of..
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2004
  19. Jan 13, 2004 #18


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Thallium, before you go off the deep end, google on 'demographic transition'. This is the observed fact that where women have been given freedom from paternalistic societies, the birth rates have fallen dramatically. Some European countries are actually seeing a population decline. So one tactic for preventing overpopulation is to force all those paternalistic societies to free their women!

    But even absent that, the UN agency responsible for population predictions has cut its numbers twice and they now think trend of population will level out after the middle of this century.
  20. Jan 13, 2004 #19
    In the U.S. at least, the Hispanic population is the fastest growing while the White population is the slowest growing. Many parts of Europe have experienced declining birth rates as well; I believe the Scandanavian countries have seen this more than elsewhere.

    On the flipside, the countries experiencing gargantuan population growth are traditional third-world countries that are only relatively recently benefitting from Western medicine and technology.

    I've never seen it written anywhere, but my impression is that people who enjoy high standards of living and education populate at lower rates than those in lower standards of living and without education. If that is the case, it follows that concerted efforts toward reducing social problems and increasing education on a global scale will result in lower population growth without imposing draconian laws on human reproduction.
  21. Jan 13, 2004 #20
    Then perhaps you would explain why U.S. still has such a high rate of population increment (keep in mind the total Hispanic and Latino population is only about 12.5%, while the "high-class-and-well-educated white people" you were referring to takes up 77.1%)? And would you also explain to me why the population increase in the world is still sky-rocketing? And of course you won't mind explaining to me why a third-world nation like China (which only relatively recently benefitted from Western medicine and technology) would have a lower population growth than U.S? Oh, just one more question, are you one of those white people who think they are put on this world to save all the lower people?

    P.S: Some European countries are experiencing population decline because the high level of distress and anxiety and other psychological problems in the population.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook