News In your opinion, what is the highest value a society should strive towards?

[Art]

Utilitarianism was kind of the happiness option. it means the objective of maximizing happiness for the maximum amount of people.

Personally I prefer hedonism.

 

[sameandnot]

still more of the same, with mr. damon.

I imagine the future humanity as composed of autonomous communities, linked by shared values and ideals, but nimble and independent, proud and protective of their cultures and identity, yet curious and imaginative, open to trade in goods, arts and ideas.

I believe that poverty is an unacceptable feature of our world, that an enlightened society cannot live side by side with homelessness, that medical care and drugs should be available to *anyone* who needs them, that education, culture, art and science should be widely accessible, and that the world's resources should be mobilized to preserve what's left of our natural heritage.
But alas, as long as our civilization remains intoxicated with socialisms, those hopes will go unfulfilled.

oh... but surely, you see, that the different "autonomous cultures" would in some way conflict with each other, so the possibility of war is eminent... not just physical war, but also cultural war, where ideas combat with others, which tends to occur naturally in traveling from place to place, leading inevitably to violent war. "our idea is better and we are proud of it!"... "no! our idea is better and we are also very proud about it"... "we will never let our children mingle with your children! cause you are WRONG and BAD, and (maybe even) EVIL!" do you see?

tell me what enlightenment is, then tell me that enlightened society does not jive with homeless people. there is not an enlightened society without enlightened individuals that compose it. the individual is the society and the society, the individual... see? what is the enlightened person? first you must know, before you make such claims. k?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

oh... but surely, you see, that the different "autonomous cultures" would in some way conflict with each other, so the possibility of war is eminent... not just physical war, but also cultural war, where ideas combat with others, which tends to occur naturally in traveling from place to place, leading inevitably to violent war. "our idea is better and we are proud of it!"... "no! our idea is better and we are also very proud about it"... "we will never let our children mingle with your children! cause you are WRONG and BAD, and (maybe even) EVIL!" do you see?

Variation does not breed hatred. Ignorance and lack of respect for things that are different does this. There is nothing wrong with variation of culture and ideology.

 

[sameandnot]

Variation does not breed hatred. Ignorance and lack of respect for things that are different does this. There is nothing wrong with variation of culture and ideology.

indeed. the presence of diversity is the basis and the measure of strength in any system. but you mention ignorance. what do you mean? after you have shed light onto the meaning of "ignorance" as you use it, you might help me see this other "thing"...

isn't it so, that ideology is fundamentally dualistic? that beliefs always have a counter belief, and as a result "end up" in conflict with each other? are you saying that humans are so happy and respectful, all the time, that all successive generations will find no flaws with their native ideologies, or want to rebel against their parents. or maybe u believe that all people will, because they are allowed to live their own ideologies (which is a system of beliefs, ie. right and wrong), will all, metaphorically, "hold hands and sing across the world" or some other ideal notion of different peoples respecting each other for respect's sake. there must be rebellion in such a world. if not in the first generation, in the subsequent ones. this is not pessimistic, it is just a recognition that dualism breeds conflict and, as a result, leads to violence.

families can't even get along. you know about family feuds that have lasted for generations, only to get worse and worse, in time, because of some discrepancy. this is a microcosm of differing ideologies, in conflict and violent clash with each other.

perhaps, if the family's individuals, on both sides, were enlightened to the nature of duality, and to the Nature, Itself, there would be no need to develop imaginary ideologies, or to conform (and thereby destroy diversity). individuals are naturally, without the implementation of ideology, the greatest expression of diversity. people, as they are naturally, when in groups, express the greatest fulfillment of possible diversity, within the limited set of peoples in the set.

imposing ideology only hinders variation and breeds disrespect, spawned from ideological pride.

pride and prejudice, my friend.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Humans have a tendency unfortunately to lash out violently towards things that they do not understand. This is what I mean about ignorance. Too few of us possesses the patience and curiosity to seek understanding.

 

[Anttech]

That is exactly what I said...

what? I say give everyone access and you will have more cream, you say give everyone access and everyone will be reduced to the lowest common denominator...

BIG difference, no matter how you try and spin it, I believe equal oppertuntiy will yeild difference results, a bit like my thinking compared to yours.

 

[ron damon]

what? I say give everyone access and you will have more cream, you say give everyone access and everyone will be reduced to the lowest common denominator...

BIG difference, no matter how you try and spin it, I believe equal oppertuntiy will yeild difference results, a bit like my thinking compared to yours.

Fair enough. Let me then state explicitly what I have only depicted earlier: the concept of "equality" thought of as a simple particular, ie, "every bright person should be able to pursue higher education", is of course something no sensible person would oppose.

However, when removed from the conceptual and immersed into the current of life, given our institutions and culture, it often translates into something less than what would have been attainable had that ideal not been explicitly formulated and enacted as a matter of state policy.

 

[Anttech]

However, when removed from the conceptual and immersed into the current of life, given our institutions and culture, it often translates into something less than what would have been attainable had that ideal not been explicitly formulated and enacted as a matter of state policy.

Since you are speaking factually and not hypothetically you can of course back this up with examples, right? Probably not...

 

[sameandnot]

can there be unified, mutually respecting, harmonic co-habitation/co-exitence, when there is duality of ideology/of thought. know duality, as that which is two-side. the two sides do not necessarily need to be in conflict with each other, because they are really One. and that is where, what you call, "respect" comes in. same with "equality", and that is also how the grounds for "liberty" are cultivated. no? duality is really a unity, rather, a wholeness of mutually dependant existences. Therefore, they are One, who think they are two.

so, fundamentally, non-dual understanding is the basis, upon which your world "of variation" can exist. this is understanding that, literally, transcends duality. as, you can see, duality is contained within the unity, so the unity is transcendant of the duality. this understanding is not of an ideology. it is not found in the adherance to dualistic belief structures, such as: (this is right and this is wrong, or this is good and this is bad, or we are proud or we are not proud, or even in the concept of "you" and "me") they are all the same, you see? are not "you" and "me" distinctions of the most fundamental divisive and dualistic delusions of all. It is really One. our divisive perception has caused how much war, famine, conflict, dis-ease, etc.? duality is cyclical. what goes up, must come down. so long as you identify with the duality, you are confined to ride the rollercoaster of fear, pain, pleasure and comfort. none of these states is permanent, but having them breeds the problems that all humans feel, and affects the lives of all humans. we are all involved. Really the 2 is 1. from 1 came 2, and with 2, came the multiplicity and complexity of All Problems. see? it is really simple.

 

[Anttech]

Execpt there are infinite ways of looking at problems, not 2. I aggree one should recpect anothers ideas, as Artistole said.. "The mark of an educated mind is to entertain an idea without accepting it"

 

[sameandnot]

from 2 comes "the many"... but, we must say, that the "many" is never actually infinite. from two, actually, comes the limitation of "ways of looking", to that of a finite set. agreed? there is only an infinite possibility, within the 1. the 1, allows infinite possibilities to manifest as any # of particulars, within its all-encompassing-ness. see? the 1 is actually the infinite. for the infinite possibilites are within it. 1 is within every other #. and every # depends on 1 for its existence. all #'s get their reality from the 1.

this is very interesting.

transcendance of the 1 is what?... 0.

zero truly contains all possibilities and all realities, it appears... no?

this is kind of a fun play with #'s, but really, duality is conflict in a bottle, illusion in a can, etc.

peas.

 

[Anttech]

peas.

from a chicken? or is the other way round ?

 

[sameandnot]

from a chicken? or is the other way round ?

yup.

 

[Skyhunter]

In all seriousness, I think that a society should strive to push the human spirit further, to reach what has been unattainable to those who came before. That's why I cringe at anything that resembles past failures, foremost of which are the varieties of socialism.
Every time someone mentions things such as "equality" and "opportunity" my mind immediately pictures the bleak, gray, blocky buildings I saw during my childhood, the dilapidated playgrounds, the oppressive government offices filled to the brim with desperate and tired people struggling to fulfill mind-numbing regulations... the black beast of the State swallowing any shimmer of individuality, stomping on any flower peering over its pre-regulated parcel, while loudly proclaiming the maxims of social justice.
I imagine the future humanity as composed of autonomous communities, linked by shared values and ideals, but nimble and independent, proud and protective of their cultures and identity, yet curious and imaginative, open to trade in goods, arts and ideas.
I believe that poverty is an unacceptable feature of our world, that an enlightened society cannot live side by side with homelessness, that medical care and drugs should be available to *anyone* who needs them, that education, culture, art and science should be widely accessible, and that the world's resources should be mobilized to preserve what's left of our natural heritage.
But alas, as long as our civilization remains intoxicated with socialisms, those hopes will go unfulfilled.

WOW!

Since capitalism is the dominant social institution in the world and there has never been a genuine socialist society,how can you say that socialism is the cause of poverty and homelessnes?

The mind boggles.

What you are describing is institutionalism. And it can take on many forms.

Not that I am advocating socialism. I am just pointing out the fallacy of your argument.

This is why I chose enlightenment. Enlightened people would not delude themselves.

 

[Huckleberry]

Peace.. Everything else follows.

Enlightment is nice, but I think peace is more nobel, once the world and Mankind is at peace with its self, common enlightment will prevail..

I think the other way around. I believe that peace won't last long without already having achieved enlightenment of a philosophical nature. Same with the other virtues.

Enlightenment seems like a lofty goal. I would start with a more basic building block like humility. To me humility seems like the essence of all other moral virtues.

 

[McGyver]

Ultimate Goal: Use of Resources for Self Preservation

The ultimate goal in any organization, society, country etc. is that of "Self Preservation," though I answered "Liberty" to the poll question. Because w/o Liberty - Self Preservation cannot be sustainable. But Liberty, along with free and open and best use of "Resources" I believe is the correct formula for any organization to sustain itself.

These "Resources" include water, energy, food, shelter, intelligent and willing labor (people), a sustainable family and social model, a sustainable Philospophy/organizational model with critical public policy, industrial resources, experts, scientists, unbiased news reporting, and finally - competent and trustworthy leadership. Any faith-based practices would fall under the family and social model - that ideally should not be directed or mandated by the societal organization/administration, but by family.

History demonstrates clearly how past civilizations and organizations failed. I am sure their failures were due to items lacking in the above.

Stephen Dolle
www.diaceph.com

 

[sameandnot]

History demonstrates clearly how past civilizations and organizations failed. I am sure their failures were due to items lacking in the above.

perhaps, sufficiently understanding these failures would lead, individuals to enlightened existence? it really should. right?

 

[McGyver]

perhaps, sufficiently understanding these failures would lead, individuals to enlightened existence? it really should. right?

You are correct ... but perhaps only in a perfect world. For now we must contend with our human fallibility, greed, pride, and acts often beyond societal control, such as natural disasters, disease epidemics, famine, and even acts of mental illness.

Sadly, even things that are within our capabilities, like Katrina/New Orleans disaster and how to rebuild, appear to be beyond the capabilities of those entrusted with these responsibilities. It is now their "pride" which has gotten in the way of the rebuilding efforts. They are not qualified to carry out what they are undertaking - in part due to their pride in not stepping aside, and others who are qualified not coming forward, the City just sits there in ruin ... waiting... waiting. But for what?

1st Rule to sustain an organization: Vision.
2nd Rule: Admit when you are wrong or don't know something.
3rd Rule: Know where to find the answers/resources to get it done.
4th Rule: Treat your people as you would want them to treat you.

 

[McGyver]

When Self Preservation Conflicts w/ Religious Beliefs

Please allow me to paste in text and link a key related Physics Forum discussion on the Riligious Right's position on Birth Control - and whether it might conflict with the rule on self preservation:

I am simply connecting a few dots in this broad discussion. The Catholic Church's broad agenda on BC may be consistent with a goal of "relagating the role and rights of the modern woman" to that which existed in recorded history until the 1960/70s, when for the 1st time BC care and Abortion became widely available for women - and which are both used in family planning and population control. Somewhere along the way - the Christian Right decided to focus their afforts on one key isse - Abortion, or the Pro-Life position.

In truth, all signs indicate that the Catholic Church's agenda, as well as certain Christian and non-Christian organizations, go well beyond BC and Abortion. They want women to return to the traditional role of not working or engaging in non-feminen sports and activities, not holding positions of importance (such as in the Clergy), that they dress and act in a manner consistent with the woman's traditional role.

The ultimate question which society and our policies must come to better answer is, "Whether BC methods and which BC technologies, and roles for men and women - are most ideally suited to sustain humanity?"

SEE the Physics Forum Discussion thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=90496