Worse off as a species?

[nolongerhere]

We need idiots as much as anyone else. Sure, we could get rid of all the phone cleaners. But you know what happens then? We all die from a horrible disease caught off of dirty telephones.

Cookie for the reference.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Why we allow threads like this to grow I will never know

 

[DayDark]

Humanity is just another form of animal, to classify it as anything else is pure foolishness. Is humanity worse as a species because we don't let survival of the fittest take place?

Absolutely.

I disagree, You are projecting your definition of what is "worse" onto natural selection, which by the way, can't be truly stopped. what Natural selection "selects" is depending on the environment, and bad luck.

Competition to survive is what drives any species to improve itself. (through breeding or intentional action) A species survival depends on its ability to improve itself over time.

improve itself according to it's given environment.

First off what makes us a superior to the rest of the animal kingdom is not emotions or feeling because its obvious by studying nature that other animals are more than capable of experiencing them. What makes us superior is the fact that we can overcome or natural instincts with reason and logic. That is the only thing that makes us better than the rest of the animal kingdom. That being said let me get to my major point.

Can't argue with that, but it doesn't make emotions a bad trait.

By the way, this superior is also biased, the cockroach can beat humans in survival.

In our society we like to delude ourselves into thinking that all people are equal. Are they really just because they happen to be of the same species they are equal? That is simply not true, its not race or anything like that that make us unequal. Its actions, the actions that one make throughout there life is what judges how good/bad a person is. A good person is not equal to a bad one. (unless you want to make a argument that Hitler was equal to Gandhi).

All have value, and can be useful, your right that they don't have the same usefulness, but that is by your definition of what is useful. natural selection doesn't care what is useful to other things than bringing your genes further.

natural selection sees no difference between romancing a girl an becoming a father, and/or raping a girl and becoming a father.

Since our world is based off of competition there will always be winners and losers. This is a fact of life and nothing anyone can do or say will change that. Are winners and losers equal? NO THEY ARE NOT. The Person who won was either naturally better smarter stronger or worked harder its one or the other. Since he/she won he is not equal to the loser. In the natural world The losers usually don't get to breed so their genes are removed from the pool and the species improves by it.

Improves according to the environment, it isn't limited to stronger, smarter, or working harder, it's also the colour, hairstyle, Who shoots first, EVERYTHING can be a positive regulator, if the environment favors it.

We are all unequal and what determines how good/bad or useful/unuseful we are is our actions we take throughout our lives and how well we compete in those said actions.

We are moving away form that aspect of human activeity because for some reason we think its below us. Why??. Instead off tell our children about how equal we all should be why cant we tell that we are all unequal but how good/bad you are is totally up too you. What we should be doing is allowing everyone to have the chance to compete equally. Instead of having one style public school we should have many. What one you can go to is up to how well the child does in previous schools.

Sort of like, high school, college, University?
I don't see how this is any different from what we have now, you don't know who's better than others, so of course you should tell everybody that they have equal potential, you want them to pursue that potential, so they can become the best that they can be.

It would allow the top students to have more direct competition with each other so they can become stronger/ better people. Competition is what brings out the best qualities in people nothing else.

Or the worst qualities, you might be smarter than me, but natural selection is a no rules game, last man standing wins.

 

[Guitar Gamer]

Oh, natural selection, I'm so sorry they killed you.

OH THE IRONY! natural selection is killed off!

 

[Merteg]

I prefer rising above nature over getting down and dirty in survival of the fittest.

If we as a society deem that we are all equal, that we all get a chance at life, then strength be ours.

You don't say any reason WHY we should kill off the cripples, so I don't see why we can't let them enjoy life.

 

[Tim Buck II]

...

All I'm saying is, humans ARE evolving.

How else did homosexuality come up? Obviously, it evolved to stunt population growth.

So THERE!

And then there's the whole different races thing...

And who knows what else?

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Humanity is just another form of animal, to classify it as anything else is pure foolishness. Is humanity worse as a species because we don't let survival of the fittest take place?

Absolutely.

Competition to survive is what drives any species to improve itself. (through breeding or intentional action) A species survival depends on its ability to improve itself over time.

First off what makes us a superior to the rest of the animal kingdom is not emotions or feeling because its obvious by studying nature that other animals are more than capable of experiencing them. What makes us superior is the fact that we can overcome or natural instincts with reason and logic. That is the only thing that makes us better than the rest of the animal kingdom. That being said let me get to my major point.

In our society we like to delude ourselves into thinking that all people are equal. Are they really just because they happen to be of the same species they are equal? That is simply not true, its not race or anything like that that make us unequal. Its actions, the actions that one make throughout there life is what judges how good/bad a person is. A good person is not equal to a bad one. (unless you want to make a argument that Hitler was equal to Gandhi).

Since our world is based off of competition there will always be winners and losers. This is a fact of life and nothing anyone can do or say will change that. Are winners and losers equal? NO THEY ARE NOT. The Person who won was either naturally better smarter stronger or worked harder its one or the other. Since he/she won he is not equal to the loser. In the natural world The losers usually don't get to breed so their genes are removed from the pool and the species improves by it.

We are all unequal and what determines how good/bad or useful/unuseful we are is our actions we take throughout our lives and how well we compete in those said actions.

We are moving away form that aspect of human activeity because for some reason we think its below us. Why??. Instead off tell our children about how equal we all should be why cant we tell that we are all unequal but how good/bad you are is totally up too you. What we should be doing is allowing everyone to have the chance to compete equally. Instead of having one style public school we should have many. What one you can go to is up to how well the child does in previous schools. It would allow the top students to have more direct competition with each other so they can become stronger/ better people. Competition is what brings out the best qualities in people nothing else.

You want to split children into groups based on their intelligence? As if that wouldn't alienate them from eachother, cause resentment and generally be a root cause to all kinds of social problems. Generally speaking, unintelligent people don't like the fact that they are unintelligent...can you imagine being labelled dumb at an early age? What would that do to your sense of self worth? How would that make you feel towards your peers who are getting so much praise for being smart? Ever been ostracised for being intelligent?...there is already a social divide, it's an issue that doesn't need further antagonising.
As a general rule in scientific matters. The moment you start talking about what "should be" instead of simply "what is", is the moment that you lose any and all credability...and are basically resorting to making things up without employing the use of sound logic or any significant evidence.

 

[crypt-creature]

And as I said, natural selection hasn't been valid for thousands of years. Why reintroduce it now? Look at what we have accomplished by disregarding the laws of nature, by becoming superior (at least in my opinion) than the animals we breed, slaughter and consume.
All of these things were possible because we build a society, because we made it possible that people could specialize, become philosphers, researchers, engineers...

Humans aren't natural and it is good that way.

Sometimes it's in a good way, but when humanity starts to think that it is more important than the other species on this planet and disregards their needs just to satisfy our own, then we have moved backwards in a way.
We can't survive without the other species (plants and animals) on this planet. Sometimes is seems like society is starting to forget about that, and defaces the value that they hold for us.

 

[Del-Toro]

I personally think all able bodied men are born equal, but after that it's up to them to determine their worth to humanity. This may sound objectivist but considering that I'm sort of a socialist it plays into the "from each according to his abilities" part of the mantra.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

The strongest is not always the most fit to live, when you bring non stone age humans into the mix there are so many levels upon where strength dose not equate to anything relevant.

We at "best" are 3 things...

1.Anarchists who prey off the world.

2.Entrepreneurs who you use the systems in place to gain, gather and refine their personal wealth.

3.Foolish hypocrites who try to be all of the above while being savant like philanthropists.

Humanity is only doomed if we destroy the world or sex.........

 

[Easykill]

Meh, I used to sorta agree. Well, not the whole thing. That seems pretty elitist to me. But I figure evolution has pretty much played out it's role already in humans. We're sill Mutating at a pretty quick speed, but standard evolution is rather difficult in the world we've created. We merely gain more and more variation. But, who cares? Society has always been overriding instinct in humans, teaching us how to make our own decisions instead of being governed by blood. Evolution is a process of instinct, and if we have decided reason is the preferable trait, we should take our bodies into our own hands. I am 100% for the genetic modification of humans, to decrease vulgar instincts, increase ability, and remove the defects evolution doesn't care about. The ones that occur after reproduction, when people have aged. I really can't wait.

 

[Oldmanwillow]

Humanity is just another form of animal, to classify it as anything else is pure foolishness. Is humanity worse as a species because we don't let survival of the fittest take place?

Absolutely.

Competition to survive is what drives any species to improve itself. (through breeding or intentional action) A species survival depends on its ability to improve itself over time.

First off what makes us a superior to the rest of the animal kingdom is not emotions or feeling because its obvious by studying nature that other animals are more than capable of experiencing them. What makes us superior is the fact that we can overcome or natural instincts with reason and logic. That is the only thing that makes us better than the rest of the animal kingdom. That being said let me get to my major point.

In our society we like to delude ourselves into thinking that all people are equal. Are they really just because they happen to be of the same species they are equal? That is simply not true, its not race or anything like that that make us unequal. Its actions, the actions that one make throughout there life is what judges how good/bad a person is. A good person is not equal to a bad one. (unless you want to make a argument that Hitler was equal to Gandhi).

Since our world is based off of competition there will always be winners and losers. This is a fact of life and nothing anyone can do or say will change that. Are winners and losers equal? NO THEY ARE NOT. The Person who won was either naturally better smarter stronger or worked harder its one or the other. Since he/she won he is not equal to the loser. In the natural world The losers usually don't get to breed so their genes are removed from the pool and the species improves by it.

We are all unequal and what determines how good/bad or useful/unuseful we are is our actions we take throughout our lives and how well we compete in those said actions.

We are moving away form that aspect of human activeity because for some reason we think its below us. Why??. Instead off tell our children about how equal we all should be why cant we tell that we are all unequal but how good/bad you are is totally up too you. What we should be doing is allowing everyone to have the chance to compete equally. Instead of having one style public school we should have many. What one you can go to is up to how well the child does in previous schools. It would allow the top students to have more direct competition with each other so they can become stronger/ better people. Competition is what brings out the best qualities in people nothing else.

You want to split children into groups based on their intelligence? As if that wouldn't alienate them from eachother, cause resentment and generally be a root cause to all kinds of social problems. Generally speaking, unintelligent people don't like the fact that they are unintelligent...can you imagine being labelled dumb at an early age? What would that do to your sense of self worth? How would that make you feel towards your peers who are getting so much praise for being smart? Ever been ostracised for being intelligent?...there is already a social divide, it's an issue that doesn't need further antagonising.
As a general rule in scientific matters. The moment you start talking about what "should be" instead of simply "what is", is the moment that you lose any and all credability...and are basically resorting to making things up without employing the use of sound logic or any significant evidence.

My whole high school experience i was ostracised for being intelligent. Why because i was in the minority. So if we separated the children biased off of there intelligence there should be as many people in the minority. Tell me do we as humans have inherent self worth? i dont believe we do. I believe the only thing you have a inherent right to is the sweat off your brow. I get my sence off self worth from what ive dont.

My argument for the school set up is a japan style of education. sure it lead to a lot of hardships among the children, but because of it japan is the technology center of the world and they have profited much as a country.

 

[thiosk]

It never ceases to amaze me how many pseudo-intellectual facists frequent this forum.

 

[Lonan]

It never ceases to amaze me how many pseudo-intellectual facists frequent this forum.

What's wrong with a little facism? It sounds harsh, but once global warming really gets gong, there will probably be lotteries to decide to live. We might as well start now. No one seems have started the whole reducing your footprint like hell WITHOUT being forced, so maybe another approach is needed. Frankly, most the the species is horribly unaware of the world around them, because they jsut go about their daily business like everything is normal. In reality, global warming is happening as we type with enough ferocity to justifiably declare a state of emergency. Unfortunately, the colossal disconnect between reality and people's skulls is such that taking action as the situation dictates would be political suicide, without extreme leadership. It would probably more than Obama, even if his country was one in Europe. The best thing would be a one child policy, strictly enforced and removing all barriers to abortion. However, I sense that this will not happen, again, because of the huge disconnect.

 

[nolongerhere]

We need idiots as much as anyone else. Sure, we could get rid of all the phone cleaners. But you know what happens then? We all die from a horrible disease caught off of dirty telephones.

Cookie for the reference.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, I think. Or one of the following books, can't remember which one.

Cookie for you. It was the sequel, The Resteraunt at the End of the Universe.

 

[darkorion69]

...

All I'm saying is, humans ARE evolving.

How else did homosexuality come up? Obviously, it evolved to stunt population growth.

So THERE!

And then there's the whole different races thing...

And who knows what else?

Homosexuality is a psychological preference and has been with mankind since we gained sentience most likely. It is most certainly not a recent development as it is recorded in our earliest histories of many ancient civilizations. Unless you think it is a built in psychological fail safe to countermand our propensity to "be fruitful and multiply'...with homosexuals just using the "be fruitful part"

 

[Tim Buck II]

...

All I'm saying is, humans ARE evolving.

How else did homosexuality come up? Obviously, it evolved to stunt population growth.

So THERE!

And then there's the whole different races thing...

And who knows what else?

Homosexuality is a psychological preference and has been with mankind since we gained sentience most likely. It is most certainly not a recent development as it is recorded in our earliest histories of many ancient civilizations. Unless you think it is a built-in psychological fail safe to countermand our propensity to "be fruitful and multiply'...with homosexuals just using the "be fruitful part"

Right, right. Should've thought before I acted. I would have realized that, should I have thought about it.

Now that I think about it, humans aren't actually evolving, are we?

 

[titanium turtle]

Oh, natural selection, I'm so sorry they killed you.

QFT.

We've stopped evolving, not because we've reached our pinnacle, but because we are repeatedly diluting the gene pool without correcting it.

You know what the real kick in the nuts is?
Warning labels.
"WARNING: Coffee may be hot!" You'd better fucking hope so.
"WARNING: Sleeping pills may cause drowsiness!" OH SHIT NO
THAT IS HORRIBLE
OH GOD WHY

WARNING: May contain nuts. On a bag of peanuts

As a species we're getting stupider because we feel compassion for others less fortunate.

I don't see why people feel sorry for idiots though

someone "oh that poor man is having a sever allergic reaction, poor fellow"
a sensible person"well what does he expect, he ate a bag of peanuts- it's his fault"

 

[titanium turtle]

resurrect Darwin and give him a revolver
either that or just get used to the fact that many people are idiotic assholes