Guest cloricus Posted May 31, 2002 Share Posted May 31, 2002 Arr money, what would the world to with out it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted May 31, 2002 Share Posted May 31, 2002 money, what would we do with out it.... maybe get along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. Dark Posted May 31, 2002 Share Posted May 31, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i] [B]money, what would we do with out it.... maybe get along. [/B][/QUOTE] As they say [QUOTE]Money is the root of all evil[/QUOTE] But when you think about it, where would we be without money. We couldn't trade, and we'd be backward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pressure Posted May 31, 2002 Share Posted May 31, 2002 [color=purple]The world, in theory, would be better without money, terrorism, killing, murders, death, hatred, etc. Personally I believe no wrong can come of eliminating ever religion from ever existing, but this is besides the point. In theory the world would function as a better place and be a utopia without all the things listed and more, but that is only in theory. It won't ever happen. Someone is always going to be there to oppose the law, someone is always going to think they have the right to take another person's life, someone is always going to hate someone else. It will never stop. Arguing won't help at all.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. Dark Posted May 31, 2002 Share Posted May 31, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DBZChikaGhan [/i] [B][color=purple]The world, in theory, would be better without money, terrorism, killing, murders, death, hatred, etc. Personally I believe no wrong can come of eliminating ever religion from ever existing, but this is besides the point. In theory the world would function as a better place and be a utopia without all the things listed and more, but that is only in theory. It won't ever happen. Someone is always going to be there to oppose the law, someone is always going to think they have the right to take another person's life, someone is always going to hate someone else. It will never stop. Arguing won't help at all.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE] Personally, I think it is down to the flaws humans possess a species, and the flaws brought about by free will. Not that free will is a bad thing, of course. All these characteristics are human traits, and can sometimes be shown as animalsitic behaviour. We both want power, we both want our own terriotory, and more things besides. It's basic instinct. Utopia can never exist, hence the name "Theory". We, as a species, will not allow ourselves a utopia, as someone will always have a different way of getting utopia compared to the person next to him. That is why books illustrate that utopia is usually achieved through brainwashing people to believe what they want them to believe, so they all think the same, and can achieve "Utopia". Free will denies utopia, due to people's individualism... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Harlequin Posted June 1, 2002 Share Posted June 1, 2002 [quote] [I]Originally posted by D. Dark[/I] Free will denies utopia, due to people's individualism...[/quote] Hmm, one of the few people that agrees with me when I say that sentience is self-destructive. On the other hand, animals, which are possessed of much less free will, also do not exist in a utopia. Why? Because they don't want one. So it's not so much that free will destroys the ideal of a utopia, it's that free will seeds the idea then gets frustrated when it will not grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstorture Posted June 2, 2002 Author Share Posted June 2, 2002 [color=darkred]Utopia, concept of an ideal society. The word "utopia" was coined by Sir Thomas More in his work [I]Utopia[/I] (1516), from Greek terms meaning "no" and "place". Ha, ha, ha. [/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted June 2, 2002 Share Posted June 2, 2002 Hitler wanted a perfect society; he just went the wrong way about it. When GM becomes easier and inexpensive we will actually be doing what Hitler?s original plan wanted to happen, but in a more "humane" way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted June 2, 2002 Share Posted June 2, 2002 hitler didnt want a perfect society. he wanted the destruction of the jewish race. he wanted death and dispare. he wanted you and i to die. of course, that is unless your one of his master race and a native to germany. dont forget, he wanted plenty of whites or ariyans dead; anyone of them that wasnt on his side. hitler was evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megabakin Posted June 2, 2002 Share Posted June 2, 2002 Hitler did want a "perfect society" in his mind. He wanted everyone the same, and everything the same. He trained his soldier's and convinced them they were superhumans. He wanted a world of superhumans where he ruled. However, genetic modification will not make us perfect. With GM comes superviruses, perhaps breeds of creatures made to kill. Even if GM is made perfect, there will be at least six children produced in an experiment, one will be perfect and the others deformed. Theres much more to learn about GM before we go making superhumans. We probably wont even get the chance to do that, because currently we are capable of making superviruses, so they will most likely kill us off before we have the chance. The method I favor of GM is Viral Vectors. They are easy to create, and can be used in different ways. Back to the point, I beleive that Hitler was wrong in his methods. Now, I hope we can end this talk on terrorism and hitler. Shallow minds discuss people, Average minds discuss news, and great minds discuss ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted June 2, 2002 Share Posted June 2, 2002 great minds come up with their own stuff. this is a thread about the war in afghanistan and against "terrorism" i also find that you misinterpret my saying he didnt want a "perfect society"; i am speaking from a third party perspective involving right and wrong. not a skewd view from with in a deranged idea of what a perfect society is. if i was to take hitlers side and view, then that could be an aim for a perfect society. he just wanted death, genoside and a prosperous germany. even with his alleged "perfect society" view he didnt stick to his own principles; making treaties and alliances with "sub-human" races such as the japanese. in closing i want to say that i meant no insult in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 Gokents shut up about things you do not know about. You don't know every thing! [I will put my post when I get home.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 sorry bud, but thats not how you prove a point. i also want to say that your right in just one way. i dont know everything; in fact im not too keen on political science and history. i do however know enough to know you've just resorted to insult and im still lecturring. if i see that you change you above post by means of edit i will take another look at your argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Chicken Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 Anyways... Back to the subject... well give it a try. ok? Hitler may have been making pacts and such with "subhumans" but this may well have have been to try and achieve his goal, which I belive is made pretty clear. He wanted indiferrence... a world of comunism if you will, where hitler himself, alone could rule. Hitler would rule and easily because of his society that he wanted, one which all opinions would be his. He didnt necessarily (spelling) want death... we wanted control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven's Cloud Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 [color=indigo] Hitler was a meglomniac who used the idealistic philosophies of Carl Marx, Thomas Moore, and a slew of others to influence a broken nation to commit one of the greatest atrocities of all time. Hitler never wanted to live in a perfect society, he wanted to control the world using fear and hatred. As for the idea of "Utopia", I believe that Thomas Moore wasn't expressing how an ideal society could be, instead he was using an ideal society to depict the "flawed" charecteristics of human nature. It is impossible to ignore that nature is competitive. Therefor, a Utopia becomes an impossibility...I believe that is the message Moore was trying to convey. By the way...please play nice. This is a message board, if you have an argument, post it, don't insult someone without being able to back up your point of view.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Chicken Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 Ok, I'll give you that... Hitler was a wackjob. Yes he did kill people. Yes he did cause the hollocaust (spelling) there was a reason. As i said he wanted to rule and do it alone. Weather or not people were going to have to die for that... He obviously didn't care. Hilter may have used some of the ideals of Carl Marx. But I don't think Hitler took it th wrong way. I just think Hitler used this a base for his ideas and went on from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 [COLOR=teal]-I will leave that post up there because I believe it has a valid point. - No one really knows what Hitler really wanted for two reasons, [I]1[/I], He died before he could do them and [I]2[/I], You can never know a persons real intensions. He said that he wanted a perfect society, where no one would suffer or be different. This is really quiet a smart thing to do because it would decrease the amount mutations, if you will, in the human race as a whole. This is what hopefully will be done in the future with GM, but I hope in a much more human way. ([I]Selective breeding.[/I]) Why is every one so scared of what the future may bring? We might screw up really badly and kill the human race ([I]which we might do anyway[/I]) or we could advance these things and see where they go. I would also expect that if Hitler had gained power he would of become corrupt like Jesus Chicken said. It is a very common flaw in the human psyche. It happened towards the end of the war to Hitler, and also in Russia with the leaders of the communist party. Also in theory Communism is a very good idea. Just because America says it's bad doesn?t mean it is. I suggest any one that dose not know what it is really ([I]not just what you have heard on TV[/I]) to read a book on it or study it in more detail. It is very interesting and it gives a veryfascinating view in to how people become untrustworthy and corrupt. (Eg [I]Russia[/I].) Gokents again your stupidity annoys me; this topic has never once stated that its sole purpose is about Americas so called "[I]war on terrorism[/I]." -The main reason I am being so rude to you is you wont accept other people?s views, or even consider them. If I am wrong in saying this prove me wrong. - If I have not explained my views in enough detail, please do not attack them. Tell me and I will endeavour to explain them better. [/COLOR] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Chicken Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 We most definatly will destroy ourselves. I aslo have to agree with you saying that comunism is not a bad thing, just because people have been unlucky with it in the past, overall it has often had the best output of success with the public, some countries want it, some dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Harlequin Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 What's more important, the government, or the people? Especially in a communism style vote... Communism is one of those ideals that tarnish as soon as they touch air, or as soon as they are befouled by human hands. Nobody wants to change unless it benefits them in some way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted June 3, 2002 Share Posted June 3, 2002 first off, i never attacked or insulted you, so just chill. second, i do listen and give other views a try, but im not in this for opinion on what people think, so i can change the facts i know. most of this stuff boils down to facts. i perfer to speak from facts. third, communism is a nice thought. but, its only a thought. communism in practice is just plain pooey. if you can site one example of communism supportting a nation and helping it to blossom to new levels of human rights and economic development, i will say that not only is it good in theory, its good in practice. im not talking about some semi-socialist country, we're talking full blown communism. do the research everyone is talking about and you will learn that communism goes against everything in human nature. i also want to mention there is a difference between communism and socialism. in closing i want to tell you to just lay off. im not trying to be a jerk. im just trying to let you hear my side, and i dont try to tell my opinion to often (especially in this thread) i just tell people the facts so we can all be on the same page. i have spoken opinion on the boards. i will continue to opine. i also will admit to error if im wrong, hence... i shouldnt have said this thread was solely on the topic of the "war on terror". what is the topic? _______________________ i wrote all the above and then spoke with some interesting people. upon my return i had a slight change in heart about history. i realized that even with in fact there are areas of history none of us know. this would allow for several differing views, all of which can not be denied, or a result from point of view (being your side). i guess everyone is entitled to their opinion. i enjoy hearing them and discussing them. sorry for any trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven's Cloud Posted June 4, 2002 Share Posted June 4, 2002 [color=indigo]Hmmm...I don't believe communism is a bad idea, it is a great threoy, just impractical. In an ideal communist society everyone works for the common good of the people, they make the same salary, and are entitled to the same luxurys. In truth, humanity will never be able to accept commuinism in this fashion. People want to strive to be better than their neighbor, we want to have better things, and we are naturally jealous and competetive. This is not the American way this is the human way. Here is a good example. Take a look at any communist country in the world. Their leaders ride around in bullet proof limos. In an ideal communist society, everybody would have equal access to those limos, but do they...no. Why not? A limo is a luxury, not a neccessity...in a communist society shouldn't everyone be entitled to the same luxury? Now, on to selectuve breeding. I am very anti genetic engineering. It will give people the ability to manipulate humanity's greatest attribute, our ability to think for ourselves. I am against any science that could advance restrictions on thought. No amount of success in the field is worth that risk.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiroMunkie Posted June 4, 2002 Share Posted June 4, 2002 [color=indigo]It is interesting the this topic has begun talking about Communism and somewhat on selective breeding. Both of which we talked about in my biology class this past school year. Selective breeding, although dangerous, can be useful. I mean, this is kind of an odd example, if it was for selective breeding, the mule would not exist. The mule is a product of selective breeding between a male donkey and a female horse. I believe I have heard a rumor that some mules are actually able to reproduce on their own, which they are not supposed to. So it might have some interesting results if that is true. The mule is beneficial for agricultural area that need animals that can carry heavy loads (donkey), and travel long distances(horse) at the same time. So you can see how selective breeding [i]can[/i] be useful, [i]if[/i] it is used correctly. "can" and "if" being the key words there. As for Communism, my actual biology [i]class[/i] didn't talk about this, but on the second to the last day of school our teacher just let us talk, and me and three other kids around me started talking about Communism. I wasn't in it to begin with. One kid supported Communism, saying it is not a bad form of government, and the other two said it was a bad form of government. The supporter asked my opinion whether or not it is a good form of government. I agreed. Although, I am not too familiar with it, I know the basic principle of it. And like you people have said, it is a good [i]idea[/i], but not one that can be carried out easily. There is always going to be something wrong with the system, no matter what it may be.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted June 4, 2002 Share Posted June 4, 2002 [color=coral]Selective breeding is something that has brought us countless species of dog/cat...and many thousands of species of flower. Just look at the "Pikmin" flower which was created only a couple of months ago...it is the direct result of some sort of bio-engineering. Though having said that, selective breeding in humans would [i]not[/i] be a good thing. As for Communism...it's fine to support the idea of socialism, as long as you understand that socialism isn't practical. In a communist society, everyone shares equally and everyone takes from the state. The problem is, nobody gives anything...they just take. There is no incentive in a communist society, as personal wealth cannot exist. And without personal wealth, you are somewhat limited to what you can achieve in your life. Capitalism certainly isn't perfect either...because those who are weaker get pushed to the bottom and they have NO way of living. However, that is why a capitalistic society needs a strong welfare net, to catch those people who fall through the cracks.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted June 4, 2002 Share Posted June 4, 2002 [COLOR=teal] Gokents. Most facts I have read from your post are not true. I know this because I have followed them up. Also this topic is ?The War on Anything That Moves? that is a generalisation and can be any thing you won?t it to be, or whatever Raven wanted it to be perceived as. Heaven's Cloud and James. I agree with you on your views on communism but not about GM. I myself have some problems. GM although way off this topic [[I]Sorry?[/I]] would allow these problems to be ?repaired?. This done to every one on earth would stop problems in future generations. [[I]And yes I know it would be hard to do that to every one on earth but you get the idea, I hope....[/I]] -I?m using GM as a broad name for GEM and T-Cell research.- But back to the subject. GM could also be used to make humans better fighters/soldiers with for example the ability to camouflage, move faster or be better aims and so on. After some thing like this happening there would be a gap, there would be basically a sub-speaches and may be despised by normal people. [[I]Sub not implying that they are any worse off.[/I]] In this case it could be dangerous for two reasons, [I]1[/I], It could course war between countries doing this and countries not, because they would feel threatened. And [I]2[/I], It could start a conflict between altered and normal humans. So in this way I can see how it could be dangerous, but we?ve taken risks throughout history to get where we are today. Why not do it again? [/COLOR] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Harlequin Posted June 4, 2002 Share Posted June 4, 2002 [font=gothic]Selective breeding is not really accomplishing much. It basically condenses the gene pool, which just leads to the point where it's only one step off inbreeding. And we all know what happens there. And cloricus, it wouldn't be humans despising (his term, not mine) "Sub species", it would be the other way around. Everyone who has anything to do with something like that would be aware of the consequences. Eventually "normal" human's would be wiped out. Everyone has seen the movies. No Ethics Commitee in the world will approve something like this, unless some kind of catchsafe is put in. Say, the altered cells are sensitive to a certain kind of radiation. Which means the whole idea is flawed even in conception, which makes it nothing more than a money wasting affair, that would probably eventually develop into the other option, the extinction of all but the altered.[/font] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts