What is wrong with this thinking?
brianlux
Posts: 42,053
My wife and I were talking today about the current situation in Syria and I was reminded once again about a basic premise I’ve had for several years now- my four easy steps to a healthier planet and living in peace and well being:
1. Protect the environment. This makes sense on several levels: it would give us more beauty in our world, it would preserve much biodiversity and it would create a cleaner environment which is the first step toward preventing disease in humans and other living things (rather than constantly trying to cure diseases while new ones keep cropping up.) And of course a healthier planet would mean slowing anthropogenic global warming.
2. Reduce human population. The benefits of this are obvious: more resources to go around leading to fewer resource wars and more habitats for other forms of life on earth.
3. Practice conservation and sharing. Depleted resources lead to resource wars. Conservation and sharing lead to greater economic and social equity, creates good will and leaves more for other species with whom we share this planet.
4. Practice tolerance- in other words, stop being so up tight about what others do in the privacy of their own home and let people have their own beliefs, even if they do seem a little far fetched. Religious differences are the other major cause of war. And homophobia, sexism and racism, etc., deserve no place in the world today.
That’s it. That simple. Yes, I realize this may sound a bit over simplified but to my way of thinking, not by much. Don’t these things make sense? Why don’t we humans do what is logical? This truly baffles me. Call me an idealist but please, don’t call me illogical.
1. Protect the environment. This makes sense on several levels: it would give us more beauty in our world, it would preserve much biodiversity and it would create a cleaner environment which is the first step toward preventing disease in humans and other living things (rather than constantly trying to cure diseases while new ones keep cropping up.) And of course a healthier planet would mean slowing anthropogenic global warming.
2. Reduce human population. The benefits of this are obvious: more resources to go around leading to fewer resource wars and more habitats for other forms of life on earth.
3. Practice conservation and sharing. Depleted resources lead to resource wars. Conservation and sharing lead to greater economic and social equity, creates good will and leaves more for other species with whom we share this planet.
4. Practice tolerance- in other words, stop being so up tight about what others do in the privacy of their own home and let people have their own beliefs, even if they do seem a little far fetched. Religious differences are the other major cause of war. And homophobia, sexism and racism, etc., deserve no place in the world today.
That’s it. That simple. Yes, I realize this may sound a bit over simplified but to my way of thinking, not by much. Don’t these things make sense? Why don’t we humans do what is logical? This truly baffles me. Call me an idealist but please, don’t call me illogical.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Pink tinged fame and appeal to the lowest common denominator. Well, I guess I can't trump that. I just throw shit at the wall and see what sticks.
What are the 4 other kids to do? They want a peaceful existence playing with their ball, but they can't force her to give it back. And what when she says ok I will give you the ball back if you each line up at the wall with your hands behind your back and let me rifle the ball at your face?
here ya go b:
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
then a big badass in charge come around & sticks their foot up the nasty kid's frickin keester & sends this screwy screaming brat of a kid to the priciple's office. all share the ball now.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Treat others as you would want to be treated.
Treat our planet as an extension of ourselves...because it is.
Every animal, plant, mountain, and on.
Be the change you want to see.
Don't just talk the talk.
Live it, and be it, as best we can.
(as best I can)
You're right. It really is that simple - or should be.
You turn your back on her and leave her out of the circle until she realizes her selfishness only brings loneliness and isolation.
Clear thinking here. This makes sense! The only thing I would add here is to preserve distinct languages as well as having a common living language- be that literal or metaphorical.
I'm beginning to think I'm not so crazy after all. And surely no genius. But how do we get world to recognize simple solutions that make sense?
So, no ball playing bc 1 child decided so? That seems fair.
We're going to leave her with the stupid ball and go listen to my Buddy Guy CD instead.
But seriously, I get what you're saying but is not cutting your losses better than increasing your losses?
This all seems so simple and I agree, but unfortunately, not everyone thinks this way. It would be extremely hard to get the whole world on this page. I have some friends that I can only be around for short periods because they are negative. I try to surround myself with positive people, which is hard to do. I can care less what people do in the privacy of their own homes, be it religion, sex etc. But not everyone feels that way- and I do not really know why.
Main point is - there are bad folks. Not that you shouldn't do the right thing. But you cant make everyone do what you want them to do lest you become the bad guy.
Yeah, good point- we can only make ourselves better people.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
basically unless you can incentivise all to conserve, no one will conserve because it is not beneficial to them to do so.
2. who is to say who can and can't have kids. should we kill people until we are down to an acceptable level, who decides that level.
3. sharing everything is not the best way to distributing the most amount of resources amongst the most amount of people.
lets say for example one group of people weren't playing by these rules. the only way to make them would be be to either economically influence them or militarily force them. causing exactly what you where hoping to avoid.
you are thinking along the right lines, but you have missed many unintended consequences that these rules would bring
Being wrong is sometimes wrong.
stopping thinking and always being right is so very wrong
Abrn Hlls '98 - Clarkston 2 '03 - Grd Rpds '06 - Abrn Hlls '06 - Clvd '10 - PJ20 - Berlin 1+2 '12 - Wrigley '13 - Pitt '13- buff '13- Philly 1+2 '13 - Seattle '13
I guess I just figure the likelihood that we are making our planet inhospitable to most or all human life is good incentive!
I can only make that decision for myself which is why I have no scratch babies- only ones I helped raise. I try to be a positive example- not a saint or miracle worker!
I'm open to better ideas.
As I've said elsewhere, as an individual, I'm more for doing what makes sense and as an individual, group, community or nation, setting an example and help others to do the same. I'm not into force. As far as I can see, force, coercion and war have not made the world a better place.
"necessity is the mother of invention"
If we didn't need to evolve and adapt to changing situations we would still all be single celled organisms swimming in the tasty primordial soup
Scientific “progress is as unlimited and at least as rapid as that of population”
I've had many a discussion about the roll of science and technology in pulling us out of the nose dive that civilization and humanity are in. I'm not against it, I just haven't been convinced it will work. It's like disease- we keep getting better at curing diseases and yet, all the while, new and tougher strains appear. It just makes more sense to me to work on prevention in the first place. But what can I say? In all sincerity, good luck to us all!
Actually disease is a good lens to use to look at at human progress.
take cancer for example. thousands and even hundreds of years ago it was almost unheard of. but this is not because people where living better back then, in fact the opposite is true. most people died too young to ever develop cancer.
(and yes environmental and lifestyle factors do have a role in cancer but not enough to make it go from non existant to as prevalent as it is now)
so while cancer is obviously a terrible illness. i would much prefer to live long enough to develop it than not.
how you gonna do this? who is gonna make the decision as to who can and who cant reproduce? and by what criteria will it be decided?
I have always been of the opinion that the problem isn't too many people, its the management of the earth. humans like to think theyre special and that theyre the peak of evolution.. that were separate from the rest of the animal kingdom(which I might point out seems to manage living in symbiosis with the planet), but look at what that supposed prime position and elitist attitude has done to us and more importantly and potentially more devastatingly, what its done to the planet. we treat this planet as if its the infinite source of all we need.. we give little thought to the future... cause its not our problem, when in fact is it. we take and take and take cause by nature we are a selfish species. we don't even think about how the disappearance of a species or an ecosystem might affect us.. we just shrug our shoulders saying the problem is too big, when in fact the problem is us.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Love it. All of it! (although I don't know about #2, although I see the need to notice potential issues with a growing population, I can't see how we can purposely stop it effectively.) Especially #4; Intolerance is what breeds hate.
Um, that IS tolerance.
I see tolerance as finger-tapping. "OK, I'll force myself to put up with this."
Which is why I said live and let live.
This reminds me of how badly (at least to my way of thinking) we need a different word. I'm guessing you both have similar views about the concept of "tolerance" but the word, the word seems to hang us up. Any suggestions for a word (or phrase) that works better, that unites the thought behind it?
Me, I tend to find comments prefaced by "Um" to be a bit rude and condescending; if I've misread the prior post, apologies.
And actually, even if I didn't misread?
All's well and the world is still doing its thing.
I apologize if the 'Um' sounds abrasive, I didn't mean it that way. Rather, what you wrote does tend to sound like tolerance to me, and to hear that it's not what you think of the word threw me because the word 'toleration' would mean to put up with someone or something begrudginly.
From http://grammarist.com/usage/tolerance-toleration/
Toleration also comes up often in reference to reluctant sorts of tolerance. Think cats and dogs living together, neighboring peoples who were recently at war with each other, or law-enforcement agencies that look the other way on minor traffic offenses. This sense probably came about because tolerance, a defining quality of a progressive modern society, has positive connotations, while toleration of this sort is not positive, but thorny and precarious.
Toleration has also recently been defined as a particular act of tolerance, but we’re having trouble finding 21st-century examples that bear this out (which is not to say they’re not out there somewhere—we’ll add them if we find them).
From http://www.kdab.afcent.af.mil/news/stor ... =123185468
What's the difference between tolerance and toleration?