The world: what went wrong?

[Emma_Acid]

The question then is: what do the do-gooders hope to get out of Doing Good? Do they help the needy out of a sense of compassion and the inestimable worth of the less fortunate? No. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on!!!!! What they get out of Doing Good is a chance to lord it over the “less fortunate” then give themselves a very public pat on the back for being so compassionate, cooperative, forgiving etc, that’s what. This is profiteering with knobs on. It’s about scoring points

Unfortunately, I don't think everyone has the same image in their heads of you that you do. You might think you're coming across as some forum-based revolutionary lightening strike to the rotten heart of society, but actually just reads like a rather sad and bitter person with far too much time on their hands.

[mike72]

Cool? Do you not feel the flames of hell licking your backside yet?

What do you think has been keep me warm this past winter, LOL

[Beany]

So, Beany, you “love this planet”, “find beauty every day”, and “causes for joy, happiness, contentment, appreciation, gratitude”.

Yet you say that in your community people are starving. Where exactly, Beany, is the beauty in that?

In your community you have specialist farmers selling organic produce (because “ordinary” farmers sell food contaminated with chemicals). Are you telling me, Beany, that you experience happiness because some profiteering farmers have spotted a business opportunity and are making a killing from it?

Nature conservancies are purchasing land to turn into preserves. You find joy and happiness in the fact that the environment is being laid waste, devastated, destroyed, such that preserves are necessary to protect the rest from the same fate?

In your community, low-income families need help to build their own homes. So, you find the appalling living conditions of the poor to be a source of contentment, do you?

………………..I could go on, but you get my point, right?

In fact, if there wasn’t all this misery in the world, all those do-gooders you describe would be out of a job, and then where would they be?!!??!! After all, it would be SUCH an inconvenience for them to be forced to find another occupation.

I watched the film Legend of the Fall last night. In it, Major Ludlow received a visit from his son accompanied by an entourage of business men. The major’s son had come to tell his father that he was running for political office. The business men were his supporters. The major’s response was to ask the entourage: “And what do you gentlemen hope to get out of this?” When his son protested at the accusation, his father’s angry rejoinder was: “Do you think these men back you out of a sense of patriotic duty and your own inestimable worth?”

The question then is: what do the do-gooders hope to get out of Doing Good? Do they help the needy out of a sense of compassion and the inestimable worth of the less fortunate? No. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on!!!!! What they get out of Doing Good is a chance to lord it over the “less fortunate” then give themselves a very public pat on the back for being so compassionate, cooperative, forgiving etc, that’s what. This is profiteering with knobs on. It’s about scoring points.

By your own admission, Beany, you are one of those do-gooders. The heartwarming confession that you derive such happiness, joy, gratitude, appreciation even, out of the misfortunes of others warms the very cockles of my heart, so it does.

This REEKS of self-satisfaction. Better be careful, someone might join this forum who knew you as a child.

This is a personal attack, Panto, and inappropriate.

[Beany]

So, Beany, you “love this planet”, “find beauty every day”, and “causes for joy, happiness, contentment, appreciation, gratitude”.

Yet you say that in your community people are starving. Where exactly, Beany, is the beauty in that?

In your community you have specialist farmers selling organic produce (because “ordinary” farmers sell food contaminated with chemicals). Are you telling me, Beany, that you experience happiness because some profiteering farmers have spotted a business opportunity and are making a killing from it?

Nature conservancies are purchasing land to turn into preserves. You find joy and happiness in the fact that the environment is being laid waste, devastated, destroyed, such that preserves are necessary to protect the rest from the same fate?

In your community, low-income families need help to build their own homes. So, you find the appalling living conditions of the poor to be a source of contentment, do you?

………………..I could go on, but you get my point, right?

In fact, if there wasn’t all this misery in the world, all those do-gooders you describe would be out of a job, and then where would they be?!!??!! After all, it would be SUCH an inconvenience for them to be forced to find another occupation.

I watched the film Legend of the Fall last night. In it, Major Ludlow received a visit from his son accompanied by an entourage of business men. The major’s son had come to tell his father that he was running for political office. The business men were his supporters. The major’s response was to ask the entourage: “And what do you gentlemen hope to get out of this?” When his son protested at the accusation, his father’s angry rejoinder was: “Do you think these men back you out of a sense of patriotic duty and your own inestimable worth?”

The question then is: what do the do-gooders hope to get out of Doing Good? Do they help the needy out of a sense of compassion and the inestimable worth of the less fortunate? No. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on!!!!! What they get out of Doing Good is a chance to lord it over the “less fortunate” then give themselves a very public pat on the back for being so compassionate, cooperative, forgiving etc, that’s what. This is profiteering with knobs on. It’s about scoring points.

By your own admission, Beany, you are one of those do-gooders. The heartwarming confession that you derive such happiness, joy, gratitude, appreciation even, out of the misfortunes of others warms the very cockles of my heart, so it does.

This REEKS of self-satisfaction. Better be careful, someone might join this forum who knew you as a child.

The flaw in your critical thinking is the conclusion that because poverty, hunger, crime, etc., exists, nothing else does exist, or anything of equal value. The errors in your critical thinking include ad hominem, ad populum, straw man, selective validition, and affirming the consequent. Gonna launch another personal attack on me, Panto? That would be another fallacious ad hominem argument.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Beany

[White Crane Feather]

The flaw in your critical thinking is the conclusion that because poverty, hunger, crime, etc., exists, nothing else does exist, or anything of equal value. The errors in your critical thinking include ad hominem, ad populum, straw man, selective validition, and affirming the consequent. Gonna launch another personal attack on me, Panto? That would be another fallacious ad hominem argument.

I tried to get him to study formal logic. no luck I guess.

[Emperor Sherlock]

We went wrong when we as a nation and as a people...a world even, set up a system that we could govern each other by. Whether it's religion, democracy, communism, or even belief; there is some system that one abides by and tries to conduct themselves under. I mean even though it pulled us out of an "barbaric age", did it really make us any less..barbaric?

[Einsteinium]

We went wrong when we as a nation and as a people...a world even, set up a system that we could govern each other by. Whether it's religion, democracy, communism, or even belief; there is some system that one abides by and tries to conduct themselves under. I mean even though it pulled us out of an "barbaric age", did it really make us any less..barbaric?

You say we went wrong when we set up a system that we could govern each other by. As compared to what? Anarchy? Before we set up such systems we were all hunter gatherers with 30-40 year average lifespans, is this better to you than what we have? Free market enterprise has created the largest explosion in prosperity in the entire history of the world. We have not yet discovered a system that is better in regards to raising the status of the common man than the free market, capitalist system. And yes, we in the civilized parts of the world are far less barbaric these days than we were in days of old. We no longer sacrifice people to please non-existent gods, we are no longer ruled by dictatorial kings, we have a vast population, far larger than at any other time in history yet if you consider the size of our population there is less war per person today, then there was in ages past.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Einsteinium

[Emperor Sherlock]

You say we went wrong when we set up a system that we could govern each other by. As compared to what? Anarchy? Before we set up such systems we were all hunter gatherers with 30-40 year average lifespans, is this better to you than what we have? Free market enterprise has created the largest explosion in prosperity in the entire history of the world. We have not yet discovered a system that is better in regards to raising the status of the common man than the free market, capitalist system. And yes, we in the civilized parts of the world are far less barbaric these days than we were in days of old. We no longer sacrifice people to please non-existent gods, we are no longer ruled by dictatorial kings, we have a vast population, far larger than at any other time in history yet if you consider the size of our population there is less war per person today, then there was in ages past.

Alright, let's break down all that you have said, piece by piece. First off Anarchy, do you know the definition of it? Allow me...

a : absence of government

b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

c : a "]utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

And so, is anarchy necessarily a bad thing ? I think not..

Explosion in prosperity??? Is that what you call our economic depression of recent!? Or you blind or completely mad man!?

The 3rd is a given..to some extent..

Ha! So to whom do we send soldiers out to sea and across continents to fight foreigners in the name of?? Oh, that's what I thought.

[freetoroam]

So, Beany, you “love this planet”, “find beauty every day”, and “causes for joy, happiness, contentment, appreciation, gratitude”.

Yet you say that in your community people are starving. Where exactly, Beany, is the beauty in that?

In your community you have specialist farmers selling organic produce (because “ordinary” farmers sell food contaminated with chemicals). Are you telling me, Beany, that you experience happiness because some profiteering farmers have spotted a business opportunity and are making a killing from it?

Nature conservancies are purchasing land to turn into preserves. You find joy and happiness in the fact that the environment is being laid waste, devastated, destroyed, such that preserves are necessary to protect the rest from the same fate?

In your community, low-income families need help to build their own homes. So, you find the appalling living conditions of the poor to be a source of contentment, do you?

………………..I could go on, but you get my point, right?

In fact, if there wasn’t all this misery in the world, all those do-gooders you describe would be out of a job, and then where would they be?!!??!! After all, it would be SUCH an inconvenience for them to be forced to find another occupation.

@Beany, sorry to say this, but Pansdragon has got a point here.

[Einsteinium]

Alright, let's break down all that you have said, piece by piece. First off Anarchy, do you know the definition of it? Allow me...

a : absence of government

b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

And so, is anarchy necessarily a bad thing ? I think not..

Explosion in prosperity??? Is that what you call our economic depression of recent!? Or you blind or completely mad man!?

The 3rd is a given..to some extent..

Ha! So to whom do we send soldiers out to sea and across continents to fight foreigners in the name of?? Oh, that's what I thought.

Lets break down what you have said.

Yes I know full well the definition of anarchy. However, anarchy has never existed for long historically. It is always a transition state until the group/person with the biggest stick takes control over society. The anarchist utopia you speak of has never existed and there is no reason to think it ever could exist.

The 'economic depression of recent' that you speak of, the poverty people in this country are experiencing. Is not even CLOSE to the kind of poverty and depression, hunger, hopelessness that people experience all over the globe in various communist and dictatorial regimes. History is absolutely crystal clear. The best way to elevate the common man and get rid of abject poverty is the free market capitalist system. Poverty today is like living the high life 100 years ago. Now THAT is progress.

[Emperor Sherlock]

Lets break down what you have said.

Yes I know full well the definition of anarchy. However, anarchy has never existed for long historically. It is always a transition state until the group/person with the biggest stick takes control over society. The anarchist utopia you speak of has never existed and there is no reason to think it ever could exist.

The 'economic depression of recent' that you speak of, the poverty people in this country are experiencing. Is not even CLOSE to the kind of poverty and depression, hunger, hopelessness that people experience all over the globe in various communist and dictatorial regimes. History is absolutely crystal clear. The best way to elevate the common man and get rid of abject poverty is the free market capitalist system. Poverty today is like living the high life 100 years ago. Now THAT is progress.

Who to say that state we all live in now is not anarchy? Furthermore you only go on to back-up my original point..." Is not even CLOSE to the kind of poverty and depression, hunger, hopelessness that people experience all over the globe in various communist and dictatorial regimes." Like I said, when we created the system, we single handedly gave ourselves the power to put ourselves and to allow others to put others in those types of conditions. History is crystal clear, and because of that it tends to repeat itself because we are lead by a bunch of followers who know no better. Want to elevate the common man? Allow him freedom, freedom from all things that bear him down..a little anarchy if you will..

[Einsteinium]

Who to say that state we all live in now is not anarchy? Furthermore you only go on to back-up my original point..." Is not even CLOSE to the kind of poverty and depression, hunger, hopelessness that people experience all over the globe in various communist and dictatorial regimes." Like I said, when we created the system, we single handedly gave ourselves the power to put ourselves and to allow others to put others in those types of conditions. History is crystal clear, and because of that it tends to repeat itself because we are lead by a bunch of followers who know no better. Want to elevate the common man? Allow him freedom, freedom from all things that bear him down..a little anarchy if you will..

Yup, I agree, give freedom to the common man. But that is NOT anarchy. Freedom requires that the rights of one person is no greater than the rights of another. Anarchy would mean that so long as you had the power, you could kill me, and there would be no recourse, or enslave me. A true free system is not anarchy, but a system like the one the founders intended the US system to be. A system with laws protecting the freedom of each person, and a govt. to enforce those laws. Anarchy would not have that, anarchy would, as it always has been in the short times when it has existed, be chaos for the short time in which it existed.

[Emperor Sherlock]

Yup, I agree, give freedom to the common man. But that is NOT anarchy. Freedom requires that the rights of one person is no greater than the rights of another. Anarchy would mean that so long as you had the power, you could kill me, and there would be no recourse, or enslave me. A true free system is not anarchy, but a system like the one the founders intended the US system to be. A system with laws protecting the freedom of each person, and a govt. to enforce those laws. Anarchy would not have that, anarchy would, as it always has been in the short times when it has existed, be chaos for the short time in which it existed.

Your idea of a system is obviously that of an Utopia, nothing compared to what we have today. And sadly, we never will have it..

[Quaentum]

I have been accused on many forums of having a very black view of the world. The truth is blacker. Much blacker. The truth is apocalypse. The full biblical horror.

Enjoy the apocalypse.

I seem to remember that the 4 horsemen cause the death of a fourth of the population. So when 1 Billion 750 Million people die, come back and show us that you were right

[Einsteinium]

Your idea of a system is obviously that of an Utopia, nothing compared to what we have today. And sadly, we never will have it..

Where do you get that out of my posts? I do not believe in Utopia, I do not think Utopia is a real possibility- I think it is simply just fantasy. That is my point. We must look at history to see what the best system is, learn from history as to what can be improved on, and move forward. People will be left behind, people will suffer, people will die. There will be war. People will not agree. It will be hard. But we have no other options except to keep moving forward and learn from the past as best we can. I think that govt. regulations have been manipulated to favor the big guy over the little guy. Which is wrong, but guess what? We allowed it to happen, the failure is ultimately on all of the citizens.

[ancient astronaut]

huh?

[Beany]

@Beany, sorry to say this, but Pansdragon has got a point here.

No, Panto does not have a point here. First, words were put in my mouth, "Are you telling me, Beany, that you experience happiness because some profiteering farmers have spotted a business opportunity and are making a killing from it?" I did not say that, nor imply it. Nor did I say this: You find joy and happiness in the fact that the environment is being laid waste, devastated, destroyed, such that preserves are necessary to protect the rest from the same fate?" Nor did I say people in my community were starving, that's Panto's term, not mine. One reason for that is because us do-gooders (and that is NOT a perjorative term), donate money to the food kitchens, or donate food, or volunteer our time to help those less fortunate. We understand we have an obligation to reach out to those who are less fortunate. Is this not one of Christ's most important messages? I did not say this, but Panto did: "You find joy and happiness in the fact that the environment is being laid waste, devastated, destroyed,...". I said saving the environment is a good thing, just the opposite of the words Panto put in my mouth. Then he attempts to make fun of or denigrate me for something I didn't say..

About about helping others, Panto claims there is just one reason and one reason only, why people are of service to their community, which hasn't been verified in any way, and which is a ridiculous claim in the first place, as there are many reasons why people decide to be of service, not just one, Perhaps they see a need they can help with, or because it is a part of their religious tradition or affiliation, because someone did something for them and they want to pay it forward, because a court sentence requires community service, because they are affiliated with an organization or group formed to deal with a specific issue, like the American Cancer Society, Kiwanas, Rotary Club, scout organizations, Lions clubs, the Elks, Big Brothers & Big Sisters, Surf Rider, or because it is a practice learned through family. Millions of people across the world all doing good work for absolutely the same reason? Does this make any sense to you?

Panto claimed that I derive happiness, joy, etc, from the miseries of others. I never said that. I am sure that you yourself derive some happiness & joy from things in your life, as I do. That doesn't mean we're not aware of some of the terrible things that occur, nor does that mean we are insensitive. A mature adult recognizes both the good & the bad, and might be able to be in gratitude for the good things in their lives and also commit themselves to actively working with others to address the wrongs. That's how things get fixed, right? By people working together towards a common goal. Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, the Peace Pilgrim, Helen Pre-Jean, Jesus, Buddha, Rosa Parks, Abraham Lincoln, Rachel Carson, the Dalai Lama, were or are all do-gooders. Do you actually believe that their sole motivation was that of self-aggrandizement? And the only person quoted was a fictional character in a movie. Not the best source on which to base an opinion. I'm starting to think Panto trashes people because there is no substantive evidence backing the claims. Trashing people, putting words in their mouths and then mocking what they supposedly said, are all critica; thinking fallacies. Either Panto doesn't know any better or doesn't care, either way, it's a reflection of Panto, not myself.

Edited May 4, 2013 by Beany

[White Crane Feather]

You say we went wrong when we set up a system that we could govern each other by. As compared to what? Anarchy? Before we set up such systems we were all hunter gatherers with 30-40 year average lifespans, is this better to you than what we have? Free market enterprise has created the largest explosion in prosperity in the entire history of the world. We have not yet discovered a system that is better in regards to raising the status of the common man than the free market, capitalist system. And yes, we in the civilized parts of the world are far less barbaric these days than we were in days of old. We no longer sacrifice people to please non-existent gods, we are no longer ruled by dictatorial kings, we have a vast population, far larger than at any other time in history yet if you consider the size of our population there is less war per person today, then there was in ages past.

A common misunderstanding . Life expectancy for hunter gathers was actually closer to 60. It's just that life expectancy rates are an average and include infant mortality which moved the average considerably lower for obvious reasons. If a child can get passed 5 years old, they generally lived fairly long. This of course is true hunter gather society, when we get to civilizations that were agragarians.... Well something else happens. Agriculture alows specialization of labor and condensation of communities. We now have vectors for disease, waste, the potential for famin, war over territory. None of these things existed in any major form before agriculture. I think the freedom that we gave up was not worth the economic enslavement most of the work suffers.

[freetoroam]

. Either Panto doesn't know any better or doesn't care, either way, it's a reflection of Panto, not myself.

I did not mean it against you, and respect your post. Pantsdragon reminds me of a solicitor who will use anything to try and win her case, and the way she worded it did have a point behind it, she played on some of your points and stretched it or condensed it. She has pointed out parts which do actually happen in our world today, but You gave her a brick and she built a house out of it!

Nothing personal, I understand your point.

[Clarakore]

I have been accused on many forums of having a very black view of the world. The truth is blacker. Much blacker. The truth is apocalypse. The full biblical horror.

<snip>

Enjoy the apocalypse.

The world: What went wrong?

The answer to that question will reveal more about the person answering than the world.

It is simply dependant on a half full or half empty perspective.

Maybe the glass is just too big? But that is besides the point.

There are two chief ways we can look at our world (i.e., the people in it).

Structural functionalism, or simply functionalism, is a framework for building theory that sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability.

https://en.wikipedia...l_functionalism

On the other hand we have this...

Conflict theories are perspectives in sociology that emphasize the social, political, or material inequality of a social group, that critique the broad socio-political system, or that otherwise detract from structural functionalism and ideological conservativism. Conflict theories draw attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and generally contrast historically dominant ideologies. It is therefore a macro level analysis of society. Karl Marx is the father of the social conflict theory, which is a component of the 4 paradigms of sociology. Certain conflict theories set out to highlight the ideological aspects inherent in traditional thought.

http://en.wikipedia....Conflict_theory

There is actually a third path and even a fourth path but those are more complicated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My general advice is if you are weak like me with this then avoid people who are complaining if you feel they will suck you into their pessimism. That does not truly define them in either case. Somewhere deep inside there is a human who wants to get along with you, themselves, and the world.

For those who are stronger or if you have no choice to be around someone acting like a pessimist then envision a shield surrounding you, allow all that is positive from them to enter that shield, then imagine all the negative hitting the shield and sliding down into the earth to be reabsorbed by the earth and turned into positive energy.

To be honest the positive and negative are two sides of one coin. As the world grows so will both positivity and negativity. There are always people helping other people...find them, become one, help someone else...not necessarily in that order. Just as we can change so can others.

Edited May 4, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Beany]

I did not mean it against you, and respect your post. Pantsdragon reminds me of a solicitor who will use anything to try and win her case, and the way she worded it did have a point behind it, she played on some of your points and stretched it or condensed it. She has pointed out parts which do actually happen in our world today, but You gave her a brick and she built a house out of it!

Nothing personal, I understand your point.

I didn't take it personally, I just wasn't sure you saw the structure of the post, putting words in my mouth and then drawing false conclusions from that. Yeah, there are some terrible things going on, but there's also good things, as well.That anyone can find or see the beauty that exists, find love, joy, compassion, forgiveness, doesn't make them bad or wrong, as Panto suggested. Thanks for the post, I appreciate it.

[pantodragon]

Unfortunately, I don't think everyone has the same image in their heads of you that you do.

You are absolutely right. There is a well known phenomenon that people only see in others, or the world, a reflection of themselves. Therefore the image you say people have in their heads of me is, in fact, their own reflection.

Your next paragraph therefore, the sad and bitter person, is yourself and other members of this forum. And what might be in my mind, is WAY beyond your ability to grasp --- witness the number of times I have explained myself and the number of times people have totally failed to grasp what I am saying.

You might think you're coming across as some forum-based revolutionary lightening strike to the rotten heart of society, but actually just reads like a rather sad and bitter person with far too much time on their hands.

Having said which, are you psychic or something? Maybe you are telepathic and can read people’s minds? However, since you do not have sufficient self-awareness to know what’s going on in your own mind, your claim to know the thoughts of others is all the more ridiculous.

[pantodragon]

The flaw in your critical thinking is the conclusion that because poverty, hunger, crime, etc., exists, nothing else does exist, or anything of equal value. The errors in your critical thinking include ad hominem, ad populum, straw man, selective validition, and affirming the consequent. Gonna launch another personal attack on me, Panto? That would be another fallacious ad hominem argument.

You really don't understand my thinking at all, Beany, much less my motives, and that in spite of my repeated attempts to make them clear. So, here we go again: logic is for machines. People who have not donned the "mind-forged manacles" of rationality have much more sophisticated ways of thinking. One aspect of this is that the emphasis is one of the ABILITIES (an ever increasing number, if your mind is still alive) required to think in ever more sophisticated ways rather than on the actual product of thinking. It is rather like a teacher correcting a child's maths. Any good teacher is far more concerned with the working out than with the actual answer. Yes, I own to all your criticisms of my logic. I am WAY beyond logic.

[pantodragon]

I tried to get him to study formal logic. no luck I guess.

Read my reply to Beany.

Let me return the compliment. It would do you inestimable benefit (do you hear those manacles clanking?; does your nose hurt from bumping up against the walls of your cage?) to read --- note carefully that I said READ, not STUDY --- poetry and look at visual art.

[Lilly]

You really don't understand my thinking at all, Beany, much less my motives, and that in spite of my repeated attempts to make them clear. So, here we go again: logic is for machines. People who have not donned the "mind-forged manacles" of rationality have much more sophisticated ways of thinking. One aspect of this is that the emphasis is one of the ABILITIES (an ever increasing number, if your mind is still alive) required to think in ever more sophisticated ways rather than on the actual product of thinking. It is rather like a teacher correcting a child's maths. Any good teacher is far more concerned with the working out than with the actual answer. Yes, I own to all your criticisms of my logic. I am WAY beyond logic.

So, are you telling us that you're somehow 'super' logical then?

Honestly, people really don't like being told that their opinions are inferior based on someone else's personal criteria that somehow supercedes logical reasoning.

I highly suggest you open a blog for this type of thing.