Chuck, what you are now saying about soldiers and leaders and nukes I
agree with entirely; however, I don’t differentiate that much between
‘sides’ when it comes to willingness to radiate humanity. This is born
out at least by history.

On Apr 15, 5:15 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> "...What else would you call an uptake in the level of
> understaning of sciences in a given sociaty if not intelegence? " -
> Lee
>
> Collection of  analogical data? :)
>
> On Apr 15, 4:16 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hey Chuck,
>
> > Yes our technology has made a great differance to the human animal.
> > It is now far easier for our kids to remotley bully each other, or for
> > house parties to become massivly gate crashed.  Two examples of
> > technolgy makeing things worse perhaps?  As I say eb and flow, good
> > things and bad, let us look at the whole.
>
> > Again you seem to be speaking with authority about the past.  1000
> > years ago is long time ago, how do you know these things?
>
> > Heh that is a mouth full and I see much truth in it.  Yes of coure our
> > opinions on what is forward progress are bound to differ and I bet if
> > we were to ask our dearest Gabs, and our Ornary OM they too would
> > produce differant yard sticks.
>
> > Hah hah yes indeed all topics are broad, I can think of not one that
> > is simple. However does this mean we cannot have meaningfull discourse
> > on any subject?  Nope I disagree, if only that after almost a week you
> > and I have gotten to know each other a little. I find that very
> > meaningfull indeed.  What is a human without human interaction?
>
> > Yes I mean some of that, but also it is possible to realise that such
> > feelings serve a low porpouse and erradicate them from your life.
>
> > I can't agree that the erradication of such feelings somehow changes
> > what it is to be human.
>
> > I am human, if I state that I am now-a-days rarely angry and never
> > jelous, am I now to be defined as being diferant from human?
>
> > Yes I can see some forward movement on world widfe ethics, but I also
> > see much evidance of backwards movment on personal morality, so agian
> > eb and flow and taking the whole into acount.
>
> > Heh so you have asserted without knowing then?
>
> > No I don't belive that American gun onwers are all frighted rabbits,
> > only that this is the typical argument that I hear from the majority
> > of them.  After all if you can't take a persons words as being true
> > then I think we are doomed.
>
> > Guns are fun, and yes I have fired them many times.  Revolvers, .22's,
> > SLR's, semi automatic hand guns.  They sure are fun, but you know I
> > still can't help thinking that the only desgin use for a hand gun is
> > to shoot people.  So not at all like basket ball IMO.
>
> > I'll takle single indivduals in sociaty and what the PM has just said
> > together as they are linked.
>
> > The uppermost thought in Mr Camerons mind is I belive the up and
> > coming local elections come May 5th and the referendum on AV at the
> > same day.  Our PM is despertly trying to curry favour with the
> > electorate, and so this talk about cutting down immergration I am
> > alsmost ashamed to say mirrors the mood of the majority of the
> > people.  Nope not for economic reasons has he now trotted this line
> > out.  Single indviduals are angry, angry that the Poles take all the
> > jobs, angry at the banks, angry at the goverment, angry at the world
> > wide global crisis, just plain angry(I of course can only really speak
> > about my own sociaty on this).  Anger is not condusive to social
> > cohesivness is it?
>
> > On the surface it may seem that technology is not the same as
> > increased intelegence, but surely they are linked?  Your avarage
> > school leaver now understands more about physics then they did say 60
> > years ago.  What else would you call an uptake in the level of
> > understaning of sciences in a given sociaty if not intelegence?
>
> > On Apr 14, 6:04 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:05 AM, [email protected] <
>
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Hey Chuck,
>
> > > > I think we can probaly say that better just means better in many
> > > > aspects, so yes it may mean more socialy aware, and yes it may also
> > > > mean envirmentlay aware and the rest of your list here.
>
> > > > My point is more holistic, taking the whole.  Are we more socialy
> > > > aware than say 100 years ago?  Well perhaps, but maybe not, we'll have
> > > > to look long and hard at our histories to answer that.
>
> > > Actually, I think technology and cultural influences have mediated human
> > > behavior quite a bit.
>
> > > For instance, a remote village in the UK a thousand years ago might have
> > > welcomed a Muslim with open arms. However, if that Muslim chose to cut the
> > > village elders throat because he was an infidel then the village would
> > > probably think twice about welcoming Muslims in the future.
>
> > > Today due to our technology and our interactions with other cultures we 
> > > know
> > > that not all Muslims are fanatics.
>
> > > > However this may be a step forwards but in other areas have we taken
> > > > steps backward?  Taking the whole into account I can see little
> > > > evidance of forward movement.  The human animal is more or less the 
> > > > same as
> > > > we have always been.
>
> > > Here, the subject of human morality and social behavior is so amorphous 
> > > that
> > > there is no way to point to any specific facet and say "there is an 
> > > example
> > > of forward progress". Is it forward progress for Italians or Turks or
> > > Europeans or forward progress for the entire human race? If so, who is it
> > > that defines and measures forward progress? Is my idea of forward progress
> > > and yours the same?
>
> > > My point is that the topic is too broad to make any meaningful discourse 
> > > on.
>
> > > > I disagree.  It is perfectly capable of humans to let go of both anger
> > > > and jelousy.
>
> > > By 'letting go' I assume that you mean acquiring anger and/or jealousy 
> > > over
> > > a certain situation and using self-control to let go.
>
> > > I didn't say anything about letting go in that context. What I was 
> > > referring
> > > to was the hardwired emotions that we all have. Without anger, jealousy,
> > > love, hate, empathy, we lose a significant portion of what defines us as
> > > human.
>
> > > To quote:
>
> > > >> As long as we are human I think we will
> > > >> suffer anger and jealousy. It's how we deal
> > > >> with it as individuals and as a society that
> > > >> determine the measure of growth.
>
> > > The thing about 1000 years ago and rape is you just don't know if that
>
> > > > is true, or if you do I would love to see any source material that has
> > > > brought you to this conclusion.
>
> > > The issue isn't rape but the ethical framework that dictates behavior. 
> > > While
> > > each culture has it's own framework in general ethics have matured over 
> > > the
> > > centuries and that maturation has been reflected in the laws that govern.
>
> > > Typically most cultures are and historically, have been male dominated. 
> > > This
> > > has led to a bias in the way individuals are treated. That dichotomy has 
> > > at
> > > times required a higher standard of proof from the victim than from the
> > > perpetrator.
>
> > > I really don't want to do the research to support my assertions but I'm 
> > > sure
> > > it shouldn't be too hard to find specific examples if you're that driven.
>
> > > Perhaps I spoke disingenuisly if so forgive me.  I have had many a
>
> > > > debate with our American brethren on gun ownership, and what I get
> > > > most is protection from those who may brake into your house, mug you,
> > > > attempt to take your loved ones, etc.. If it looks like fear, and
> > > > smells like fear and sounds like fear, there is a very good chance
> > > > that is it fear.
>
> > > Heh. Do you really believe that all American gun owners are frightened
> > > rabbits hiding away in their homes just waiting for the bogey man to burst
> > > through the front door?
>
> > > Guns have multiple uses as I assumed was clear in my post. One most
> > > definitely is protection. There is a real possibility that someone could
> > > break through the front door but it's not something that consumes every
> > > thought for every moment of the day.
>
> > > As to hunting as you alude to here, rifles my good man or shot guns
>
> > > > for that, so you would agree that there is no need to own a hand gun
> > > > or an automatic weapon?
>
> > > Have you ever fired a hand gun or automatic weapon?
>
> > > Many people have hand guns and automatic weapons for the same reason that
> > > people own basketballs. Just as there is no good reason to fire at a 
> > > target
> > > or a beer can, there is no good reason to shoot a basketball at a hoop - 
> > > and
> > > yet we do.
>
> > > > Not more intelegent but more socialy intergrated?  Nope I think that
> > > > perhaps the opposite is true.
>
> > > This link is a thesis on the intelligence of prehistoric man:
>
> > >http://www.custance.org/old/earlyman/3ch1.html
>
> > > If you read it you'll see that our intelligence over the centuries hasn't
> > > changed significantly.
>
> > > As to social integration. I am not referring to tolerance of other 
> > > cultures.
> > > I am referring to the organization and function of individuals within a
> > > single society.
>
> > > Look at world wide politics at this moment in time.  France have just
>
> > > > made laws banning Muslim woman dressing in any kind of face covering.
> > > > Social intergration?  Today our Prime Minister was on the TV telling
> > > > how he is planning on cutting down imergration into the UK from
> > > > 100,000s to 10,000's.   Social intergration?  Nope it seems to me that
> > > > we are entering into an age of misrust of those not of our own culture
> > > > or heritage.
>
> > > I don't know anything about french law concerning dress but if the PM is
> > > cutting down on immigration I'd guess that there are other motivations
> > > besides cultural mistrust. Economic considerations probably being primary.
>
> > > > On the other hand, gene therapies, real movment in nuculare fusion via
> > > > laser or plasma, stem cell tecnolgy, phones that
>
> ...
>
> read more »

Reply via email to