Support
Ask your question
Search
Visual Collection
Popular Questions
- Is organized religion the root of all ... latest post by Subzero | 200 responses
- Why don't schools teach us to form our... latest post by rwt | 20 responses
- When will someone ask STUDENTS what th... latest post by rwt | 10 responses
- Who Protects Us From Them? latest post by Subzero | 5 responses
- Will human beings really ever understa... latest post by Subzero | 47 responses
Popular Topics
Most active users
- Thai sean 1272 posts | member since Nov 11, 2007
- treeless 17 posts | member since Dec 9, 2011
- cyberworldukltd 16 posts | member since Feb 7, 2012
- thedoc 1381 posts | member since Sep 10, 2006
- GDiFonzo 10 posts | member since Nov 9, 2011
Profile of skeenan
libertarian socialism-anarcho-syndalicism
Communism can only be referenced by how it was enacted in reality. Other than 'communism in practice' there is no single concrete object that is communism. Marx and engles wrote and philosophized generalities about communism and socialism as did mao, stalin, lenin, pol pot, castro ect. Aside from marx and engels the afformetioned figures each enacted some form of communsim that they contrived from the ambiguos and maleable writings of people like marx. So to reference communism as you have in your question shows a misunderstanding, for there is no objectivef communism. In fact expiriments have been made throghout history to "really see if communsim could work" but the writings and concepts are to general and unspecific and disaster has only resulted from these expiriments. I think you should read into writngs on libertarian socialsim or anarcho- syndalicism for they both are systems which have been written extensively on in more contemporary times and they are concepts of a brand of socialism that conceptualize the elimination of the state and very strong democratic priciples.
god
i appreciate and enjoyed your response. I see that in other posts you have referenced "god" and i am interested in what your perception of that concept is and how it fits and functions into the picture of the universe you have painted in your response.
truth
your answer here confuses me a bit in that you seem to be quite convinced that truth does exist outside of human consciousness, and you assert that this truth is perverted and manipulated by all those who attempt to ascertain truth. I guess what perplexes me with this answer is that you refer to truth and facts but never explain those concepts and i am interested in what your criterion for discerning reality from fiction is.
nature
im not sure that the biological function of all living creatures on earth is to improve the habitat for all life. That may be the end result of the interrelations of some if not the majority of life on earth but to say that the "function" of all life is to improve the habitat of all life is in my opinion not very well thought out. Human beings have developed massive brains with dangerous power and have detatched themselves from nature in a certain respect. But evolution is a process of mutations and adaptations that may or may not be beneficial to the environment or to life itself. Ultimately what decides whether these mutations and adaptations survive or not is the sucess rate of them, if human beings are so detrimental to the planet and other life on it then on a long enough timeline humans will destroy themselves and probrably alot of life with them. But that is the process of nature. Mother nature hovers above this dance we call evolution and ultimately on a long enough timeline all life will see its demise, and new life will emerge. Planet earth has endured much more cataclysm then human beings can offer to it and always life has emerged from the rubble. The notion you set forth of a "natural self" is i my opinion a bit ill-considered. I do understand that the generaly accepted meaning of nature is that which lies outside of human civilization. But i think that anything that the human brain produces is part of the course of nature. That is not to say we are not responsible for it or cannot change it. The human brain evolved over millions of years and all of its by-products evolved with it, it may seem couter-intuitive to consider things like television and nuclear power a part of nature but those things developed as a by-product of the human mind which is a by-product of nature. There are no restrictions on evolution therein lies its beauty. Ultimately as i have previously said if humans and thier by-products become too detrimental to themselves, the earth and its life then they will be destroyed as part of the course of evolution, but again ultimately all lifeforms on a long enough time scale will see its demise. With this being said humans have become so prosperous as a species because of thier ability to create and to reason. The challenge we face as a species is to prolong our existence by creating a lower impact more symbiotic way of living using intellect and reason. Humans cannot save all life on this planet that is not thier purpose in evolution, species die everyday and whether it is the human species fault or not it is within the bounds of evolution. But again humans have reason and intellect and it is reasonable and intelligent to create a human species that lives as symbioticaly and harmoniously with eachother and other life because it prolongs our existence as a species, that is lifes purpose in nature.
scientific scripture
There may be evidence supporting the big bang, but there is much less than ample evidence to support a theory on the what precluded the big bang. Science does not exist in a vaccum and although one may be quite sure about theory today tommorrow a new and cataclysmic devlopment could alter those convictions or even destroy them. I think it is dangerous for humans to accept science and theory as religion, as scripture. The only thing that humans can be sure of is that they are not sure of anything.
Money?
I think in the modern global econonmy what drives any change is profit. I dont see any problem, within the system that we currently operate in, for an individual, a private enterprise or a corporation to invest in something that which they truly believe in and to reap benefits when thier investment suceeds. I am not sure what your statements aim is....clarify.
lol
This answer is replete with sweeping generalizations, i.e. the first sentence and is blantantly written by a partisan believer who seems to be completely ignorant of reality. I cannot begin to respond to this advertisement literaly for i have spent a lifetime responding to the same superficial fallbacks and sanctimonious statements that this answer is constructed of. And as for the last sentence, about todays adhd people. This sentence is a perfect example of the sort of ignorance and malice that in my opinion is bread by organised religion and furthermore is such an asinine statement it disolves any chance of relevancy or purpose your answer could have offered.
