Tag Archives: equality

Does anyone else wish that end of the world would just happen already?

I find myself wishing for global catastrophe, or the “Apocalypse” to come about and wipe the slate clean. Yes I know it sounds horrible and inhumane, but I’m just speaking my mind. People all around the world just make problems. I wish to just leave humanity behind and become a recluse. I have survival skills and am loosely familiar in agriculture, so I know I’d be fine on my own for the most part. I’m tired of these old men in suits claiming they know whats best for the rest of us. I’m tired of the inconsiderate people on the streets. I’m tired of all of the mindless sheep that preach they have answers to problems that don’t matter in the world. People have lost their independence, and have become weak in return. Too reliant on technology, and too willing to be lead are the people. They forget where they come from, and embrace the superficial. Why? Why can’t people come together and help each other for the greater good? Because they’re to worried about the new iPod that comes out next month. They worry about they’re next facebook status. They have fallen in love with this trivial convenience that is coveted around the world. My only hope is that i am strong enough to survive any collapse in society so that I can finally get some peace and quiet, and who knows maybe even help people think for themselves and embrace collective thinking, equality for all, the free exchange of ideas, and most importantly, logic. People should also know how too defend themselves, for any number of reasons. Defending their homestead/ community from those who wish to take from them. It’s a tough world out there and the vast majority of humanity would not survive in nature. Not because of being to dumb or unintelligent, but because of sheer laziness, and unwillingness to better ones self. All though if I should fall in the end of the world, I will die laughing at humanity. I’m sure it’ll be other humans who are the cause of it all too, and that it could have been avoided if people would only listen to one another.

This is my first post/question, please comment and leave your thoughts. Weather you are agreeing or the latter. all opinions are welcome as long as you are not disrespectful. my only goal is to inspire free thinking, which I hope I have done at the least.
Thanks to those who answered. One answer states, “your life is a mirror of your thoughts”. My life is sh*t first off, and most of my freedoms have been stripped from me. I am a soldier in the US Army. Were free thinking is rather rare if you ask me. I’ve lived on my own sense I was 16 and am now 22. I’ve seen a lot in my 22 years on this earth. I’ve seen many different places on this earth as well, and they’re are all the same ultimately. I know i can come off a little rash sometimes and I know most people in the world are just trying to make it, but they argue to much amongst themselves over things that have no real standing in society. Like religion for instance, or other personal beliefs. For some reason, the masses of people think everyone else should believe the same as them or like them. I enlisted hoping to find direction in my life and all i found was the same sh*t. I wanted to be the one who helped others, so I enlisted to be a combat medic, and all i see in the majority of th
(in the majority of…) the places I’ve been is same as any where else, from Iraq and back. It’s all just a bunch of people being driven apart from one another because of different preferences or beliefs. I’ll say right now I know I may seem a little… extreme in my thought process, but remember that I’m only 22. I have much to learn and I know that, but that doesn’t mean I’m not going to voice my opinion regardless.

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?

What would be the result if man could alter natural law and repeal Survival of the fittest?

If in the interest of fairness and equality we could take food, habitat, hunting skills, speed, intelligence, survival instinct ect.. from more successful animals and species and redistribute them to natures less successful adaptations what do think would be the outcome?
Do you think nature would thrive or stagnate and die?
From the tenor of many of the responses, this question seems to have hit a nerve. Perhaps “Survival of the fittest” was not the most accurate term. Evolution seems to stir so much emotion that I thought I might receive more coherent answers avoiding it. You obviously took my meaning without it. Obviously there are more criteria than those I listed just as there are more ways to limit success in a society than progressive taxes, quotas and excessive regulation. As you know I was not referring to Social Darwinism but to the failed philosophy at the root of the Progressive movement and responsible for misery and atrocity throughout history. I understand your defensiveness and why you choose to avoid a direct answer.
Thanks Jack. I never mentioned Darwin in my question. You brought up the subject of Eugenics. What concerns me are people like the Emanuel Brothers. Rham Emanuel is Obama’s Chief of Staff and Chief Arm Twister. Rham’s first brother is Ari Emanuel. Ari just happens to be Michael “Sicko” Moore’s Hollywood Agent. Rham’s other brother is Ezekiel Emanuel M.D. PhD. Dr. Emanuel is a leading Oncologist, Bioethicist (EUGENICS) and proponent of Euthanasia. Dr. Emanuel is also on President Obama’s Medical Advisory Board. Then we have Dr. John Holdren, the President’s National Science Advisor. Dr. Holdren is a leading expert on global population control ( EUGENICS) and well known Euthanasia proponent. The last charmer we have is Cass Sunstein, U. Chiciago/Harvard Law Professor and another “Eugenics and Rationing of Care” Proponet and sometime advisor to President Obama
Our nation’s “Science Czar” John Holdrens book Ecoscience:
“In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not; The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food; Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise; People who ‘contribute to social deterioration’ (i.e. undesirables) ‘can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility’ — in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational ‘Planetary Regime’ should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives — using an armed international police force.”
You read all of that correctly. If you don’t believe me, do the research for yoursel

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?