Ho ho ho! Here comes White Santa Claus!!!

[snakeblitz33]

I believe your race is what you personally identify with, according to your culture and your parents beliefs and your ancestral background and ethnicity. I am Caucasian, white, or anglo-saxan American. You could say that some of my family decended from the visigoths. However, when I look down at my arms and look at my facial features and interact within my culture and look at my parents and my social standing, I'm a glorified educated redneck from Louisiana.

Jesus was Jewish, so he looked like a Hebrew from the old days. No one knows what Jesus looked like, nor do I honestly care about his appearance. Santa Clause was a myth perpetuated by the Germans, to my knowledge, and was always portrayed as a Caucasian fellow. The tradition stuck and was brought to the US, where the image of Santa posted everywhere remained white. Nothing wrong with sticking o traditional depictions of characters... what if, in the name of equality, we colored Jesus green and santa purple?

Phixer, just as a side note, you made a comment about Science being wrong more than being right, and you are absolutely right. Science does not prove anything, and by getting as many wrong answers as possible, it makes the only correct answer even more probable. Science allows you to turn your lights on in the morning, brush your teeth with a plastic brush, go to the kitchen and have eggs and milk stored cold. It lets to talk to people far distances, like we are doing now. Science saves lives every day in the medical field, and makes new discoveries every day that makes your life more comfortable. You should be thanking a Scientist for being wrong so many times, so that your life can be made easier. Or you can just bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536470
I believe your race is what you personally identify with, according to your culture and your parents beliefs and your ancestral background and ethnicity. I am Caucasian, white, or anglo-saxan American. You could say that some of my family decended from the visigoths. However, when I look down at my arms and look at my facial features and interact within my culture and look at my parents and my social standing, I'm a glorified educated redneck from Louisiana.

Jesus was Jewish, so he looked like a Hebrew from the old days. No one knows what Jesus looked like, nor do I honestly care about his appearance. Santa Clause was a myth perpetuated by the Germans, to my knowledge, and was always portrayed as a Caucasian fellow. The tradition stuck and was brought to the US, where the image of Santa posted everywhere remained white. Nothing wrong with sticking o traditional depictions of characters... what if, in the name of equality, we colored Jesus green and santa purple?

Phixer, just as a side note, you made a comment about Science being wrong more than being right, and you are absolutely right. Science does not prove anything, and by getting as many wrong answers as possible, it makes the only correct answer even more probable. Science allows you to turn your lights on in the morning, brush your teeth with a plastic brush, go to the kitchen and have eggs and milk stored cold. It lets to talk to people far distances, like we are doing now. Science saves lives every day in the medical field, and makes new discoveries every day that makes your life more comfortable. You should be thanking a Scientist for being wrong so many times, so that your life can be made easier. Or you can just bite the hand that feeds you.
LOL, spoken like a science major (I could be wrong).

And often depends on the generation. Science is important but I think it's somewhat overrated and has created a weakened state and sense of dependency. Ever notice how most kids cant make change without a cash register now or how people have forgotten how to spell and compose basic grammar without word processing software. Or how dependent people have become on cell phones and computers to do simple tasks. This isnt the weakness of science though only an enabler. Here is the weakness of science:


Ever notice how slow and unreliable computers are and how crappy cell phone radio reception still is? so why does it cost at least $50 a month? And why is everything computer based when computer technology will not support the demand? Ever notice how how more people die each year from cancer than are saved by oncology? So why does cancer treatment cost so much with no gaurentee of success? Ever get stuck in traffic, seems like a daily occurrence. Why cant science solve this simple problem?
Ever get tired of paying exorbant prices for fuel? Why cant science come up with an alternate fuel source?
We dream and know our dreams are real. Yet according to science and the scientific method they cannot be proven. I see the things that science has made possible as significantly enhancing our lives but also realize that science has created products that significantly harm us. Chemical toxins, radioactive waste, science designed the reactors but failed to consider the what if scenarios.

Science has also created problems for which it cannot solve. I try to see science objectively and not as a crutch but see the majority of society becoming entirely too dependent upon it. Evoloution is fleeting unless it changes.

 

[snakeblitz33]

Phixer, I hope you realize that we are just having a conversation. there is nothing you can say that makes me change my mind, and I realize that there is nothing that I can say that would change your opinion either. I enjoy these kinds of conversations not because of the conflict, but because on some level, I do agree with you. However, I do see some gaps in your logic and would like to help you separate opinion from fact.

First of all, I am very honored and excited for the fact that you could tell that I am indeed, on some level, a Scientist. I just got done with nearly all of my Biology classes at college and I am for the next year and a half learning how to teach. Yes, I will be a Science teacher not too long from now.

Science is a way to discover the natural and physical properties of this world and a way to test and experiment upon them. People are the ones who use modern technology in stupid ways - for example, misspelling evolution when spell check is available. Technology has become a crutch to some in society. I absolutely agree that it has, but that is not Science's fault. People are fallible - we all make mistakes and do so often, that still, is not Science's fault.

Science also isn't in charge of economics. Supply and demand is not dictated by the scientific method, so I have no idea why you bring money into the conversation. Science makes it possible for cell phone reception - not for your phone bill. Everything is computer based because it is a lot more efficient than paper based, telegraphs and telephones. Computers keep up with demands far greater than humans ever could, and I don't understand your logic. People die from cancer because we are simply not immortal. Science has been able to come up with treatments for cancer, and has saved many lives. I would not say to mistrust Science simply because it can't save them all. There are many people that are working around the clock to understand cancer and treat it and many other diseases. Science simply has not come up with an answer just yet to some of them. Science can not bend the laws of nature to do your bidding either - when everyone gets off work at the same time and is rushing home and thousands of decisions are being made, or not made, that is a human issue - not a scientific one. Your last question about fuel prices - again, that is economics, not science. There are alternative fuels out there - alcohol, vegetable oil, propane, diesel, hydrogen.... but the majority of cars made currently are petrol powered and you can't burn alternative fuels in petro fueled cars. Go buy yourself a propane powered car if that is what you want... it's possible. Again, this is a question of supply and demand, not science.

Science does not prove anything, your right, and I have said it before... we know dreams are real, but scientifically, we have not yet come up with a way to analyze them, view them, or test them. Science came up with the technology and the ability to carry it out - people are the ones who designed the reactors and didn't foresee the design flaws. You are associating people, things, and economics with Science, when they are different. Science just has yet to get answers to the problems that it has created - or mainly, the funding from the people that use or want them to solve the problems.

Evolution is fleeting unless it changes? I don't really understand what you are trying to say here... evolution is the process of a gradual change in species over a long period of time.... meaning it is constantly changing... you might need to read a few good books on science and educate yourself a bit more on the subject of evolution - it is really interesting stuff.

Again, I know I probably can't change your mind and I don't really want to. I just felt like defending my chosen field a little this morning..

now, back to black santa...

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536483
Phixer, I hope you realize that we are just having a conversation. there is nothing you can say that makes me change my mind, and I realize that there is nothing that I can say that would change your opinion either. I enjoy these kinds of conversations not because of the conflict, but because on some level, I do agree with you. However, I do see some gaps in your logic and would like to help you separate opinion from fact.

First of all, I am very honored and excited for the fact that you could tell that I am indeed, on some level, a Scientist. I just got done with nearly all of my Biology classes at college and I am for the next year and a half learning how to teach. Yes, I will be a Science teacher not too long from now.

Science is a way to discover the natural and physical properties of this world and a way to test and experiment upon them. People are the ones who use modern technology in stupid ways - for example, misspelling evolution when spell check is available. Technology has become a crutch to some in society. I absolutely agree that it has, but that is not Science's fault. People are fallible - we all make mistakes and do so often, that still, is not Science's fault.

Science also isn't in charge of economics. Supply and demand is not dictated by the scientific method, so I have no idea why you bring money into the conversation. Science makes it possible for cell phone reception - not for your phone bill. Everything is computer based because it is a lot more efficient than paper based, telegraphs and telephones. Computers keep up with demands far greater than humans ever could, and I don't understand your logic. People die from cancer because we are simply not immortal. Science has been able to come up with treatments for cancer, and has saved many lives. I would not say to mistrust Science simply because it can't save them all. There are many people that are working around the clock to understand cancer and treat it and many other diseases. Science simply has not come up with an answer just yet to some of them. Science can not bend the laws of nature to do your bidding either - when everyone gets off work at the same time and is rushing home and thousands of decisions are being made, or not made, that is a human issue - not a scientific one. Your last question about fuel prices - again, that is economics, not science. There are alternative fuels out there - alcohol, vegetable oil, propane, diesel, hydrogen.... but the majority of cars made currently are petrol powered and you can't burn alternative fuels in petro fueled cars. Go buy yourself a propane powered car if that is what you want... it's possible. Again, this is a question of supply and demand, not science.

Science does not prove anything, your right, and I have said it before... we know dreams are real, but scientifically, we have not yet come up with a way to analyze them, view them, or test them. Science came up with the technology and the ability to carry it out - people are the ones who designed the reactors and didn't foresee the design flaws. You are associating people, things, and economics with Science, when they are different. Science just has yet to get answers to the problems that it has created - or mainly, the funding from the people that use or want them to solve the problems.

Evolution is fleeting unless it changes? I don't really understand what you are trying to say here... evolution is the process of a gradual change in species over a long period of time.... meaning it is constantly changing... you might need to read a few good books on science and educate yourself a bit more on the subject of evolution - it is really interesting stuff.

Again, I know I probably can't change your mind and I don't really want to. I just felt like defending my chosen field a little this morning..

now, back to black santa...
What are the negative aspects of science? Does science conflict with the quest to live a simple life or does it complicate this process?

 

[snakeblitz33]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536554
What are the negative aspects of science? Does science conflict with the quest to live a simple life or does it complicate this process?

The negative aspect of Science might be that mankind's greatest destructive force is itself. Using our intelligence, we have created weapons to kill other humans, sometimes en masse, such as a hydrogen bomb. Science - the scientific method, was used to figure out how to create such a device - but ultimately, it is a human decision to wield that power, not Science.


Phixer, even though I am a Biologist, I love the simple life. I am purchasing land in the country, living off the grid and learning to get back to nature, which is what I love. I love to research, to discover new species and figure out what makes life work. I love the ability to document and categorize, to photograph, to experiment and observe. I like computers and cameras and other gadgets to do that kind of work... it makes my life easier, less complicated and more simple.

The simple life... I have a simple life... I own a small wardrobe, a tablet computer, a Nikon camera, a few journals, a few carpentry tools and a ukulele. My wife keeps it simple too, however, we do have the luxury of a washer and dryer and a dishwasher. I also like to keep two large vegetable gardens growing year round. I am sure my life could be made more simple, but I like it the way it is. Technology can make life simpler, if you let it. It can also make your life more complicated. It's all about choice...

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536554
What are the negative aspects of science? Does science conflict with the quest to live a simple life or does it complicate this process?

The negative aspect of Science might be that mankind's greatest destructive force is itself. Using our intelligence, we have created weapons to kill other humans, sometimes en masse, such as a hydrogen bomb. Science - the scientific method, was used to figure out how to create such a device - but ultimately, it is a human decision to wield that power, not Science.


Phixer, even though I am a Biologist, I love the simple life. I am purchasing land in the country, living off the grid and learning to get back to nature, which is what I love. I love to research, to discover new species and figure out what makes life work. I love the ability to document and categorize, to photograph, to experiment and observe. I like computers and cameras and other gadgets to do that kind of work... it makes my life easier, less complicated and more simple.

The simple life... I have a simple life... I own a small wardrobe, a tablet computer, a Nikon camera, a few journals, a few carpentry tools and a ukulele. My wife keeps it simple too, however, we do have the luxury of a washer and dryer and a dishwasher. I also like to keep two large vegetable gardens growing year round. I am sure my life could be made more simple, but I like it the way it is. Technology can make life simpler, if you let it. It can also make your life more complicated. It's all about choice...
I know, thats why I mentioned it. And your getting closer to proving my point. Mankinds destructive nature is not science , it's behavior and behavior is not science it's (psychology) often based on self preservation. I.e. guns dont kill, people do. The reliance on weapons (product of science) weakens ones ability to solve problems without them. But they're a necessity now because the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

Eventually you may (or may not) realize that science is frequently in opposition to nature. Medicine attempts to heal and save (noble objectives) but in nature the herd moves on and becomes stronger by shedding the weak. Is human intervention using science really helping then? or is it weakening the species? Is the hand sanitizer killing the germs or weakening our ability to fight off infection without it? See what I mean.

A quest to live a simple life will inevitably draw one towards the natural order of things and put you in opposition to certain elements of science because science attempts to modify nature assuming human beings know better than nature. A great deal of science is based on mathematics which is also a man made process. More practical examples besides nuclear power would be products of science such as computers and fossil fuels both are cantankerously flawed but we think they are good things because a culture has been built around them making us dependent upon them. Is the dependency created by these products of science really a good thing? By only focusing on the positive elements of science one neglects the truth (which is both positive and negative) and does not get a fair or accurate representation of reality.

Dont get me wrong, science is important and has a purpose but it is far overrated and fails to deliver most of the time. Some fail to accept this and focus only on the positive. Experimentation and progress thru a process of elimination still fails to address the reality that science is not perfect.

So I would have to ask again what then are the negative attributes of science? Perhaps a weakening of the human species abilty to adapt (dependence upon technology forfits simplicity), global warming maybe? radioactive fallout?

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus#post_3535439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus#post_3535431
Ok, which race would you throw him into:
Caucasian
Negroid
Mongoloid
Australoid
Race is not about how dark your skin can get in the sun. A Jew from the house of Levi is not a race. Being a Jew is a social, cultural, religious designation, not a racial fact.
Yep, I know that Jesus likely did not look like the representations of him in Renaissance art. LOL
Mongoloid? Did you just say jesus had Down's syndrome?
Darth (yes I am that crass) tang

Thats some funny sheet. Someones going to hell for this.

 

[snakeblitz33]

Again, you are talking about products of science. Economics and governments determine supply and demand and use of the products of science. I think what you are mainly focused on is the technology part of science, which is actually only a small fraction of what science actually is. Technology is something you are seeingin use every day... computers, internet, cell phones, tablets, and so on and so forth. there is a definite disconnect that people have from the world around them. The science I specialize in is the study of how we are all interconnected and how we use our resources as a population - in human populations it's anthropology. I prefer ecology over anthropology...

I think you are just getting hung up on how technology seems to be pulling the world apart more than pulling it together. social interactions are not the same - it used to be that people would actually talk to one another face to face if they met, but now it seems that it is more easy to text and to facebook and do social media instead of having a real relationship. That disconnect from the real world has many people in the grip of technology, but that doesn't mean that you and your family have to conform. I know that I don't let my family conform to modern social norms, and I make sure that my friends understand that it is not ok to pull their cell phones out in the middle of our conversations.

As to the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to give a good guy a gun... well, I hate to burst your bubble, but before there were guns, there were arrows and tribuchets, before that there were atlattles and spears and before that, there were rocks and slings. Mankind has always had to prove ourselves, our strengths... and kill those that don't share our beliefs. People have been fighting religious wars on this Earth for thousands of years... I have never heard of a war over Science. Instead of getting rid of the guns, get rid of religion, then we wouldn't fight over it so often... until there is another reason to fight, like famine and dwindling resources.

You don't have to worry about the weak dying off so that the strong can live... Everyone deserves a chance at life, no matter how small and insignificant it may be.

 

[2quills]

Hate to break it to you guys but you're not going to find world peace by ending religion or science. Its always going to be survival of the fittest. The best you can hope for is for people to find a comfotable enough position to live peacefully for a while. Once that position becomes compromised by the dwindling of things like natural resources then it becomes survival of the fittest all over again. Man kind simply goes through cycles just like in nature. If getting back to nature means to rely on man's help to get there then what does it really mean?
It's man kinds own brain that fools him into thinking he can always make things better for everyone else. Its our greatest tool and our biggest problem.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536573
Hate to break it to you guys but you're not going to find world peace by ending religion or science. Its always going to be survival of the fittest. The best you can hope for is for people to find a comfotable enough position to live peacefully for a while. Once that position becomes compromised by the dwindling of things like natural resources then it becomes survival of the fittest all over again. Man kind simply goes through cycles just like in nature. If getting back to nature means to rely on man's help to get there then what does it really mean?
It's man kinds own brain that fools him into thinking he can always make things better for everyone else. Its our greatest tool and our biggest problem.



Hi,

To be happy I think humans just need something to fight over. If it isn't science, it's religion, or politics...or abortion, and when we run out of important stuff to fight and argue over, we go to other countries to try and make them live they way we morally think they should.

 

[2quills]

I don't think it's just because people like to fight because they chose it. I think its just our competetive nature that is hard wired into all of us. Its what has allowed us to survive and claim our place at the top of the food chain.
When you take away a persons reason to compete you hinder them from being able to survive on their own.

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536569
Again, you are talking about products of science. Economics and governments determine supply and demand and use of the products of science. I think what you are mainly focused on is the technology part of science, which is actually only a small fraction of what science actually is. Technology is something you are seeingin use every day... computers, internet, cell phones, tablets, and so on and so forth. there is a definite disconnect that people have from the world around them. The science I specialize in is the study of how we are all interconnected and how we use our resources as a population - in human populations it's anthropology. I prefer ecology over anthropology...

I think you are just getting hung up on how technology seems to be pulling the world apart more than pulling it together. social interactions are not the same - it used to be that people would actually talk to one another face to face if they met, but now it seems that it is more easy to text and to facebook and do social media instead of having a real relationship. That disconnect from the real world has many people in the grip of technology, but that doesn't mean that you and your family have to conform. I know that I don't let my family conform to modern social norms, and I make sure that my friends understand that it is not ok to pull their cell phones out in the middle of our conversations.

As to the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to give a good guy a gun... well, I hate to burst your bubble, but before there were guns, there were arrows and tribuchets, before that there were atlattles and spears and before that, there were rocks and slings. Mankind has always had to prove ourselves, our strengths... and kill those that don't share our beliefs. People have been fighting religious wars on this Earth for thousands of years... I have never heard of a war over Science. Instead of getting rid of the guns, get rid of religion, then we wouldn't fight over it so often... until there is another reason to fight, like famine and dwindling resources.

You don't have to worry about the weak dying off so that the strong can live... Everyone deserves a chance at life, no matter how small and insignificant it may be.
Snake, feel free to use the quote tab if you want. Sounds great, but I cant pick up what your putting down. This has never been my experience and just isn't how nature works in my world... sorry. Im not here to convince and frankly dont care to waste time trying as each person must learn on their own (similar to the Matrix)

. Best wishes in the new year my friend.

 

[2quills]

Snake,  feel free to use the quote tab if you want.   Sounds great, but I cant pick up what your putting down.  This has never been my experience and just isn't how nature works in my world... sorry.  Im not here to convince and frankly dont care to waste time trying as each person must learn on their own (similar to the Matrix) :laughing: .    Best wishes in the new year my friend.
Like in the matrix there are those who believe man kind must be controlled because he is incapable of controlling himself.
I wonder who will be The One?

 

[2quills]

I've been doing some pondering on this and I think I've figured it out. The answers to science and religion. Here me out...
It's simple. What do science and religion both have in common? Something to believe in right?
Everybody comes to a point in life where they have to start asking some serious questions about themselves like where they are going and what does it all mean? Everybody hits a point in time were they experience their lowest low´s. Loss of a loved one, maybe a loss of job or business disaster etc. Whatever the reason people are down on life and in many ways probably down on themselves. When some one loses their confidence everything they touch seems to turn out bad. So what do you do to help them? You give them something else to believe in other than themselves.
Still with me?
It doesn't matter what Jesus's skin color was, It's irrelevant. The only thing you need to understand is that someone gave their life for you so that you can survive. What greater sacrifice is there then that, right? When you begin to believe in SOMETHING for long enough you begin to believe in yourself and therefore you begin to start doing better. Science and religion can both provide this for different people. The facts don't really matter. It's about the never ending and ongoing journey for the soul. Without the spirit then the mind and body have no direction to go.
I have witnessed those moments in life that seem so powerful and far to coincidental to be explained any other way. I'm sure many of you have too. It's in those moments that we become connect to whatever it is we believe in the most.
Eh?
Edit: Oh, yeah. Santa is an easy one too. It doesn't really matter if Santa Claus is a jolly old white man or a little green elf. It's an idea. It's about bringing joy and happiness into somebody else's life other than your own. It's a SELFLESS ACT. We don't really need Santa for that. We just need to remember NOT TO FORGET to do it.

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536621
Snake, feel free to use the quote tab if you want. Sounds great, but I cant pick up what your putting down. This has never been my experience and just isn't how nature works in my world... sorry. Im not here to convince and frankly dont care to waste time trying as each person must learn on their own (similar to the Matrix)

. Best wishes in the new year my friend.
Like in the matrix there are those who believe man kind must be controlled because he is incapable of controlling himself.
I wonder who will be The One?
Quills thats profound thing to say, both posts make good sense especially the part about providing something to believe in. Another reason I dont like the matrix. It provides a false sense of security for those who need it and charges the ultimate price ... freedom.

Although it sounds crazy, thats why the matrix exists. Many would perish without it, in nature where there is no matrix the incompetent quickly rejoin the food chain and the speices becomes stronger and evolves. The matrix enables the weak, it encourages it by taking the weight off and in turn weakens the culture.

"The One", well...IMHO he was nailed to a cross 2000 years ago and still remains "The One" to me. Im sure he would disagree with me about survival of the fittest though.

In the mean time, how do we change it. Dont vote for red or blue. But by all means never vote for a liberal in any guise, they love big govt, more laws, rules, bureaucracy, enslavement, welfare... etc and for the most part they hate all forms of personal freedom and independence. They love government, totalitarianism and controlling people with overwheliming laws and taxation.
Many of them are agents of the matrix and vehemently oppose any who resist the expansion of it.

 

[2quills]

Quills thats profound thing to say, both posts make good sense especially the part about providing something to believe in.  Another reason I dont like the matrix.  It provides a false sense of security for those who need it and charges the ultimate price ... freedom.
Although it sounds crazy,  thats why the matrix exists.  Many would perish without it,  in nature where there is no matrix the incompetent quickly rejoin the food chain and the speices becomes stronger and evolves. The matrix enables the weak, it encourages it by taking the weight off and in turn weakens the culture. 
 "The One",  well...IMHO he was nailed to a cross 2000 years ago and still remains "The One" to me.  Im sure he would disagree with me about survival of the fittest though.
In the mean time, how do we change it.   Dont vote for red or blue.  But by all means never vote for a liberal in any guise, they love big govt, more laws, rules, bureaucracy, enslavement, welfare... etc and for the most part they hate all forms of personal freedom and independence.  They love government, totalitarianism and controlling people with overwheliming laws and taxation.
Many of them are agents of the matrix and vehemently oppose any who resist the expansion of it.
The laws do seem a bit suppressive don't they?
So is it a human flaw in our compassion for one another that is the root of all our troubles, IYO?

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536812
Quills thats profound thing to say, both posts make good sense especially the part about providing something to believe in. Another reason I dont like the matrix. It provides a false sense of security for those who need it and charges the ultimate price ... freedom.
Although it sounds crazy, thats why the matrix exists. Many would perish without it, in nature where there is no matrix the incompetent quickly rejoin the food chain and the speices becomes stronger and evolves. The matrix enables the weak, it encourages it by taking the weight off and in turn weakens the culture.
"The One", well...IMHO he was nailed to a cross 2000 years ago and still remains "The One" to me. Im sure he would disagree with me about survival of the fittest though.
In the mean time, how do we change it. Dont vote for red or blue. But by all means never vote for a liberal in any guise, they love big govt, more laws, rules, bureaucracy, enslavement, welfare... etc and for the most part they hate all forms of personal freedom and independence. They love government, totalitarianism and controlling people with overwheliming laws and taxation.
Many of them are agents of the matrix and vehemently oppose any who resist the expansion of it.
The laws do seem a bit suppressive don't they?
So is it a human flaw in our compassion for one another that is the root of all our troubles, IYO?
I'll have to articulate it. Evil is the root of our troubles, it's often guised as compassion.
IMO ... this answer makes one sound like a cold hearted soul less person. We dont think of nature (at least I dont) as cold, heartless and soul less when the runt of the litter gets eaten or the wolves get the slowest buffalo. I see nature as harmony and mankind as chaotic, especially the rat race. Compassion runs deep ... after all what if it was our kid? But the fact of the matter is that kid is going to have a much harder life because of this compassion... is it then compassionate or selfish to bring a kid into the world with severe problems? Not fair to the kid IMHO. Would the kid be better off not being born, after all the kid didnt have a choice. More compassionate to prevent such issues at the lowest level.

Compassion isnt a good thing if the end result doesnt evolve the species. Compassion is at 6:13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgGTTtR0kc

Many disagree and state that our compassion for one another is what separates us from the beasts (some cases in nature but more often based on survival). I conclude that our compassion for one another is frequently the source of problems, that and rampant overpopulation. So the concept of compassion... is different to each person. Pulling the plug to one is compassionate while to another it's murder. Nature thinks nothing of it and does so to strengthen the species resulting in harmony, mankind fails to (because of compassion) and it results in poverty and suffering.

The diameter of the circle of compassion is different for each person. For me it's pretty small but infinitely deep. The ones with the big circles who want to help everyone are the most displaced from nature IMHO. Im probably a cold hearted person to think compassion is a flaw.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/396806/ho-ho-ho-here-comes-white-santa-claus/20#post_3536824
I'll have to articulate it. Evil is the root of our troubles, it's often guised as compassion.
IMO ... this answer makes one sound like a cold hearted soul less person. We dont think of nature (at least I dont) as cold, heartless and soul less when the runt of the litter gets eaten or the wolves get the slowest buffalo. I see nature as harmony and mankind as chaotic, especially the rat race. Compassion runs deep ... after all what if it was our kid? But the fact of the matter is that kid is going to have a much harder life because of this compassion... is it then compassionate or selfish to bring a kid into the world with severe problems? Not fair to the kid IMHO. Would the kid be better off not being born, after all the kid didnt have a choice. More compassionate to prevent such issues at the lowest level.

Compassion isnt a good thing if the end result doesnt evolve the species. Compassion is at 6:13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgGTTtR0kc

Many disagree and state that our compassion for one another is what separates us from the beasts (some cases in nature but more often based on survival). I conclude that our compassion for one another is frequently the source of problems, that and rampant overpopulation. So the concept of compassion... is different to each person. Pulling the plug to one is compassionate while to another it's murder. Nature thinks nothing of it and does so to strengthen the species resulting in harmony, mankind fails to (because of compassion) and it results in poverty and suffering.

The diameter of the circle of compassion is different for each person. For me it's pretty small but infinitely deep. The ones with the big circles who want to help everyone are the most displaced from nature IMHO. Im probably a cold hearted person to think compassion is a flaw.

Hi,

Odd how threads morph into something completely different as it rubs it's course. I'm a very compassionate person, I don't want to save the world, but I believe in letting people choose their own path, as long as it doesn't hurt others.

I happen to think we humans are a little above the beasts of the field.

If somebody such as my Mother, want's to live on life support for 100 years, so be it, I won't pull the plug so to speak. She did all her breeding long ago so it won't weaken the gene pool, and it won't do a thing but run an electric and medical bill that her insurance would pay for...insurance that SHE paid for many years. If however the person is like my brother, he doesn't want to be on life support at all. Since that would be his wishes, I could pull the plug without feeling guilty at all...I would still weep for the loss of my loved one.

To pull the plug on my Mom would be murder, to pull the plug on my brother would be compassion....LOL..He is done breeding as well, so alive or dead, he doesn't evolve the species either. I really hope we actually have a higher purpose then just having kids and strengthening the species.

 

[2quills]

Good point, Phixer.
The problem with seeing ourselves as good or evil is that both sides only see the negative in one another. The challenge for man IMO is to find the balance between.
If the compassion of a parent for their child is what allows that child to survive then what does that say for our bigger family that we call mankind? Evolution or survival of the fittest is about species taking some of the worst conditions that this world can throw at us and using whatever edge we have to adapt and make it through. I believe Jesus understands this and is their for our guidance.
Take my wife and I for example. We live in a neighborhood with rules. Some of the nit picky stuff I don't agree with. But the over all premise of the home owners association is to help insure that the neighborhood stays clean and safe. So I can live with the nit picky stuff for now because it's better to me than some of the more urban areas down town.
We have no plans of retiring here. We will just finish out our careers (hopefully) and move on. We'd like to retire on a nice piece of land (more land/less house). So that way we can hunt and harvest our own food. Getting back to nature (as it were) and live the simple life. Until that day arrives then competing in the rat race is just something I see that we simply have to do. And it is there in The Matrix that man will find his evolutionary advantage IMO. This is the nature of our age.
"You have to go through hell before you get to heaven" (Steve Miller Band)

 

[phixer]

Hi Flower, always good to hear your ideas, makes good sense to stop LS in that situation. For me to think humans are above the beasts of the field requires me to expand the diamater of the field to encompass the entire universe. At this point I realize that human beings are less than the beasts of the field. Im sure God created many more species than what exists on Earth. IMHO the best way for us to live is to emulate nature instead of manipulating it. Cant go wrong that way. In other words if a stranger is starving to death maybe thats natures way of telling us we as humans have made to many and to stop re-producing. We have been conditioned to believe that helping them is a good thing.

Interesting you mention that Quills. Those HO associations can keep the dirt bags out but can also restrict ones freedom. I hate the rat race concept because it dosent allow people to work for happiness using the skills they have, but rather baits people into a competetion of materialism that never ends resulting in the creation of robotic work machines and not human beings. I do understand what you mean but feel that the best way one can be free is to do what your skills allow you to do without having to compete for survival. Hope you guys get there soon, hate to see good people caught up in it. As you implied, one must suffer at some point I suppose. That rat race though is also the matrix in a way, self sufficiency and personal independence is the way out of it.

Finding the good in all people is a noble objective. I do believe there are varying levels of good and evil in everyone.

If given in a sinking ship with one life boat that can only hold 5 people and there are 6 people onboard who shall perish? It is under these circumstances that the true nature of human beings is manifested. Christmas shopping, road rage etc... People naturally revert back to primal instincts of survival. This is our natural default, showing compassion is divine and something unnatural to most people. I've seen more evil done by people than good done by people, perhaps thats why the good deeds stand out so much.

As the population increases and the resources deplete people will revert back to their basic nature. Do we really need each other to survive or are others a threat to our existence? We have been trained to depend upon each other i.e teamwork etc but it also has it's drawbacks