Better World...

[HaShev]

Suggestions for bettering this world- By Darrell Sifford- Phila. Inquirer Tues. July 18,1989
Willis Harman was saying that “if enough people change their minds, their ways of looking at things,
institutions change too,” and almost before you know it, a new age has dawned, more promising than anything
that has come before. “Increasingly, people are becoming aware that the present system doesn’t work in the long run.
People are awakening.....and recognizing that they have it better simply by choosing to have it better.
“People in general are becoming aware that it’s no longer enough just to concern themselves with their own growth
and development” All of us must be concerned with making the world a better place or there won’t be a world.
“Every age, every society has its myths and models that offer an explanation of who we are and how the world works.
These reign virtually unexamined until enough new information challenges those old models.
Today we are on the brink of a planetary crisis and on the edge of a changing worldview.
At stake is the future. Herman suggests to “Be aware. Be concerned.
Get together, talk, listen, search. In the long run ordinary things can produce extraordinary results.”
Most of all be hopeful. “Things are happening.”

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Suggestions for bettering this world- By Darrell Sifford- Phila. Inquirer Tues. July 18,1989
Willis Harman was saying that “if enough people change their minds, their ways of looking at things,
institutions change too,” and almost before you know it, a new age has dawned, more promising than anything
that has come before. “Increasingly, people are becoming aware that the present system doesn’t work in the long run.
People are awakening.....and recognizing that they have it better simply by choosing to have it better.
“People in general are becoming aware that it’s no longer enough just to concern themselves with their own growth
and development” All of us must be concerned with making the world a better place or there won’t be a world.
“Every age, every society has its myths and models that offer an explanation of who we are and how the world works.
These reign virtually unexamined until enough new information challenges those old models.
Today we are on the brink of a planetary crisis and on the edge of a changing worldview.
At stake is the future. Herman suggests to “Be aware. Be concerned.
Get together, talk, listen, search. In the long run ordinary things can produce extraordinary results.”
Most of all be hopeful. “Things are happening.”

Basically, if we can get mankind, or a large enough majority of it, to adopt and exercise this guy's values, we can fix the world, which is in an existential crisis that only mankind's philosophical awakening can fix!

Man, I feel like I heard this before. . . Who was it. . . Oh! Right! Every religion and every campaigning politician who ever inhabited this planet.

Well, different strokes for different folks. To each child, their own pied piper.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

And I gotta say, I love watching hippy types play the pseudo-logical morality sales pitch with all the same basic bullet points as old world religions, complete with fire and brimstone. Every time I read this, "If we all just stopped being selfish and everyone focused their energies on X" drivel, I envision a bible with an Organic sticker on it.

I also love that it boils down, 9 times out of 10 with hippy "sky is falling and we must awaken!" philosophies, to humans abandoning selfishness and individuality and all adopting identical sets of values. Just gotta shed those pesky natural tendencies and alter human nature and we're good!

Likewise, if we all just stop being shorter than 6'6", then everyone can dunk! Let's get on it, gang!

 

[HaShev]

You see the worlds problems are by choice, even your negative defeatest approach was your choice and yet you might be the first to cuss the world for being so irrational and messed up.
IT'S by choice that we do not seek one understanding through defining the most finite source and power in life so that with the most finite expression we no longer use subjective opinions on what is in line or opposing that purpose and direction in life. With knowledge of how things are and how things could be and how to recognize good or bad right or wrong without it being mere subjective opinions then we have something we never had, known purpose,known goals, known direction, know how to recognize true opposition to life and true reflections and manifestations of it's essence.
Like I said, we chose not to simply define the simplest of things and that's by choice, we simply choose to live this way. If you don't believe me then why is there a huge difference in how people live country to country, community to community, school district to school district, and from camps outside prison to being inside prisons?
People in prison choose to live in agression, rage, violence, fear, gang mentality, ego/pride, revenge, hate/anger, selfishness, animosity, and thus live in their own hell and yet it could be like a sleep over camp where they work together and enjoy each others time or like a commune where paradise is possible as they make things good for one another tsking away burdens, sharing chores, interests etc, all by choice. Neighborhoods same wsy, end violent behavior and threats and crime and you build value in property and community and higher pay with better jobs and more conveniences.
Once again by choice.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

You see the worlds problems are by choice, even your negative defeatest approach was your choice and yet you might be the first to cuss the world for being so irrational and messed up.
IT'S by choice that we do not seek one understanding through defining the most finite source and power in life so that with the most finite expression we no longer use subjective opinions on what is in line or opposing that purpose and direction in life. With knowledge of how things are and how things could be and how to recognize good or bad right or wrong without it being mere subjective opinions then we have something we never had, known purpose,known goals, known direction, know how to recognize true opposition to life and true reflections and manifestations of it's essence.
Like I said, we chose not to simply define the simplest of things and that's by choice, we simply choose to live this way. If you don't believe me then why is there a huge difference in how people live country to country, community to community, school district to school district, and from camps outside prison to being inside prisons?
People in prison choose to live in agression, rage, violence, fear, gang mentality, ego/pride, revenge, hate/anger, selfishness, animosity, and thus live in their own hell and yet it could be like a sleep over camp where they work together and enjoy each others time or like a commune where paradise is possible as they make things good for one another tsking away burdens, sharing chores, interests etc, all by choice. Neighborhoods same wsy, end violent behavior and threats and crime and you build value in property and community and higher pay with better jobs and more conveniences.
Once again by choice.

There are so many huge and silly assumptions in this post that it's hard not to just yell, "God damn hippies!" in my best Cartman voice and not even try reasoning with you.

First assumption, that my approach to life is negative and defeatist. This is silly because it presupposes that I believe that, for the first time in history, you fire and brimstone preachers are correct and the world hangs in the balance of mankind's urgent spiritual awakening. I do not. In fact, I feel like you're the one with the negative viewpoint, because if the planet's continued health is contingent on mankind adhering to a singular view of right and wrong, then we're fuckin doomed!

Second silly assumption: It's by choice that we don't seek one understanding by defining the source and power, etc. This is silly because it presupposes that we can prove or disprove a hard standard for the proper direction and purpose of mankind. If we had knowledge of such a hard standard, philosophy and religion wouldn't be a thing, there would be only one school of thought. All these differing world views didn't happen because we chose not to define these things, they happened because, given our current understanding of reality and the technology accessible for aiding in that understanding, these things are as yet undefinable. One of the primary purposes of philosophy is figuring out our purpose, though, so saying we've chosen not to define these things is as ignorant as saying that we can define them.

When you refer to this as defining the "simplest of things", it's also insanely arrogant. What you're doing is presupposing that your communal morality is not only objectively correct, but obviously so. This implies you couldn't possibly be wrong, which in turn implies the infallibility of your intuition. Arrogant doesn't even cover it. I have a really hard time wrapping my mind around how someone could even be that self assured without any hard evidence. Confidence feels good, though, so that level of ignorance must be as blissful as the old saying states. Nevertheless, from a bystander's perspective, assumption 3, here, is perhaps the most ridiculous.

Lastly, you've assumed that the differences in how people live proves that they choose not to adhere to objective definitions of right and wrong. The problem with this assumption is that right and wrong are -purely- subjective values. Unless you can prove that a hard standard for moral correctness exists (and lemme spare you the suspense; you can't), then you can't say that the only possibility is that not coming to identical moral conclusions was a conscious decision. If morality is based in opinion (and it absolutely is unless, again, you can prove a hard standard), then it is only natural that many different versions of right and wrong would emerge, as individuals are generally prone to being different from one another.

So yeah, basically what you're saying is that if people just accepted one view of right and wrong (your view, I assume? ) instead of believing what they actually find compelling, everything would work out. This flatly rejects the very nature of human psychology, which is to form opinions based upon one's particular experiences and influences. You might as well propose that we all sprout wings to eliminate air travel's contribution to carbon emission. Sure, that would solve a lot of problems, it's just not a reasonable explanation.

Also, GOD DAMN HIPPIES!

 

[HaShev]

See your anger=your choice.
Your frustration=your choice.
Your need to muck up the water so nobody else can drink it=your choice. Their choice is to filter your muck or iggy you, or emukate you and be angry too.=choices.

You assume to much, none of this is hippy it's philosophy that prexists copying it down into texts.
I was never even remotely a hippy, I was a punk rocker who's choices were to not get tatted up, not do drugs, not rage or be violent, not blame others, not be lazy or ignorant, not follow or conform to the so called norm like a pied piper off a cliff -blind leading the blind.
You are following the norm=misery love company, you enjoy living in it and I refuse to, yet you seem to want to force me in your misery and my refusal to let you subvert or submerse me in it is ticking you off.
You and Christianity have a lot in common, more then you think.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

See your anger=your choice.
Your frustration=your choice.
Your need to muck up the water so nobody else can drink it=your choice. Their choice is to filter your muck or iggy you, or emukate you and be angry too.=choices.

You assume to much, none of this is hippy it's philosophy that prexists copying it down into texts.
I was never even remotely a hippy, I was a punk rocker who's choices were to not get tatted up, not do drugs, not rage or be violent, not blame others, not be lazy or ignorant, not follow or conform to the so called norm like a pied piper off a cliff -blind leading the blind.
You are following the norm=misery love company, you enjoy living in it and I refuse to, yet you seem to want to force me in your misery and my refusal to let you subvert or submerse me in it is ticking you off.
You and Christianity have a lot in common, more then you think.

Lol, I wasn't calling you a hippy because I believed you self identify as such, but because your pseudo-intellectual philosophy pushes the same feel good morals as the mainstream culture, presumes everyone understands these morals to be self-evident, and ignores their obvious conflicts with the tendencies of human psychological norms, just like hippy spiritualism. Try not to fixate on the label as if the literal inaccuracy somehow invalidates my entire point.

Not that I expect you to engage in honest debate, as your entire response ignored the substance of my argument and resorted in stead to an ad hominem attack on my motives. Nevertheless, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with one more challenge:

If I'm just blindly venting misery, then the errors in my logic must be evident. If that is the case, where does my logic not add up?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Also, for the record, it's pretty presumptuous to tell me that my disdain for your philosophy is indicative of anger and jealousy of the fulfillment that you get from said philosophy. Personally, I feel like my rejection of your premises is the more optimistic route.

From my perspective, there is no conclusive, compelling evidence that the world is in an existential crisis to any greater degree than that to which the ongoing game of cosmic pinball normally subjects us, so your premise that we are approaching our doom strikes me as needlessly, depressingly negative. It also strikes me as purposely pessimistic (not to mention arrogant) that you think that in the thousands of years that various religious leaders have been pushing various end-times theories that have never come true, -you- just happen to be the guy with the correct information on the apocalypse and how to avoid it.

Furthermore, your contention is that the path to salvation is as "simple" as getting mankind onto one moral page, which is where your lack of understanding of human psychology and the processes by which humans acquire moral values becomes evident. You're basically proposing that humans should choose to believe in the same set of values, but the problem is that nobody gets to choose what they find compelling. Choosing to all believe in the same definitions of right and wrong is literally impossible.

In summation, you posit that the sky is falling and propose that the only available solution is to demand that mankind accomplish something of which we're not psychologically capable, then you tell me I'm trying to muck up your joy with my pessimistic view that there's no reason to believe that mankind is about to be doomed if we don't all unnaturally conform?

I hate to break it to you, but -your- view is the depressing one. Stop trying to bring everyone down with your doomsday prophecy, I get that misery loves company, but the fact that you've bought into some modern Armageddon fantasy doesn't necessitate that you try and scare everyone into following your belief system.

You, my bosom chum, are far more philosophically similar to a Christian than I.

 

[HaShev]

One simple answer: you said " it's pretty
presumptuous to tell me"
Since I'm not spoutting hippy jargon, not a hippy , not selling or even mentioning armageddon and you assumed I didn't take into account man's resistance to things, even if they are helpful in their best interest, sort of what you are doing by mucking up clean water.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Good argument. Declare that I'm wrong without any supporting argument.

The difference between what you did here and what I did prior is that when I said you were being presumptuous, I explained why. You simply make declarations that I'm wrong without addressing a word of the substance of what you've branded incorrect.

No logic, just faith parading as wisdom.

 

[HaShev]

I don't have to, because you did it for me. You see all this time you left no indication nor idea for a better world as all you can do is o pooey on it. You only left the opposite nature behind in your post and made like I wrote the 1989 article in your rant. I repeat 1989 newspaper clipping.
This same nature can be found in supressive regimes around the world, whereby the dictators can't create a betterment for their societies, so it's easier to tear everything down and blame everyone else for their troubles. So how's this destructive nature going for you? No complaints about the world you accept this way right? Voltaire would be proud of you, for he said in his day the sham of Christianity would not last to much longer, and we see how many murders and wars later the acceptance of keeping the status quo that commonsense Voltaire forsaw did not take into acct people who accept the way things are because they love their misery. By choice they suffer in the hell they build just as prisoners make their prisons whereby it doesn't have to be.

I'm just glad you are not my favorite teams General manager, because you would never fire the coach nor restructure the team if you lost every game for every season. And I'm glad you don't run a cable co. or we'd all be stuck with outdated 480p resolution, oh wait we are stuck with that standard and real standard HD is considered premium while 4k should really be the standard now, if they so choose it to be BETTER.= (Evolution 101)

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I don't have to, because you did it for me. You see all this time you left no indication nor idea for a better world as all you can do is o pooey on it. You only left the opposite nature behind in your post and made like I wrote the 1989 article in your rant. I repeat 1989 newspaper clipping.
This same nature can be found in supressive regimes around the world, whereby the dictators can't create a betterment for their societies, so it's easier to tear everything down and blame everyone else for their troubles. So how's this destructive nature going for you? No complaints about the world you accept this way right? Voltaire would be proud of you, for he said in his day the sham of Christianity would not last to much longer, and we see how many murders and wars later the acceptance of keeping the status quo that commonsense Voltaire forsaw did not take into acct people who accept the way things are because they love their misery. By choice they suffer in the hell they build just as prisoners make their prisons whereby it doesn't have to be.

I'm just glad you are not my favorite teams General manager, because you would never fire the coach nor restructure the team if you lost every game for every season. And I'm glad you don't run a cable co. or we'd all be stuck with outdated 480p resolution, oh wait we are stuck with that standard and real standard HD is considered premium while 4k should really be the standard now, if they so choose it to be BETTER.= (Evolution 101)

This isn't a thread about -my- ideas for what would make the world better, this is a thread about -your- ideas.

The mere fact that I didn't choose to illustrate an alternate plan isn't indicative of anything other than the fact that what caught my attention was what I found silly about your post. On a regular basis I throw out things I feel need improvement in our culture and politics. Don't keep throwing out wildly presumptuous accusations. If your ideas are logically defensible, speak to where I've erred in my assessment of their merits.

And this obsessive need to paint me as miserable is silly. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with everyone forming their own morals, I just wish our culture was more encouraging of people using rational thought to form them, and I wish less people would demand that other people obey their's. Even if not, I'm content with the current reality of individuals forming different opinions. Consider the possibility that people who disagree with your life view aren't automatically constrained to a life of misery.

 

[HaShev]

Once again "NOT MY ARTICLE"
For a person who thinks it's a waste of time you surely spend a lot of time with it, of course that's your choice.
: )

 

[Steven_R]

You want a better world? Start with yourself. Take a class. Clean up your front yard. Exercise more. Get to know your neighbors. Go for a walk in the evening instead of watching the tube. Read to your kids. Help an old lady cross the street. Plant a garden. Go see a high school play.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Once again "NOT MY ARTICLE"
For a person who thinks it's a waste of time you surely spend a lot of time with it, of course that's your choice.
: )

Sorry, not your article, I'll stop attributing these silly thoughts directly to you, though do understand that typically when people make a post out of a philosophical piece like this it's usually because they find the information compelling. If these thoughts don't reflect your own, my apologies for assuming otherwise.

On the other hand, I never said this was a waste of time. I said that what this article proposed and what you subsequently said about mankind's morality being a choice were demonstrably ignorant.

Debate isn't a waste of time. Keeps the mind sharp and periodically exposes where my views on life are wrong, allowing me to update to more accurate hypotheses. And it's fun

 

[HaShev]

No problemo, the article was as vague as a tv evangelist or a politician. Everytime you think they are gonna say something deep and profound they let people down by being vague without substance.
The intent was to show that we are always facing the same need to watch what's going on and do something about it before it get's to hard to fix, whether it's the french romantic period of Voltaire, Moliere, Recine or 1989, or today. It's to spark conversations to learn through including inspiring topics within the topic and analogies to tangibly see how it involves our lives, behavior., actions, thus results.

 

[Abishai100]

Maxim Market

What is the street-talk regarding paradise or utopia? Why does Hollywood (USA) make movies such as "Mean Streets" (1973) and "Maniac Cop" (1988)?

I remember reading an issue of Spider-Man (Marvel Comics) which presented images of a terrifying super-nemesis named Venom, a muscular stalker who creates havoc with his insidiousness.

America is the world's hub for toys and games, and the market successes of relevant companies such as Marvel Comics and Toys 'R Us and Parker Brothers speaks to this assertion.

Many American toy stores carry water-pistols on their shelves. How do the sales of such violence-consciousness toys reveal social interest in talking about values reformation?





Venom (Marvel Comics)

 

[HaShev]

On that note we are the same society that always seems to glorify wicked icons.
From the wild west glorifying the bank and train robbers, Billy the Kid etc.
To glorifying Bonny and Clyde and Mobsters on TV & in film, glorifying D.B. Cooper, and now glorifying criminals when they die during the process of maintaining the law.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

This glorification of violence doesn't occur in a vacuum as the work of profit driven masterminds. As humans, we have incisors and eyes in the front of our heads because we're omnivorous and, thus, predatory. Even if we weren't, the desire for physical dominance is fairly common for male mammals. The contest for that dominance is expressed in its rawest form as physical violence, and thus males have a tendency of revering and emulating men perceived as capable at violence and warfare.

Young boys pretending to be warriors isn't native to any culture, and it certainly isn't the work of the toy makers. The squirt guns didn't cause boys to like weapons, they simply catered to an existing psychological tendency.