Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by rtwngAvngr, Jul 17, 2004.
could someone else do the body of this post? I did the title. I'm tired.
If this is going to turn into another thread on socialism, then post it in the Politics forum.
First, humans competed physically for territory and resources. Roving bands of pre-historic people joined forces in small numbers, and the bands with the strongest guys got the most hunting territory.
Then, humans competed mentally for territory and resources. As agriculture and culture developed, those humans who best developed things to prolong human life prospered.
Then, humans competed in the realm of ideas. The humans who could convince others of the superiority of their ways did best, because everyone went along with them.
Is that why the Muslim Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia said "the Jews run the world by proxy?"
Are you saying that less than .01% of the world population is best in the realm of ideas and that they have convinced all others of the superiority of their ways? Or is that why you HATE the Jewish people?
Ok, here goes.
The most basic, carnal form of competition is mortal combat, a one on one fight to the death. It has been around as long as there have been humans beings, since Cain killed Abel, if you believe the Bible. Humans have competed for millenia over seemingly insignificant parcels of land for their resources or for women. Before long, humans joined into groups to increase their strength, and communities formed. Competition became more complex, with tribe versus tribe combat instead of individuals. After the development of agriculture, tribes fought for the best land or the secrets to getting food out of seemingly fallow ground. Individuals compteted over who could own the most land or the best land, as better land led to more wealth, allowing more luxuries and better women. As society evolved, it became the smart that accumulated the wealth, while the strong could no longer fight in a civilized society. Not legally, anyway. Thus, people began competing to see who was the smartest, while the strong continue to do battle in civilized sports. Competition has always been over the accumulation of wealth and the choicest "mates." The evolution of competition follows which qualities allow one to obtain these things.
Hobbit I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of competition (wars) being waged for wealth or choice mates.
Actually history tells us that most wars are waged not for wealth or mates but singly for POWER.
Take for example Adolph Hitler, Emperor Hirohito or Sadaam Heusein and the wars waged against their neighbors.
All of them already had more wealth than they possibily could want for their every whim was satisfied instantly. They had no need for wealth. They had all the choicest women or in Hitler's case all the boys he and they wanted or desired instantly.
Why would despots wage war against other nations when they already had both immense wealth and all the choicest women? There is some mental defect in mankind to seek power over others once money, women and territory are no longer a problem.
Why did J. Pierpont Morgan, the world's richest man want more, more, more, more to the detrement of the 'ordinary people?'
It is the desire to have power and control over others. This can be seen in our own elected representative government. Why does the government tax the populace when all a government needs is the income from import, export and tarrif duties.
It is power over the life and actions of men which prevents the US Contitutional framers intention for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
IT IS POWER OVER OTHERS.....
You forgot to complete that last statement. "Those who failed to go along got their asses kicked". :bat:
The winner of the competition has more power by default. Power is seen by people as the way achieve pleasure and avoid pain. People compete by using the method that proves to be most effective against others. When the cultures in which these people live "advances" so do the methods of competition. Some have decided that to have power while they are living is not as important as having power to exist in an after-life. These people tend to compete with others seeking power in the after-life. (My god is better than yours) IMHO competition is the result of one persons' or a societies'
method of seeking pleasure or avoiding pain comes in direct conflict with an opposing method.
Simple as I can put my thoughts in a forum such as this---power can be debated (and has been) for eons.
I don't think people want power in any after-life but just the desire to exist in some ethereal hereafter. Most people who believe in such a thing want to be under the control of the Power that made them and not to have power over others.
Avoiding pain and pleasure does not seem to define POWER. Power is much more like dominance over the recessive fellow beings.
Separate names with a comma.