Comments on: The knots of development Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 00:46:35 +0000 Morality is the very basic universal pattern. Something derivative of this pattern is moral, because it is right; something not based on this pattern is not moral, because it is wrong. A normal society shall be built on this pattern, otherwise, it neither is moral nor can last long. By this way, the basic principle and codes of mankind tally with the universe.

Must agree mankind and humanity are part of nature and part of the universe, like everything else, is comprised of dark energy and energy. Otherwise, cannot exist. It surprises me still so many stupid people believe human mentality is above nature. Easy to see how bad and how deep an abnormal social environment or ecosystem casts its influence to these no brainers. Of course, no brainers transfer the most precious resources- the opportunity to those who have a clear mind.

With the aggrement that the basic principle and codes of mankind tally with the universe, an economy based on morality is connected with an economy based on system. In other words, they actually the same thing. Morality is not something that only exists in human mentality, with this agreement, morality exists as the universal pattern existing as the base above which the universe is running.

By: PseudoTurtle Thu, 07 Feb 2013 22:37:56 +0000 Frankly, in my haste I think I may have overstated the probability of the number of humans who understand what is going on by several decimal points.

I have found VERY few who seem to share my opinion.

Some do in part, but I have found no other “aliens” presently on earth who understand what is happening.

If there are any of you out there, I would appreciate it if would express your opinions.

Crazies need not apply.

I am using the working definition of crazy, which is basically that you know you are crazy if you repeat the same thing over and over, but expect a different result each time.

I think there are at least 99.9999% of you out there who qualify under that definition.

By: PseudoTurtle Thu, 07 Feb 2013 21:49:19 +0000 @ stevedebi —

I live with myself just fine.

I’d prefer the truth to the mumbo-jumbo you are spouting about the human race being so great.

I stand by what I said, and history is my proof.

The “height of the arts”, which you point to as one of our greatest ashievements, has been due entirely to lavish spending solely by the wealthy class — much of it to honor themselves and their greatness — but ALL at the expense of everyone else who lived in varying degrees of poverty at the same time.

It also begs the question, is art more important than human life? But I choose not to go down that path.

You state “we humans depend upon educating our young, which includes the basics of how to interact with each other and our environment.” But I would counter that you have totally failed to teach them proper respect for either other humans or their environment.

What I am saying is that humans by their nature are basically evil, if you assume evil exists and is manifested in our treatment of others and the environment.

The other argument is that humans can’t be evil because they are doing what God intended them to do.

That path leads to Social Darwinism, which is rampant especially in the US, both in its present treatment of others, as well as a long and abysmal track record of destroying other cultures through Manifest Destiny.

From that standpoint, I would argue the US is a nation of quasi-religious zealots who care nothing about anyone but themselves, nor even the preservation of the earth upon which they need for survival (and that of their young, whose futures they themselves are destroying in their greedy stupidity).

I agree that “We are different from the rest of nature.”

But “We have (NO) hope in a better future,” because we CANNOT “work together and train our young realistically (neither pie-in-the sky socialism nor ultra-dark despair).”

Your comments are real-time proof of my thesis that we are unable to change, mainly because of people like you who refuse to accept reality.

It is the same basic problem Mr. Hadas has, and the other 99.9999% of the human race.

Thus, I stand by my argument that we will not survive much longer, and most likely destroy this planet in the process.

You may not like it, nor accept it, but it is the truth nevertheless.

By: stevedebi Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:37:28 +0000 Man, I don’t know how some people live with themselves. If I had the dark concepts of some of the people I read here, I don’t know what I would do.

Mankind does share a large part of its DNA with other primates, but no other primate has ever achieved the heights of the arts, or the lows of depravity, as mankind. Ours species carries within us the capability to be very good or very bad. Animals in nature tend to have a lot of instinctual knowledge; we humans depend upon educating our young, which includes the basics of how to interact with each other and our environment. I personally believe that people will tend towards evil if they are not led otherwise.

We are different from the rest of nature. We have hope in a better future, if we work together and train our young realistically (neither pie-in-the sky socialism nor ultra-dark despair).

By: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 04:48:51 +0000 There is another organization can be taken as a reference. That is multicellular organism, such as a human. In this type of organism, each cell works with others to function. Different cells have different functionalities, exactly like different members have different functionalities in a human economy. The involvement of multicellular organism is not the ethics, it is the system, the balanced system. When the system becomes unbalancing, the human needs to rebalance the system or die.

By: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 04:40:50 +0000 Even aliens will absolutely do the same thing without a curious balanced system’s help. A society of bees will not be involved in such a thing, only because the bee society has evolved into its built-in balanced system, which helps them to organize as a group. If only counting on invidual bee’s ethic spirit, I don’t think the bee economy can be a successful economy.

By: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 04:26:57 +0000 All ethical economies will end up with hypocritical economy and corrupted economy, since without the help of a balanced system- another tool invented by humans, an ethical economy leaves too many loopholes, which become the target of those in athority. They will take advantage of it with all ethics on the surface and with all calculations in the depth. The balance is gradually but totally lost after a while. No ethical economy cannot survive for long. This the most evil thing that has happened and keeps happening. Don’t let it happen in the current western world. People’s goodwill will evolve into evil absolutely. So I said, people actually don’t know how the universe is running. They just simply think, if everyone has a goodwill, nothing bad can happen. They are totally wrong. Factually, not just can bad thing happen, it goes much much worse- it will always end up with evil,vwithout a single exception, as long as we are all humans. Face that.

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:33:47 +0000 @PseudoTurtle,

While “Self-discipline” is not “in our genetic heritage”, we are all born ignorant. Experience and knowledge are our antidotes.

As children we learn self-discipline rather early on; either directly from those who love us, or later from those who refuse to put up with our immature excess (and may not be at all gentle in the process). While many chafe at such limits and seek to escape them, the more intelligent learn how to work within the “system” and benefit from it.

One can get caught up in subjective and emotional words that mean many things to different people in discussing “common sense”, “morals”, ethics”, etc., so I will put it this way. Everyone eventually develops some sort of personal “code of conduct”, whether by adopting some prepackaged religious outlook or affiliation or picking or choosing from life’s buffet of choices both good and bad.

The is one overriding truth, and that is that no one can watch their own back 24/7 over the weeks, months and years of one’s life. So we tend to ally with others of similar thought or motivation.

The great majority of children by some magic know at a very early age that it is “wrong” to intentionally injure a defenseless puppy or kitten, or to pull the wings off of a butterfly. And so over time our individual perspective of “right” and “wrong” accrues.

I believe it is this “greater sense” that Mr. Hadas wishes us to collectively consider and employ in the course of “human events”. I thus applaud and endorse such desire and wish him every possible success.

So, while I agree it is far more probable “we” will end up by destroying the world due to our “insanity” as a species, I do not yet feel that outcome is unavoidable.

By: PseudoTurtle Wed, 06 Feb 2013 23:35:23 +0000 Mr. Hadas —

A final thought. Instead of arguing for ethics, which is too variable of an idea, perhaps you should make the case for “stability” in a society.

Why does society exist?

To promote stability — a condition which satisfies most of the human needs and desires most of the time in a given society — should be the answer.

Unfortunately, it is rarely the condition of any society.

Thus, when conditions exist that promote instability, they must be eliminated as quickly and efficiently as possible, by whatever means necessary, to return society to stability.

By: PseudoTurtle Wed, 06 Feb 2013 22:11:51 +0000 @ —

As you say, “Let me repeat that, no brainer has no idea of how the universe is running. To learn from the universe is millions times better than to learn from a few of doctrines taught by this master or the other one.”

Clearly, you do not understand anything I have said.

I am not responsible for your total lack of education or experience that is evident in your replies.