Are large differences in opinion desirable?

[EssexGonzo]

Interesting, please could you give us a nice concise logical explanation of the difference between religion and superstition? As thicko that I am they seem to be very much the same thing to me.

Glad I'm not the only one in that camp......

What is better, dull and happy or exciting and unhappy?

Easy. Exciting and happy.

 

[DaleCooper]

Interesting, please could you give us a nice concise logical explanation of the difference between religion and superstition? As thicko that I am they seem to be very much the same thing to me.

Religions are created for the purpose of controlling people, superstitions are just misunderstandings.

 

[radamfi]

You probably also need a culture-shift in society towards less cynicism and more non-judgmental acceptance of people genuinely holding opposite opinions to one's own - so that responding to different opinions with anger/offence/disbelief ceases to become the norm in society.

How many generations do we need to wait for that to happen? Is it fair to expose intermediate generations to that horror?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cynicism is not a problem - it causes people not to take things at face value and to explore them properly. Arguably a good thing.

What people need to do is stop taking offence and getting angry, though, and instead to rationally counter opinions they do not agree with.

 

[radamfi]

What people need to do is stop taking offence and getting angry, though, and instead to rationally counter opinions they do not agree with.

But why isn't this happening now? It is all very well to say, "it would be great if people didn't take offence or get angry", but surely there have been millions of years of humanity when that could have happened? It sounds like a very basic thing to do but if humanity can't even do that simple thing, is it right to allow future generations to put up with that?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But why isn't this happening now? It is all very well to say, "it would be great if people didn't take offence or get angry", but surely there have been millions of years of humanity when that could have happened? It sounds like a very basic thing to do but if humanity can't even do that simple thing, is it right to allow future generations to put up with that?

But how, other than not having future generations (and I know that's your view), do we prevent it?

 

[Railops]

But why isn't this happening now? It is all very well to say, "it would be great if people didn't take offence or get angry", but surely there have been millions of years of humanity when that could have happened? It sounds like a very basic thing to do but if humanity can't even do that simple thing, is it right to allow future generations to put up with that?

I bet it's a laugh a minute in your house.

 

[krus_aragon]

So, to summarise the thread so far:

We have a difference of opinion on how desirable large differences in opinion are.

:/

 

[backontrack]

So, to summarise the thread so far:

We have a difference of opinion on how desirable large differences in opinion are.

:/

I disagree with that statement because actually... :P

 

[DaleCooper]

So, to summarise the thread so far:

We have a difference of opinion on how desirable large differences in opinion are.

:/

I can't agree with that.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I bet it's a laugh a minute in your house.

If the only way you can find things funny is to be offensive, I don't think it's him that has the sense of humour failure to be honest.

 

[radamfi]

But how, other than not having future generations (and I know that's your view), do we prevent it?

There is no way. That's the point.

 

[backontrack]

There is no way. That's the point.

So, once again, you think we should all kill each other and just generally stop existing due to a part of the human condition that we can control?

Well, if you want to stop existing, then you're free to do that any time you like. I'm staying put.

 

[Railops]

So, once again, you think we should all kill each other and just generally stop existing due to a part of the human condition that we can control?

Well, if you want to stop existing, then you're free to do that any time you like. I'm staying put.

He's now got support on this thread for his doom mongering, perhaps they'll join up they could be formidable.

 

[backontrack]

He's now got support on this thread for his doom mongering, perhaps they'll join up they could be formidable.

Who's he going to join up with?

 

[radamfi]

So, once again, you think we should all kill each other and just generally stop existing due to a part of the human condition that we can control?

Well, if you want to stop existing, then you're free to do that any time you like. I'm staying put.

Death is totally unregulated in most places and regulated in a few jurisdictions only if you have a terminal illness. So if you attempt death there is a real possibility that you will survive the attempt and have an unbearable life afterwards because of the injuries caused.

Also hell or similarly horrible place may await us after death. I think that's unlikely but I can't discount it. If that is the case, the only option is to hope that we live forever and things improve in our lifetime.

So it is really too late for us and I'm really looking out for people who have yet to be born.

 

[DaleCooper]

At least we've avoided the paradox of everyone agreeing that difference of opinion is a good thing.

 

[Johnuk123]

Death is totally unregulated in most places and regulated in a few jurisdictions only if you have a terminal illness. So if you attempt death there is a real possibility that you will survive the attempt and have an unbearable life afterwards because of the injuries caused.

Also hell or similarly horrible place may await us after death. I think that's unlikely but I can't discount it. If that is the case, the only option is to hope that we live forever and things improve in our lifetime.

So it is really too late for us and I'm really looking out for people who have yet to be born.

What on earth are you talking about ?

 

[krus_aragon]

At least we've avoided the paradox of everyone agreeing that difference of opinion is a good thing.

I don't agree that we have. (Yet.) :P

 

[backontrack]

Death is totally unregulated in most places and regulated in a few jurisdictions only if you have a terminal illness. So if you attempt death there is a real possibility that you will survive the attempt and have an unbearable life afterwards because of the injuries caused.

Also hell or similarly horrible place may await us after death. I think that's unlikely but I can't discount it. If that is the case, the only option is to hope that we live forever and things improve in our lifetime.

So it is really too late for us and I'm really looking out for people who have yet to be born.

What about:

a) Not killing ourselves
b) Enjoying ourselves
c) Bringing children into this wonderful world and allowing them to enjoy it
d) Changing our world and making it better by using renewables and stopping fighting each other
e) Supporting the human race, not destroying it

Then, if we do all that, then we won't end up in hell, purgatory or Folkestone, provided that they even exist (I'm not sure that that last one does...)

What do you say to that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What on earth are you talking about ?

Personally, I have absolutely no idea.

 

[krus_aragon]

What about:

a) Not killing ourselves
b) Enjoying ourselves
c) Bringing children into this wonderful world and allowing them to enjoy it
d) Changing our world and making it better by using renewables and stopping fighting each other
e) Supporting the human race, not destroying it

Then, if we do all that, then we won't end up in hell, purgatory or Folkestone, provided that they even exist (I'm not sure that that last one does...)

Swapping my silly hat for a serious one, there are many individuals through the aeons who have decided (and who do decide) not to follow step c, whether they feel they don't want to add to add to the burgeoning population, or feel that the future is too uncertain to risk it.

That doesn't mean that they can't follow steps a, b and d, and thus contribute to e.

 

[backontrack]

Swapping my silly hat for a serious one, there are many individuals through the aeons who have decided (and who do decide) not to follow step c, whether they feel they don't want to add to add to the burgeoning population, or feel that the future is too uncertain to risk it.

That doesn't mean that they can't follow steps a, b and d, and thus contribute to e.

Ah. I'm not referring from deciding not to have step c; there are people who can't have children, and people who don't want to.

I'm talking about people who actively prevent other people from following step c. Apologies; should have made that more clear.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What on earth are you talking about ?

I think (in all seriousness) he needs to consider seeking medical help for depression, as his posts sound very much that he is clinically depressed.

 

[radamfi]

What about:

a) Not killing ourselves
b) Enjoying ourselves
c) Bringing children into this wonderful world and allowing them to enjoy it
d) Changing our world and making it better by using renewables and stopping fighting each other
e) Supporting the human race, not destroying it

Then, if we do all that, then we won't end up in hell, purgatory or Folkestone, provided that they even exist (I'm not sure that that last one does...)

What do you say to that?

(a) we have no choice because foolproof suicide is available in any jurisdiction unless you have a terminal illness. With the possible exception of cyanide pills given to very specific public employees such as spies and astronauts.

(b) now that we are here it is damage limitation so the best we can do is try to live as happy a life as possible.

(c) is cruel and works against environmentalism in (d)

(d) if only

(e) What does "supporting" mean? If it means making life as good as possible for people on the earth at the present time then who could argue with that?

You can't be 100% sure that there is no hell or similarly horrible place that humans go after death.

Anyway, not having children is a tiny sacrifice compared to the huge risks to all parties involved after having children. And it isn't even a sacrifice to many people as they don't have children out of choice. They believe that a life without children is better and so don't have any. People have been having fewer and fewer children by choice for a number of years and more and more people have realised that not having children is not only better for ethical reasons but also for purely selfish reasons.

 

[DaleCooper]

I think (in all seriousness) he needs to consider seeking medical help for depression, as his posts sound very much that he is clinically depressed.

Are you qualified to make that diagnosis?

 

[backontrack]

Are you qualified to make that diagnosis?

Well, is radamfi qualified to say this stuff?

(c) is cruel

How?

So, let me get this straight; you don't know me, but you didn't want me to be born. Is that correct?

 

[DaleCooper]

Well, is radamfi qualified to say this stuff?

He doesn't need to be.

 

[backontrack]

He doesn't need to be.

I disagree...

 

[DaleCooper]

I disagree...

That is your inalienable right.

 

[radamfi]

How?

So, let me get this straight; you don't know me, but you didn't want me to be born. Is that correct?

How can it be anything other than cruel to make someone suffer physical pain, mental pain and death?