If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Humanity
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
What is so great about humanity? I have yet to understand this concept and the insanity of you who find it to be of such importance. The majority of "humans" live in disgusting wretched poverty and ignorance, a misery the majority of people on this forum have never experienced. Why would anyone want to associate themselves with such a pathetic rabble, so worthy of contempt and disgust? Humanity has never been organized as a society anywhere, as a government, as a culture, as a people, as a single state in all of history. It is a totally meaningless abstraction of materialism with no inate significance whatsoever. "Mankind" is a zoological expression, an empty word, as Spengler would say. We are all "human beings." So what? We are also mammals. Does this mean all mammals possess dignity and "equal" rights? We emerged from primordial slime. Does this mean in itself we should actually yearn to become primordial slime, to regress to such a primitive state? The humanitarians are even worse than the religious zealots. Both humanitarians and religious zealots ridicule and condemn science out of fear of progress but at least the religious zealots are upfront about their FAITH, at least we know where they are coming from. There is no real significant difference between the Ten Commandments for the Jerry Falwells and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for humanitarians. Just as the reactionary Christians used to burn "witches" at the stake, the reactionary humanitarians condemn "racists" today because of their irrational fear of change, and at heart, fear of authority. The result is intellectual stagnation, just like the Dark Ages. The humanitarians with their stupid ignorant theories have already brought the new Dark Age to Rhodesia and South Africa, writhing before the entire world in their newfound misery and backwardness. This is the same backwardness the humanitarians are bringing to Europe and America as well. There are parts of Europe and America today indistinguishable from the poverty and of Sub-Saharan Africa. Take Harlem for instance. Bangladeshis, amongst the poorest people in the world, live longer than black males in Harlem, in America itself. The same is true of the UK, where human flesh is actually bought and sold now. No wonder so many of its citizens are fleeing into the countryside, now that the humanitarians have ruined large parts of that country in the name of the lie that all people are equal.
0
Comments
your a moron. it probably isn't your fault. you have been abused in some way thats for sure.
It does not follow from man's social nature that men accept ALL of mankind as having equal social significance to their interests. The world is not organized as humanity, nor has it ever been, it is organized into SEPARATE states and SEPARATE nations. Now why is this? It is because of the salient fact that we recognize that some human beings have more value to us than others. Some human beings are friends. Some are enemies. The world turns on this great principle.
>>> it sets us apart in a big way from the rest of what came out of the slime.
Not really. Deer are also social creatures. It does not follow from such observations that all deer are of equal social significance to other deer. Why do male deer have horns? Perhaps it is because they often find themselves quarrelling with other deer.
>>>we will risk our own lives for a stranger. we will share our last loaf. we will carry a cripple from danger at great risk to our selves
Perhaps you will risk your own life for a stranger. Perhaps you will share your last loaf. Perhaps you will carry a cripple from danger at great risk to your own life out of pity. It does not follow from your own pitiful values however that ALL human beings share them.
>>>your a moron.
Ad hominem logical fallacies are quite useful when one does not have an argument.
>>>when i say we, i exclude you and your kind who would rather see love and compassion, hope and dignity, extinguished.
How can we forget the straw man?
>>>it probably isn't your fault. you have been abused in some way thats for sure.
Or the false generalization?
And you have experienced this poverty? Then we need to ask, what do you call poverty? Absolute or relative?
In your opinion... back this up.
I agree, we are nothing more than mammals; which is why personally believe we should have more respect for the earth.
Very debatable. It could be argued from both sides. Science is incomplete, if it weren't then we would never have another new discovery.. but many scientists ridicule the paranormal and religious ideas such as divine intervention, just because it cannot be explained in numbers, or cannot be recorded on a graph.
As for religious zealots, when you believe that you'll avoid hell or a reincarnation as the underclass in the next life, it certainly is a motivation to get your ass in gear and to promote or attend ritual/service/worship.
I think the witch trails had nothing to do with racism. It wasn't religious intolerance in the slightest and there was no fear of change. Most of the people burned weren't even pagan... by the way the early polytheistic pagan religions contributed a lot to Christianity.
Or we could say that this is not compassion, but an instinct to survive, to keep up our numbers.
Hehehe, just a thought.
No, living in poverty is something I have yet to have the joy of experiencing. Have I ever been surrounded by poor people in my life? Yes, and it filled me with disgust.
>>>Then we need to ask, what do you call poverty? Absolute or relative?
Poverty is a relative concept that can be used in several senses.
>>>In your opinion... back this up.
No, it is a fact that "humanity" has never been organized as a people, as a state, as a government, as a culture, as a society in all of history. That is not an opinion in the slightest.
>>>I agree, we are nothing more than mammals; which is why personally believe we should have more respect for the earth.
I see no reason why values follow from meaningless materialist abstractions like "mammalia" or "humanity."
>>>Very debatable. It could be argued from both sides.
It is quite obvious to me that humanitarians ridicule and attack science on ideological or subjective moral groups in a very similar manner to medieval Christianity. It is equally obvious to me that this has had a substantial negative effect on material progress in the last 50 years.
>>>Science is incomplete, if it weren't then we would never have another new discovery.
Science is a method, not a discovery.
>>>but many scientists ridicule the paranormal and religious ideas such as divine intervention, just because it cannot be explained in numbers, or cannot be recorded on a graph.
Such concepts have no validity or reliability. They are also incapable of being measured. They have no more existence than homosexual elves on Pluto who play Nintendo games. Another similar article faith is the widespread belief that all "human beings" are somehow "equal," despite the mountain of evidence that indicates otherwise.
>>>As for religious zealots, when you believe that you'll avoid hell or a reincarnation as the underclass in the next life, it certainly is a motivation to get your ass in gear and to promote or attend ritual/service/worship.
The only life that exists is this life. Thankfully once this fact began to recognized once again in the 16th century things finally began improving for our lot in Europe.
>>>I think the witch trails had nothing to do with racism.
I never suggested the witch trails themselves had anything to do with racism. I have suggested that the persecution of witches in Medieval Europe is highly similar to the persecution of racists today in our own times.
>>>It wasn't religious intolerance in the slightest and there was no fear of change. Most of the people burned weren't even pagan... by the way the early polytheistic pagan religions contributed a lot to Christianity.
The Inquistion was most certainly afraid of change.
Well excuse my ignorance, but geography is not my strong point, but where are you from or where have you experienced this poverty? I mean leaving under the breadline in the UK or America is one thing, but it's really quite different to not having a roof over your head or to not being able to afford food.
Materialist... abstractions? The term "mammalia" is a concrete plural noun and "humanity" is an asbtract noun. We use words to describe the world... for example a mammal... warm blooded and having hairs on its body, you couldn't just call it a 'thing'... "mammals" are different from "reptiles". I don't really 100% see what you mean by values as they're societal, they can be personal, or universal... again, please expand.
If a humanitarian is attacking science, it's because of exploitation. For example, when the drugs company exploited this African tribe by getting information off of them about a cactus that is now used for a weight-loss pill. As for medieval Christianity... I don't see how that links in the slightest. Could you tell me that?
I didn't say it was a 'method', I said it was incomplete and backed up my idea by saying that if it were complete, we wouldn't have another discovery.
Which is what I basically wrote... it can't be measured. However, one technique used by New Age type people has been proved to work... dowsing in fact. Although nobody's sure exactly how it works.
Not all religions, for example from the Christian hymn 'All things Bright and beautiful'...
The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at the gate,
God made them high and lowly...
and ordered their estate."
Maybe some religions simply exist to explain inequalities? You refer to Christianity in the middle ages... Before the coming of Protestantism and, according to Marx the rise in capitalism, people were supposedly born in to their position in society, be it peasent or noble... and the kings were supposedly divine.
Looking at contemporary religion, you could argue that especially fundementalist denominations of Christianity, Judaism and Islam are extremely patriarchal and almost open about it. In fact you only have to refer to their texts for that (if you like, I can post some examples). Also, the idea of heaven, or some afterlife seems very conditional, too conditional to be considered 'equal'.
How do you know this? It is simply your belief.
I can see where you're coming from, but there's a difference between the transition and development of Christianity from the early celtic religions and xenophobia. Perhaps the word 'persection' would be better suited than 'racism' as most the ladies (and sometimes men) burned were not even witches at all. You could argue that they were persecuted for their religion... but how do you define a religion?
And how come you're referring to Christianity so much? Every religion can be a bitch.
I respect where you're coming from but find some of what you put... a little too ambigious?
I have been to the Mississippi Delta before. It is indistinguishable from a third world country now.
>>>Materialist... abstractions? The term "mammalia" is a concrete plural noun and "humanity" is an asbtract noun. We use words to describe the world... for example a mammal... warm blooded and having hairs on its body, you couldn't just call it a 'thing'... "mammals" are different from "reptiles". I don't really 100% see what you mean by values as they're societal, they can be personal, or universal... again, please expand.
Yes, both "mammalia" and "humanity" are abstractions, abstract categories that describe similarly related substances. Values follow from consciousness as well. "Society" values nothing for it does not possess consciousness.
>>>If a humanitarian is attacking science, it's because of exploitation.
The flat-earthers were also explorers too.
>>>For example, when the drugs company exploited this African tribe by getting information off of them about a cactus that is now used for a weight-loss pill. As for medieval Christianity... I don't see how that links in the slightest. Could you tell me that?
I don't see how anything was "exploited" from any African tribe.
>>>I didn't say it was a 'method', I said it was incomplete and backed up my idea by saying that if it were complete, we wouldn't have another discovery.
You are equivocating science and knowledge. They are not one in the same.
>>>Which is what I basically wrote... it can't be measured. However, one technique used by New Age type people has been proved to work... dowsing in fact. Although nobody's sure exactly how it works.
psuedoscience. . .
>>>Maybe some religions simply exist to explain inequalities? You refer to Christianity in the middle ages... Before the coming of Protestantism and, according to Marx the rise in capitalism, people were supposedly born in to their position in society, be it peasent or noble... and the kings were supposedly divine.
Marx's facile theory of history has been discredited for years now by Max Weber.
>>>Looking at contemporary religion, you could argue that especially fundementalist denominations of Christianity, Judaism and Islam are extremely patriarchal and almost open about it. In fact you only have to refer to their texts for that (if you like, I can post some examples). Also, the idea of heaven, or some afterlife seems very conditional, too conditional to be considered 'equal'.
I am not interested in religion or their works of fiction about "justice" and "morality" and "equality."
>>>How do you know this? It is simply your belief.
This is false. There is no testable evidence whatsoever of any other life.
>>>I can see where you're coming from, but there's a difference between the transition and development of Christianity from the early celtic religions and xenophobia.
Not really. The action of both believers follow from the same irrational premises of the tartuferry they call morality.
>>>Perhaps the word 'persection' would be better suited than 'racism' as most the ladies (and sometimes men) burned were not even witches at all. You could argue that they were persecuted for their religion... but how do you define a religion?And how come you're referring to Christianity so much? Every religion can be a bitch. I respect where you're coming from but find some of what you put... a little too ambigious?
See the dictionary if you would like a definition. As for Christianity it is like any other mysticism, irrational. Unfortunately secularization has yet to rid us of theological concepts like "morality."
So this is absolute poverty then? If you care so much about poverty, then why don't you join a charity or work to help people out of it instead of whining?
Um no... 'Mammalia' is a concrete noun... CONCRETE and is used to describe a group of living organisms bearing the traits that cause them to be categorised as mammals. That is a class of vertebrata that are norished by milk (or another liquid secreted by certain glands) in youth, that are warm blooded and that have hairs on their body. Human beings are mammals as they bear these traits.
'Humanity' is again a noun, but also a plural and is used to describe the human race, or a group of people. As for values, most of them are installed in to the consciousness, in my opinion through the Social learning theory and primary and secondary socialisation. Not to mention the ideological state apparatus such as the media and religion.
I'll find you the link on this as I'm sure some information is available on the internet as it was on TV a while back.
Science is what gives us knowledge, what teaches us about the world. And yet we are taught through education and through our life experiences too.
'Knowledge' is a sum or range of what we have perceived, learned and discovered. Science is a tool which can and does expand our knowledge.
Yet protestantism came at a similar time to when feudalism ended and Max Weber argued over which came first, capitalism or Protestantism.
You brought up Christianity as an example to your wonderful 'theories' in life and now you're not interested?
Calling religion 'fiction' shows a lack of respect and open-mindedness towards somebody's belief... which sounds prejudiced in itself and almost like you're arguing for the sake of it. If you're not interested in it then does that mean you haven't researched it?
Religion in itself is difficult to define as there are so many paths of belief... and I asked for your definition, not a narrow one from a dictionary.
Again you come across as closed-minded and bigoted. There is no evidence of extra terrestrials, yet would you be as ignorant as to believe that there is only life on earth?
Tartuffery... my don't we have a nice thesaurus sitting by our computer
The problem Christianity had with witches was a belief that they were worshipping the devil... and all because the church was unhappy about the fact that some people were still following pagan religions left over by the celts (and some are actually still practiced today, such as 'celtic reconstructionalism'). They saw this as a threat and, seeing as some people were simply unwilling to change their faiths decided to scapegoat it. You see, Christianity owes a great deal to the polytheism of early Druidic and Goddess religions that were there before it.
Then you can ask... what is 'morality'? As again it is very ambigious. I see it as a system of ideas defining 'right' from 'wrong'. Which can be applied on many levels. For example, stealing could be thought to be wrong... but if a man steals a loaf of bread to feed his family, is that still 'wrong'? There is the law, religious conduct and personal conduct to take in to account.
So if you were to define the word 'morality' and put it in a dictionary, what would you put? After all, you use that word a lot.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/biographies/heydrich.htm
No, there are isolated pockets of whites who tend to be almost always much better off.
>>>If you care so much about poverty, then why don't you join a charity or work to help people out of it instead of whining?
LOL my idea of helping these people out is sterilization.
>>>Um no... 'Mammalia' is a concrete noun... CONCRETE and is used to describe a group of living organisms bearing the traits that cause them to be categorised as mammals.
ROFL a GROUP is an ABSTRACTION.
>>>That is a class of vertebrata that are norished by milk (or another liquid secreted by certain glands) in youth, that are warm blooded and that have hairs on their body. Human beings are mammals as they bear these traits.
'Class' is an abstraction.
>>>'Humanity' is again a noun, but also a plural and is used to describe the human race, or a group of people.
See above.
>>>As for values, most of them are installed in to the consciousness, in my opinion through the Social learning theory and primary and secondary socialisation. Not to mention the ideological state apparatus such as the media and religion.
I suppose that is a more polite way of saying the majority of 'human beings' are idiots who believe what they hear in the media. I would agree with this hypothesis.
>>>I'll find you the link on this as I'm sure some information is available on the internet as it was on TV a while back.
Africa is poor because its people are so ignorant, that is the fact of the matter. Ignorance is not lack of education either. Negroids have smaller brains than Caucasoids and Mongoloids. This translates into a deficit of billions, if not trillions of neurons. They also metabolize glucose slower and produce much more testosterone, precisely why they tend to be so much more prone to violent crime and so far behind whites and asians academically.
>>>Science is what gives us knowledge, what teaches us about the world. And yet we are taught through education and through our life experiences too.
Now you are confusing science with reason.
>>>'Knowledge' is a sum or range of what we have perceived, learned and discovered. Science is a tool which can and does expand our knowledge.
Science and morality are two different things. Most people are simply AFRAID, usually because of moral and political reasons, to accept the reality of human inequality, the reality of broad genetic differences between human populations.
>>>Yet protestantism came at a similar time to when feudalism ended and Max Weber argued over which came first, capitalism or Protestantism.
Max Weber actually argued that capitalism has existed in various countries at various points in history, as anyone who is actually familiar with The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is quite aware. The whole idea of a 'logic of history' is preposterous. Western capitalism is unique because it is a secularized version of Protestantism.
>>>You brought up Christianity as an example to your wonderful 'theories' in life and now you're not interested?Calling religion 'fiction' shows a lack of respect and open-mindedness towards somebody's belief... which sounds prejudiced in itself and almost like you're arguing for the sake of it. If you're not interested in it then does that mean you haven't researched it?
This seems to presuppose there is something wrong with being prejudiced against the beliefs of others, being disrespectful of their opinions, and not having an open mind regarding their absurdities. I would of course disagree. I am prejudiced against nonsense, always have been and always will be.
>>>Religion in itself is difficult to define as there are so many paths of belief... and I asked for your definition, not a narrow one from a dictionary.
A form of irrational faith that involves belief in a deity.
>>>Again you come across as closed-minded and bigoted. There is no evidence of extra terrestrials, yet would you be as ignorant as to believe that there is only life on earth?
What again is wrong with close-mindedness and bigotry?
>>>Then you can ask... what is 'morality'? As again it is very ambigious. I see it as a system of ideas defining 'right' from 'wrong'. Which can be applied on many levels. For example, stealing could be thought to be wrong... but if a man steals a loaf of bread to feed his family, is that still 'wrong'? There is the law, religious conduct and personal conduct to take in to account. So if you were to define the word 'morality' and put it in a dictionary, what would you put? After all, you use that word a lot.
Morality is a worthless subjective and arbitrary concept. It actually has theological origins, in the modern era it has simply been secularized. Regardless, it is nothing more than nonsense, or wishful thinking.
Well there has to be doesn't there. And this doesn't change the fact that there's poverty. Relative poverty is measured against the breadline... anybody falling below this line is in 'relative poverty'. 'Absolute poverty' is when people are too poor to even afford food, clothing, the very basics... for example in Ethiopia. Just thought I'd educate you on that.
On what grounds are you talking? I'll just assume that you haven't studied the English language :rolleyes: or you're just making it up.
Got a link to back this up?
So then Buddhism is not a religion?
'Irrational'... Interesting. Well that isn't a definition is it, it's an opinion. Funny how you can pump big words out of a thesaurus to try and confuse people, yet you fail to understand the difference between a definition and an opinion .
Hatred is a weakness, it causes wars, crime and people from growing to become beautiful. It stops society from evolving.
Again, what I intended from this question, although it were partially hypothetical was a definition not an opinion. Your opinions mean nothing if you fail to back them up anyway.