...and why is it wrong to be selfish? Because Keith Stone says so, and no explanation is necessary. Blank out.
...and why is it wrong to be selfish? Because Keith Stone says so, and no explanation is necessary. Blank out.
"Moral poison", wow what an idea! How is altruism a poison? Human beings are social creatures and altruism is a behavioral tendency, which evolved because it confers some advantage for groups of people. It might be detrimental for a given individual, but it's advantageous for the group.
Where the evidence that it's destroying the world? The world is not AN indivdual.
The role of altruism in human evolution is a controverted issue and an area of debate which few, if any of us are likely qualified to speak on. Suffice to say that it is one of several competing social theories and that the entire dialogue is thoroughly obfuscated by competing definitions of altruism. You are not going to be able to justify universal healthcare on the basis that altruism is evolutionary. Evolution is irrelevant. We are alive now, and we have only this one chance to live our lives before we perish and are gone forever.
You have raised the fundamental issue of individualism vs. collectivism. Good. The correct orientation is individualism. Collectivism is the social philosophy that has ravaged mankind everywhere that it has been practiced. It is the basis of racism, sexism, nationalism, statism, socialism, communism, fascism, and the emergence of almost every dictatorship in history.
A collective does not have a mind, a body, or a wil. The individual, not the group, is the only entity capable of thinking, ancting, or feeling. The individual, not the group, is the fundamental unit of the social world. A man's only frame of reference is HIS OWN LIFE and nothing that happens after the time of his death is relevant to his existence. Do you honestly expect any living person to care what about the state of human evolution a million years from now? To sacrifice their own happiness during their one precious existence ocurring here and nowfor the benefit of the species across future epochs? With 60 years or less of good health to look forward to in this life, no rational person would give a F*** what happens outside the sphere of his awareness and the events which affect him directly. No rational person would sacrifice a minute of his life and his one chance to pursue his dreams to lapse into the collective non-entity called "society" which does not even possess the awareness necessary to be greatful for his contribution.
Altruism is an intellectual virus like religion which indoctrinates the masses and misinforms their basic sense of right vs. wrong. It causes people to confuse "goodwill toward your fellow man" with "a duty to sacrifice your own existence for the sake of society which must be enforced by law." when it is the basis of a political system, it sets men against each other as every class and group in society has to compete against every other class and group for rights, privileges and benefits. Power-lusting politicians emerge under the guise of only caring about others. do you really think that the millionaire shyster lawyers who make up the majority of congress are really motivated by the welfare of society? They see politics as an end in itself and the government as a PRIZE, not an instrument of social good.
the idea of selflessness as the primary human virtue is totally untenable, yet most people will treat it as an irreducible self-evident truth which defied explanation. WHY is selflessness good? Because others say so. Blank out.
i typed that on my iphone so chill re: the composition
the sayer of so wrote:
...and why is it wrong to be selfish? Because Keith Stone says so, and no explanation is necessary. Blank out.
Since you and your ilk lack the power of reasoning I'll elaborate.
If everyone in society acted like the greedy selfish bastards like you idolize then over time society would break down, become ungovernable and the only people with a reliable livelihood would be living in a cave far from the rest. What you claim to idolize is not sustainable so by definition it is wrong. On top of that I believe you should have learned both in kindergarten and from your Mom how wrong it is to be selfish.
That doesn't mean everyone needs to chuck everything and live like Mother Teresa, that's just one in the long line of asinine straw-men you've throw out just to prove how poorly educated you are.
Despite all the irrelevant babbling of the Ayn Rand types, society does need to function for individuals to succeed. No functioning society, no livelihood, and the opportunity for business (and thus profit) dries up. You need not look any further than the financial crisis. The selfish greedy bastards did what you profess is so great and nearly brought the financial system to total collapse.
Now complete idiots such as yourself think screwing millions of people out of their life or livelihood should be encouraged, but fortunately there are plenty of honest and moral people out there to stop you. If not for them you'd be a prison getting ass raped for the rest of your life, which on the surface would be a good thing, but the burden us intelligent and moral people bear is keeping idiots such as yourself from living down to your expectations.
the sayer of so wrote:
The role of altruism in human evolution is a controverted issue and an area of debate which few, if any of us are likely qualified to speak on.
....then just shut-up, peewee....
Keith Stone wrote:
Since you and your ilk lack the power of reasoning I'll elaborate.
If everyone in society acted like the greedy selfish bastards like you idolize then over time society would break down, become ungovernable and the only people with a reliable livelihood would be living in a cave far from the rest. What you claim to idolize is not sustainable so by definition it is wrong. On top of that I believe you should have learned both in kindergarten and from your Mom how wrong it is to be selfish.
That doesn't mean everyone needs to chuck everything and live like Mother Teresa, that's just one in the long line of asinine straw-men you've throw out just to prove how poorly educated you are.
Despite all the irrelevant babbling of the Ayn Rand types, society does need to function for individuals to succeed. No functioning society, no livelihood, and the opportunity for business (and thus profit) dries up. You need not look any further than the financial crisis. The selfish greedy bastards did what you profess is so great and nearly brought the financial system to total collapse.
Now complete idiots such as yourself think screwing millions of people out of their life or livelihood should be encouraged, but fortunately there are plenty of honest and moral people out there to stop you. If not for them you'd be a prison getting ass raped for the rest of your life, which on the surface would be a good thing, but the burden us intelligent and moral people bear is keeping idiots such as yourself from living down to your expectations.
You are the single most ferociously stupid idiot I have ever encountered on letsrun. You were asked to explain why selfishness is wrong, and you responded by repeating your original statement, again treating it as an irreducible axiom with no real explanation provided.
For example, your statement that "society would break down," given as a reason why selfishness is evil, is not a reason at all; is just the original statement repackaged as a prediction. You provide no technical political or economic details as to how selfishness would cause society to break down. You simply treat it as a given, using ambiguous phrases like "what you claim to idolize" which allow you to evade the responsibility of dealing with the particulars of the opposing argument and make it easy for you to substitute a straw man ("screwing people out of their livelihood") in its place, not only distorting the argument but also achieving a complete inversion of logic, since what you advocate- taxation- is what it really means to screw someone out of his livelihood.
All of this, of course, betrays your utter inability to justify the view that selfishness is evil, as well as your inability to argue logically or even honestly about anything.
Those of you who agree with Keith Stone's beliefs should closely examine the way he argues. What he does- blank out and arrange a vitriolic sequence of distortions and diatribes against the rich in place of an honest admission that he's mad because someone else has money and he doesn't- is the only strategy that has ever been used to justify altrusim.
sorry for the italics, must've forget to place a "/" in there somewhere.
the sayer of so wrote:
Anyone who has an important contract to protect will be both willing and able to pay a small fee for the service. If half a percent of the value of every contract was charged as a fee, all important contracts would be protected and businesses would pay far less than they do now in taxes. Anyway, that's only one possible way for the government to generate revenue.
Every contract is important. Period. The "fee" are the taxes we pay for the basic functions of government. Enforcing contracts are one of those basic functions.
Very happy to englighten you on this issue.
the sayer of so wrote:
Anyone who has an important contract to protect will be both willing and able to pay a small fee for the service. If half a percent of the value of every contract was charged as a fee, all important contracts would be protected and businesses would pay far less than they do now in taxes. Anyway, that's only one possible way for the government to generate revenue.
thats what people thought they were getting w/ AIG, and the monolines Ambac and MBIA
You have never actually worked in business, where recourse is assumed. If you don't have recourse, the haircut on any contract goes WAY up, to the point it is not profitable.
You don't know how the real world works...REAL money, put down by REAL people, looking for REAL results.
the sayer of so wrote:
Keith Stone wrote:Since you and your ilk lack the power of reasoning I'll elaborate.
If everyone in society acted like the greedy selfish bastards like you idolize then over time society would break down, become ungovernable and the only people with a reliable livelihood would be living in a cave far from the rest. What you claim to idolize is not sustainable so by definition it is wrong. On top of that I believe you should have learned both in kindergarten and from your Mom how wrong it is to be selfish.
That doesn't mean everyone needs to chuck everything and live like Mother Teresa, that's just one in the long line of asinine straw-men you've throw out just to prove how poorly educated you are.
Despite all the irrelevant babbling of the Ayn Rand types, society does need to function for individuals to succeed. No functioning society, no livelihood, and the opportunity for business (and thus profit) dries up. You need not look any further than the financial crisis. The selfish greedy bastards did what you profess is so great and nearly brought the financial system to total collapse.
Now complete idiots such as yourself think screwing millions of people out of their life or livelihood should be encouraged, but fortunately there are plenty of honest and moral people out there to stop you. If not for them you'd be a prison getting ass raped for the rest of your life, which on the surface would be a good thing, but the burden us intelligent and moral people bear is keeping idiots such as yourself from living down to your expectations.
You are the single most ferociously stupid idiot I have ever encountered on letsrun. You were asked to explain why selfishness is wrong, and you responded by repeating your original statement, again treating it as an irreducible axiom with no real explanation provided.
For example, your statement that "society would break down," given as a reason why selfishness is evil, is not a reason at all; is just the original statement repackaged as a prediction. You provide no technical political or economic details as to how selfishness would cause society to break down. You simply treat it as a given, using ambiguous phrases like "what you claim to idolize" which allow you to evade the responsibility of dealing with the particulars of the opposing argument and make it easy for you to substitute a straw man ("screwing people out of their livelihood") in its place, not only distorting the argument but also achieving a complete inversion of logic, since what you advocate- taxation- is what it really means to screw someone out of his livelihood.
All of this, of course, betrays your utter inability to justify the view that selfishness is evil, as well as your inability to argue logically or even honestly about anything.
Those of you who agree with Keith Stone's beliefs should closely examine the way he argues. What he does- blank out and arrange a vitriolic sequence of distortions and diatribes against the rich in place of an honest admission that he's mad because someone else has money and he doesn't- is the only strategy that has ever been used to justify altrusim.
I'll put it in really simple terms, just because something is beyond your understanding doesn't mean it's wrong. I've already taken every since point you've made an slam dunked it into the toilet. The fact you're not capable of understanding that isn't the point. I repeated my original point because it was right the first time, and right the second. Since you have no actual argument to defute that, I guess I was right the third time also.