Jump to content
Science Forums

Is It A Good Thing, To Check One's Bad Self?


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I see your point but you don't need a gun to do that in fairness. The only thing I can think of that actually need a gun for is to safely to harm to others.   Capitalism is all about competition. One

no. Get Down with your Bad Self.

Why should guns or capitalism be considered "bad".  I consider them to be neither bad nor good, any more than the weather.  It is the use to which they are put that may yield either good or bad result

  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for the indulgence. I think of the phrase as akin to guns, or to something as general as capitalism: not everyone can say it, otherwise society would arguably collapse.

Why should guns or capitalism be considered "bad".  I consider them to be neither bad nor good, any more than the weather.  It is the use to which they are put that may yield either good or bad results, depending perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should guns or capitalism be considered "bad".  I consider them to be neither bad nor good, any more than the weather.  It is the use to which they are put that may yield either good or bad results, depending perspective.

Capitalism is bad because it opposes what it needs - replication. Same with guns. Both are based on bias.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, a gun is nothing but a tool for accelerating a projectile.  If I have a cow that is down with a painful and incurable condition, do I allow it to linger for days in pain until it eventually dies on it';s own, or do I place a bullet in a specific spot and bring a quick end to it's suffering?  Which would you consider to be "good"?

 

I view capitalism as more of a natural force.  I have skills that I put to good use taking care of cows and land for producing feed and milk which I sell for money that I can use for buying the things that I am not so good at producing. If I am profitable, I can reinvest some of the money into equipment for the farm to improve efficiency, or for hiring help and expertise that I may need or find useful.  

 

It seems a natural arrangement to me.

 

Capitalism, at it's best, is mutually beneficial for all those who do business together, and can allow for growth and creativity

 

The danger of and to capitalism is unbridled greed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism is bad because it opposes what it needs - replication. Same with guns. Both are based on bias.

Capitalism is good because it promotes growth, innovation, and development, while Socialism (Communism) stifles it.  Replication without growth and innovation results in stagnation.  Please review the history of the Soviet Union and China over the last century before making a stupid comment like that.  China has been only slightly more successful (or less of an abject failure) due to the relative homogeneity.

 

800px-Lada_%287907387898%29.jpg

 

Lada 1970-1988

Edited by fahrquad
Link to post
Share on other sites

First, a gun is nothing but a tool for accelerating a projectile.  If I have a cow that is down with a painful and incurable condition, do I allow it to linger for days in pain until it eventually dies on it';s own, or do I place a bullet in a specific spot and bring a quick end to it's suffering?  Which would you consider to be "good"?

 

I view capitalism as more of a natural force.  I have skills that I put to good use taking care of cows and land for producing feed and milk which I sell for money that I can use for buying the things that I am not so good at producing. If I am profitable, I can reinvest some of the money into equipment for the farm to improve efficiency, or for hiring help and expertise that I may need or find useful.  

 

It seems a natural arrangement to me.

 

Capitalism, at it's best, is mutually beneficial for all those who do business together, and can allow for growth and creativity

 

The danger of and to capitalism is unbridled greed.

Capitalism denies people a sensible routine; moreover, it creates needless threats to people's lives, via things like the motorway and infrastructure.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism denies people a sensible routine; moreover, it creates needless threats to people's lives, via things like the motorway and infrastructure.  

Nothing about capitalism "denies people a sensible routine."

 

Nothing about capitalism inherently "creates needless threats to people's lives."  Note that even the USSR, during its most communistic, had motorways and basic infrastructure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing about capitalism "denies people a sensible routine."

 

Nothing about capitalism inherently "creates needless threats to people's lives."  Note that even the USSR, during its most communistic, had motorways and basic infrastructure.

Can capitalism exist without motorways and infrastructure - and how does it not deny people a sensible routine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can capitalism exist without motorways and infrastructure - and how does it not deny people a sensible routine?

Capitalism existed long before the motor car let alone the motorway, was invented.  As for the second question it is you that is asserting that capitalism denies a sensible routine so it is up to you to justify your claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism needs less than 100% interaction, and it needs roles and functions (which are immoral) - the day that all people have spoken to each other on the planet is the day that capitalism is no longer possible.

What is so bad about roles and functions?  If you believe human nature is immoral, I suppose, but we all take on roles and perform tasks as a part of living.  

 

As for your assertion that capitalism is no longer possible when all the people will have spoken to each other, it is probably the opposite of reality.  Capitalism requires and thrives on communication. Just take a look at Craigslist.

 

Capitalism denies people a sensible routine; moreover, it creates needless threats to people's lives, via things like the motorway and infrastructure.  

My routine is that I get up and have breakfast, work, break for cheese and coffee, work some more, break for lunch, work some more, break for supper, work some more, finish work, spend time with my wife, and go to bed.  Seems sensible to me.

 

Motorways and infrastructure can also save lives by allowing people access to medical care.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is so bad about roles and functions?  If you believe human nature is immoral, I suppose, but we all take on roles and perform tasks as a part of living.  

 

As for your assertion that capitalism is no longer possible when all the people will have spoken to each other, it is probably the opposite of reality.  Capitalism requires and thrives on communication. Just take a look at Craigslist.

 

My routine is that I get up and have breakfast, work, break for cheese and coffee, work some more, break for lunch, work some more, break for supper, work some more, finish work, spend time with my wife, and go to bed.  Seems sensible to me.

 

Motorways and infrastructure can also save lives by allowing people access to medical care.

Do roles and functions cause violence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...