The fallacy is the argument that the meaning of existence is to achieve "happiness". Since this is not proven, the rest of it is a collection of weak associations.
:dismissed:
The Case for Rational Suicide, by OldDirty/b/Tard
-
Tingel Tangel
- Fascist Bitch
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
- Location: On my feet
I generally dislike the argument of 'omg lulz we broke teh world it wud be bettah if we wasnt here dawg!'.
It's a general statement of defeat and cowardice, in my opinion. What we generally pride ourselves with that sets up apart from other primates is our hightened sense of function and coordination and purpose - that we're able to function in large societies that are all, in a small or larger degree, combined or connected.
Saying that only 1% of us has a purpose and thereby demeaning the rest to a bundle of drooling retards that muck up things for the real life heroes is like saying that only one part of a watch is important, because it makes it tick. Nevertheless, there would be no clock, if it wasn't for the rest of if.
Moreso, it's greatly evident that humans -do- aspire to a greater collective, and to serve each others' well beings. No, we may not be more than a single spec in the universe, but the fact that we're even concidering this makes us much more than what the original quote tries to depict.
It's a general statement of defeat and cowardice, in my opinion. What we generally pride ourselves with that sets up apart from other primates is our hightened sense of function and coordination and purpose - that we're able to function in large societies that are all, in a small or larger degree, combined or connected.
Saying that only 1% of us has a purpose and thereby demeaning the rest to a bundle of drooling retards that muck up things for the real life heroes is like saying that only one part of a watch is important, because it makes it tick. Nevertheless, there would be no clock, if it wasn't for the rest of if.
Moreso, it's greatly evident that humans -do- aspire to a greater collective, and to serve each others' well beings. No, we may not be more than a single spec in the universe, but the fact that we're even concidering this makes us much more than what the original quote tries to depict.
-
Smiley
- Righteous Subjugator
- Posts: 3186
- Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 11:20 pm
- Location: Denmark. Smiley-land.
- Contact:
Overall, I agree. There's no big reason to off yourself, there's plenty to live for, even if you take a long look at how humanity is shaping itself.
If you need to be able to do something about it, then work for it, do your best. People can't afford to be smart enough to see our world as a whole and expect to do more of a difference than any other one man.
While it may be greatly evident that we aspire to be a greater collective, and I need to press the fact that I'm not educated on the matter, I don't see or hear much proof of us actually advancing towards it. Or maybe I just don't notice it.
I don't dispute that there have been great advances in society over the last 100 years, compared to the last tens of thousands, but you still see deeply rooted religion and by extention extremists killing for a fictive cause. Or basicly "we don't agree with you, so we want to kill you or die trying".
We're also regressing on some points, such as the new security laws, rules and reinforcements after 9/11 which forced all commercial methods of transportation to be a lot more strict.
Good in some cases, but overkill in most.
It automatically puts a measure of distrust in people, it makes them uneasy, afraid but mostly really annoyed.
As far as I'm concerned, the terrorists at 9/11 won, they've managed to scared the shit out of everyone and forced us to adhere to rules that are over the top.
Then there's at least one commercial aspect that I'm aware of..
The way laws protect commercial media over common interest, such as when the state protects the interest of a distribution company(not even the musician or the creators of a movie) and puts them higher than your average person.
RIAA sues people for hundreds of millions, even though they know that the people they sue have hardly done anything wrong and will never be able to pay even the settled amount.
They don't do it because they expect to cover their alleged losses, but it's economical terrorism meant to scare people from illegally downloading or sharing media. They're making examples of people.
The worst thing is that all of their losses are theoretical and that there has never been so much money to be made on media as there is now. And a good part of that is due to file-sharing or as I like to call it, free advertising and word-to-mouth.
There is a lot of licensing that prevents the rest of the world from seeing new shows or movies. Even music.
Instead of riding on the wave of bit-torrent technology and file-sharing in general, there's a lot more focus on punishing their customers. iTunes is increasingly popular, but is still very limited. I can't buy any tv-shows here in Denmark, even though I'm willing and have the money. So I download them instead.
We're being held back by a lot of things..
If you need to be able to do something about it, then work for it, do your best. People can't afford to be smart enough to see our world as a whole and expect to do more of a difference than any other one man.
While it may be greatly evident that we aspire to be a greater collective, and I need to press the fact that I'm not educated on the matter, I don't see or hear much proof of us actually advancing towards it. Or maybe I just don't notice it.
I don't dispute that there have been great advances in society over the last 100 years, compared to the last tens of thousands, but you still see deeply rooted religion and by extention extremists killing for a fictive cause. Or basicly "we don't agree with you, so we want to kill you or die trying".
We're also regressing on some points, such as the new security laws, rules and reinforcements after 9/11 which forced all commercial methods of transportation to be a lot more strict.
Good in some cases, but overkill in most.
It automatically puts a measure of distrust in people, it makes them uneasy, afraid but mostly really annoyed.
As far as I'm concerned, the terrorists at 9/11 won, they've managed to scared the shit out of everyone and forced us to adhere to rules that are over the top.
Then there's at least one commercial aspect that I'm aware of..
The way laws protect commercial media over common interest, such as when the state protects the interest of a distribution company(not even the musician or the creators of a movie) and puts them higher than your average person.
RIAA sues people for hundreds of millions, even though they know that the people they sue have hardly done anything wrong and will never be able to pay even the settled amount.
They don't do it because they expect to cover their alleged losses, but it's economical terrorism meant to scare people from illegally downloading or sharing media. They're making examples of people.
The worst thing is that all of their losses are theoretical and that there has never been so much money to be made on media as there is now. And a good part of that is due to file-sharing or as I like to call it, free advertising and word-to-mouth.
There is a lot of licensing that prevents the rest of the world from seeing new shows or movies. Even music.
Instead of riding on the wave of bit-torrent technology and file-sharing in general, there's a lot more focus on punishing their customers. iTunes is increasingly popular, but is still very limited. I can't buy any tv-shows here in Denmark, even though I'm willing and have the money. So I download them instead.
We're being held back by a lot of things..
Testicular Pugilist
-
Tingel Tangel
- Fascist Bitch
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
- Location: On my feet
But the greater collective doesn't necessarily mean a total lack of specific cultural traits, such as religion or language or whathaveyou - we're not talking Star Trek Borg collective here. Atleast I'm not.
But if you look at the history of the planet and its progression over millions of years, and then how large societies humans have built over the last, say, three thousand - maybe merely just 2500, but three is a nicer number. Not only have we created small societies, but we've actually mingled and combined and widened.
Gone from small city states that constantly attack each other simply for living on the wrong side of a river, to a larger sense of humanity - not as being humane, but as being a race of the world.
Yes. There are indifferences.
Yes. There are collisions between nationailities and cultures.
Yes. There are doubters and pessimists and sceptics.
Yesyesyes, to all of those.
But to be quite honest, look at how far we've come - we've got a lingua franca; English, being spoken in the majority of the world by people that speak it as a foreign language: it being used in global conferences etc as main language.
This being a sure sign of how we've actually reached out to one another - if you look aside from the angle of English being the language of a dominant colonist power yadayada, and instead look at the fact that people of the world are communicating with each other; commerce and development, peace and treaties, travel, cultural exchanges.
Instead of being merely a citizen of a small ville somewhere in a country that noone has heard of apart from in geography, people can actually call themselves citizens of the world. It is open, to a degree, because people work for it to be so.
And yes, we're leaving nasty footprints and prohibiting ourselves and destroying and restricting. But if one only sees the negatives, then it all comes down to 'we should just kill ourselves instead and savethe world'.
The world can't be saved, not from what we've already done - there's no realistic way of offing all of us at once and it not doing damage in the process. All we can do is develop - I won't say evolve, even though, to be honest, I think that it's a better word.
But if you look at the history of the planet and its progression over millions of years, and then how large societies humans have built over the last, say, three thousand - maybe merely just 2500, but three is a nicer number. Not only have we created small societies, but we've actually mingled and combined and widened.
Gone from small city states that constantly attack each other simply for living on the wrong side of a river, to a larger sense of humanity - not as being humane, but as being a race of the world.
Yes. There are indifferences.
Yes. There are collisions between nationailities and cultures.
Yes. There are doubters and pessimists and sceptics.
Yesyesyes, to all of those.
But to be quite honest, look at how far we've come - we've got a lingua franca; English, being spoken in the majority of the world by people that speak it as a foreign language: it being used in global conferences etc as main language.
This being a sure sign of how we've actually reached out to one another - if you look aside from the angle of English being the language of a dominant colonist power yadayada, and instead look at the fact that people of the world are communicating with each other; commerce and development, peace and treaties, travel, cultural exchanges.
Instead of being merely a citizen of a small ville somewhere in a country that noone has heard of apart from in geography, people can actually call themselves citizens of the world. It is open, to a degree, because people work for it to be so.
And yes, we're leaving nasty footprints and prohibiting ourselves and destroying and restricting. But if one only sees the negatives, then it all comes down to 'we should just kill ourselves instead and savethe world'.
The world can't be saved, not from what we've already done - there's no realistic way of offing all of us at once and it not doing damage in the process. All we can do is develop - I won't say evolve, even though, to be honest, I think that it's a better word.
-
Smiley
- Righteous Subjugator
- Posts: 3186
- Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 11:20 pm
- Location: Denmark. Smiley-land.
- Contact:
No I don't mean a borg collective, but I would like to see some standards, such as everyone having access to a PDA with all vital functions on it.
On the specific topic of religion there are conflicts though. I can't see any room for any sort of collective for religions that exclude non-believers and treat them as lesser-worth.
Even if that's the ancient and unadapted version, there is still a truth to it.
I'd like to say that there should be room for any religion, but as long as they don't permit others to have their opinion, it's in the way in its current form.
I like your positive look on things and it's definately the kind of attitude needed to change the world from its current form to something more united.
On the specific topic of religion there are conflicts though. I can't see any room for any sort of collective for religions that exclude non-believers and treat them as lesser-worth.
Even if that's the ancient and unadapted version, there is still a truth to it.
I'd like to say that there should be room for any religion, but as long as they don't permit others to have their opinion, it's in the way in its current form.
I like your positive look on things and it's definately the kind of attitude needed to change the world from its current form to something more united.
Testicular Pugilist
-
Tingel Tangel
- Fascist Bitch
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
- Location: On my feet
Well, then say that there should.
Should meaning that there still isn't.
I don't think there actually -is- room, yet. But I recognise that it is a goal for many, many people - more than a mere 1%, I should hope.
Just take the 2015 goals for poverty - a collaboration of countries setting up guidelines and work ethics in order to achieve something, that's generally for the greater good, and not just for themselves.
I'm not debating that it's not going so well. I know it's not. And it probably won't be perfect while I'm still alive.
But as long as people have their minds set upon this, it gives me faith in how things will turn out.
Should meaning that there still isn't.
I don't think there actually -is- room, yet. But I recognise that it is a goal for many, many people - more than a mere 1%, I should hope.
Just take the 2015 goals for poverty - a collaboration of countries setting up guidelines and work ethics in order to achieve something, that's generally for the greater good, and not just for themselves.
I'm not debating that it's not going so well. I know it's not. And it probably won't be perfect while I'm still alive.
But as long as people have their minds set upon this, it gives me faith in how things will turn out.
-
Manoil
- Wastelander's Nightmare
- Posts: 3701
- Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:05 pm
- Location: Drifting Onward
You see this?
This intellectual, carefully thought-out back-and-forth is exactly what I was talking about. It's the force that keeps DaC alive, sustaining and rejuvenating it. It's people not necessarily talking for the sake of being right in an argument, but having an exchange of ideas that ends in the participants and observers walking away with growing insight. Whether or not the subject is important, it is this substantial and thorough use of the mind that makes us, and DaC itself, improve and flourish.
It's a beautiful thing. Were it more widespread and commonly practiced, the species as a whole would be richer for it.
This intellectual, carefully thought-out back-and-forth is exactly what I was talking about. It's the force that keeps DaC alive, sustaining and rejuvenating it. It's people not necessarily talking for the sake of being right in an argument, but having an exchange of ideas that ends in the participants and observers walking away with growing insight. Whether or not the subject is important, it is this substantial and thorough use of the mind that makes us, and DaC itself, improve and flourish.
It's a beautiful thing. Were it more widespread and commonly practiced, the species as a whole would be richer for it.
-
Tingel Tangel
- Fascist Bitch
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
- Location: On my feet
-
vx trauma
- 250 Posts til Somewhere
- Posts: 2568
- Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:12 pm
- Location: trapped in memory
- Contact:
Sweeping floors at the mill all day
Dropped out of school just to get away
I'm just a kid but I'll soon be dead
And all I want is some good head
Good head, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Flipping pizzas on a Saturday night
Classy asses to the left and right
Have you ever been laid, she said
Fuck you. I'd rather have some good head
Good head, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Dropped out of school just to get away
I'm just a kid but I'll soon be dead
And all I want is some good head
Good head, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Flipping pizzas on a Saturday night
Classy asses to the left and right
Have you ever been laid, she said
Fuck you. I'd rather have some good head
Good head, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Please Kill Yourself So I Can Rock
-
Kashluk
Kash - maybe your lutherans. Not over here....
I find this argument not really pro suicide, but a thought that if someone were to kill themselves it is no great tragedy. Suicide is often thought of selfish, by those who want the person to stick around for their happiness and well being...a bit hypocritical and primitive in my opinion. Some argue you owe society for raising you. Doesn't follow really.
This argument DOES seem to be along philosophical grounds(zen tradition/existentialism) as there truly is no hope or grand meaning...this is a life of curiosity and discovery, PERHAPS some happiness though many deem instant gratification their life goal, which, to me is truly sad. Watch some Sagan, read up on genetics evolution(the moral animal is quite good). Whatever happens after life, even if its oblivion, your life is not one of grand meaning. Few people will EVER do anything truly meaningful and we are easily replaced. This is not to say that you can't derive personal meaning from life, and not to say that your life doesn't mean anything to others, just that there is no overarching goal of humanity. We're animals. That's just it...meaning in existence is derived by what one wants it to be. While we can we can wish for higher meaning, some may not find it. So who's to say that suicide is wrong?
I find this argument not really pro suicide, but a thought that if someone were to kill themselves it is no great tragedy. Suicide is often thought of selfish, by those who want the person to stick around for their happiness and well being...a bit hypocritical and primitive in my opinion. Some argue you owe society for raising you. Doesn't follow really.
This argument DOES seem to be along philosophical grounds(zen tradition/existentialism) as there truly is no hope or grand meaning...this is a life of curiosity and discovery, PERHAPS some happiness though many deem instant gratification their life goal, which, to me is truly sad. Watch some Sagan, read up on genetics evolution(the moral animal is quite good). Whatever happens after life, even if its oblivion, your life is not one of grand meaning. Few people will EVER do anything truly meaningful and we are easily replaced. This is not to say that you can't derive personal meaning from life, and not to say that your life doesn't mean anything to others, just that there is no overarching goal of humanity. We're animals. That's just it...meaning in existence is derived by what one wants it to be. While we can we can wish for higher meaning, some may not find it. So who's to say that suicide is wrong?
...signatures? WTF?
-
Manoil
- Wastelander's Nightmare
- Posts: 3701
- Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:05 pm
- Location: Drifting Onward
Nicely put. Though I did find something in there--Caleb wrote:Kash - maybe your lutherans. Not over here....
I find this argument not really pro suicide, but a thought that if someone were to kill themselves it is no great tragedy. Suicide is often thought of selfish, by those who want the person to stick around for their happiness and well being...a bit hypocritical and primitive in my opinion. Some argue you owe society for raising you. Doesn't follow really.
This argument DOES seem to be along philosophical grounds(zen tradition/existentialism) as there truly is no hope or grand meaning...this is a life of curiosity and discovery, PERHAPS some happiness though many deem instant gratification their life goal, which, to me is truly sad. Watch some Sagan, read up on genetics evolution(the moral animal is quite good). Whatever happens after life, even if its oblivion, your life is not one of grand meaning. Few people will EVER do anything truly meaningful and we are easily replaced. This is not to say that you can't derive personal meaning from life, and not to say that your life doesn't mean anything to others, just that there is no overarching goal of humanity. We're animals. That's just it...meaning in existence is derived by what one wants it to be. While we can we can wish for higher meaning, some may not find it. So who's to say that suicide is wrong?
The exception, of course, is when you become An Hero. Like Mitch Henderson, the original An Hero.Caleb wrote:Suicide is often thought of selfish, by those who want the person to stick around for their happiness and well being...
Kind of a null point now. I guess maybe i'm just missing something but...in a way we've poisoned ourselves with the idea of individuality and seem to miss the fact that the world wasn't really designed as our playground. Happiness has NEVER been an option for everyone, but this should be a null fact. Life is, by and large, fucking interesting. Especially the people and the things they do. Whenever horribly depressed, it seems worth it just to stick around to see whats going to happen.
...signatures? WTF?
-
POOPERSCOOPER
- Paparazzi
- Posts: 5035
- Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 1:50 am
- Location: California
I have no idea what your talking about in your post Smiley since I don't even get the logic of bringing up 9/11 and bit torrent in a topic about suicide. I'm not even sure I get what the guy is talking about in the original post.
I've always thought that if there is no after life and since humans are animals with the sole purpose of pro-creating, having a human conscience is really for only one thing and that is for pleasure. Everything we do is for pleasure/happiness or there would be no point in living. Generally our goal is to have hot sex when you get down to it and if your some giant basement dweller who has no chance in ever having sex with someone hot then there is no point for you to live besides getting pleasure from games or eating or something.
I often think about kidnapping and raping some really hot chick and having the time of the life then killing myself after wards because I don't believe in an after life. Life is really just not worth the effort most of the times so why no take what you want and end your life while your at the top? The only reason I probably won't ever do that is because of the empathy I would have for the person I would rape and the effect of killing myself would have on my family.
I would probably have to refine my thinking about it but I've often thought about what the point of life is.
I've always thought that if there is no after life and since humans are animals with the sole purpose of pro-creating, having a human conscience is really for only one thing and that is for pleasure. Everything we do is for pleasure/happiness or there would be no point in living. Generally our goal is to have hot sex when you get down to it and if your some giant basement dweller who has no chance in ever having sex with someone hot then there is no point for you to live besides getting pleasure from games or eating or something.
I often think about kidnapping and raping some really hot chick and having the time of the life then killing myself after wards because I don't believe in an after life. Life is really just not worth the effort most of the times so why no take what you want and end your life while your at the top? The only reason I probably won't ever do that is because of the empathy I would have for the person I would rape and the effect of killing myself would have on my family.
I would probably have to refine my thinking about it but I've often thought about what the point of life is.
Join us on IRC at #fallout on the gamesurge.net network.
-
Wolfman Walt
- Mamma's Gang member
- Posts: 5243
- Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:31 pm
- Location: La Grange, Kentucky
- Contact:
I always prefered a more buddhist approach to the idea of life. Life is ment to be about suffering, but it is the ultimate goal of overcoming that suffering that makes life worth living. Suicide is a coward's notion, someone not strong enough to handle truths about life. It's only when these truths are accepted that one can be happy with his life.
