In other words, become a part of it, be fitted and conformed to the norm (be Job).
Today was built on being underground, unseen, invisible, occultic, and hidden behind lies and every manner of stealth.
You really think more of it is going to fix it?
What “fixing” is there to be done?
The global globule is merely a large particle of negative noise, an anti-proton. One can convert a particle to it’s opposite by impedance matching its opposite field to it, properly mating it to its opposite, and then maintaining that opposite while the particle reforms around it as its opposite, a positive proton.
In English, form any small group that is fundamentally the opposite of the malicious thing that the glob represents. That is what SAM Coops are all about. But they are for the positive minded, not the compliant minded. SAM Coops reproduce and spread, growing a living body in place of a mass particle of noise.
People will form communion and cooperation, of course.
Civilization encourages specialization…that engineers breed with female nerds, army soldiers with soldier wives, politicians with Hilary Clinton or Sarah Palin, etc.
If an individual or group of people are not conducive to The (Global) State then such a group is at risk of termination, especially if it is directly opposed to or seen as an intimidating challenge to The State.
I’ll talk more about this on the Political Philosophy thread, another time.
The State (Feminine) versus The Church (Masculine).
More people going underground …either or,either the technocrats are going to reduce everyone ,anyway, so may as well challenge them technologically in a way, which may give equal opportunity to educate values not only appearing but consisting of useful attainment.
if not, children may listen to their friends anyway, before asking parents what they think about values. And if upper tier parents can’t think this could happen to them now, the so called middle class did t think so one generation ago. it’s pitifully reductive yes, but still that’s all there is.
Yes.
Sometimes it appears as though evolution might be working backward, but it isn’t. It is just that what it is doing does not agree with our values.
There is no such thing as devolution, or disgenics. There is only evolution.
Yes, consider this exchange, after copro said something like " we can observe nature and derive objective values to pursue, so we should play the odds."
Then it went something like
_You said that values don’t matter.
_Uh, no I didn’t. I said that our values don’t determine evolutionary fitness.
Devolution is when a moderately fit (average) human being, stands in for another weaker, crippled human being (like an infant or Down Syndrome), and then claims that “Evolution affects everybody and everything equally”. This is both artificial and an obvious lie, like Phoney exhibits. She stands in for an infant, and pretends that both her, and the infant, are somehow (magically) “exempt” from both the selective forces of evolution, and they predatory and threatening forces of evolution.
This is a hypocrisy of the highest magnitudes, especially to then proceed afterward to “speak on behalf of science” or objectivity…
Furthermore, people need to make a differentiation between Evolution and Survival, and “Fitness” which means survivability (as a mathematical probability).
It says absolutely nothing about evolution, selection, and nature to associate evolution with Survivability, and then call all successfully reproducing organisms “Fit”. That’s misleading and false.
Instead fitness refers to the heightened complexity of a specie’s genetics. That humans are “more evolved” or “fitter” than…for example, a dolphin, a zebra, a fish, a bird, etc.
No “progress” will be had in this “discussion” without a little bit of intellectual honesty.
Fitness refers to probability of survival of both individual organisms and its representing species. Even if one human dies, doesn’t mean all the others do. Just because a human dies, doesn’t mean all other life forms die too.
Idiot, your inference is that your values do not and/or cannot match the objective values of nature. COP-OUT.
See:
You refuse to delve deeper into why some are more fit than others and why survival alone is a problematic and unsophisticated and cowardly means by which fitness is determined. And if you read, THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE FUCKING THREAD AS PER ARMINIUS’ FIRST POST! And why? Too dumb. Too cowardly. Too politically egalitarian. A stupid dishonest cow. Fuck off already. Either introduce some nuance into your pitiful analysis or piss off and stop mentioning me.
But don’t you see if, the superman(men)were here today, he/she would/could say ,perhaps,the same thing about us, you, and I or anyone. Would you, or could you honestly then believe in the things you are writing now? you are playing on the nounances which then to ameliate differences between real retardation and those disadvantaged
No, that is not at all what I inferred. My inference is that they are irrelevant. That is exactly what I wrote.
If you can’t tell the difference you are even dumber than I thought.
The Missing Link
A woman has sex, births a child. Then she comes onto a philosophy forum, like this one. She simultaneously represents the selective function of “Nature”, but denies it outwardly. She wants to talk about evolution and science “objectively”. But how can she, when she is the very mechanism of nature? When her choice is the proof? Did she give birth to something “better than” a severely mentally retarded child, or not?
Can this be measured? Does it even matter?
Meanwhile, in “the wild” nature, severely crippled animals will die. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s not a subjective value judgment.
But back within the safe confines of human civilization (Artifice)…instead everybody sees different writing on the wall.
Not entirely, since crippling effects do not transmute into hereditary traits. Usually they are not born that way.
And, if they are, then they do not count anyway down the line.
It’s tantamount to saying alienation will eventually get rid of unfavorable genotype. but this does not necessarily happen, it may, but who can put tracers on it?
Aeon, you are very confused. I recommend starting with the basics and grabbing a high school leven biology book. Then you can come here and pose some questions or make comments based on what you read.
See what I mean? You are just a flat-out liar. I reposted your own words, it is there for any rational person to see. Take care. And wear a crash helmet you moron.
what the fuck
the quote is right there, word for word
an I dealing with a lobotomy patient here?
please, I need to know
Just commenting, this issueone of long standing that
between exclusion or inclusion of hereditary traits,
whether these traits can become advantageous, or a hindrances to further evolution.
A disadvantage may not cripple a lineage, if, the
tracer can reoccur,
Here is where the idea of the memetic comes in, because the genetic basis still has a hole in it.
But thanks, need to check back into basics.
I think You are unwarranted to be attacked as such, for being natural, and hope this will not bring further
.
Obe, that post was not meant for you. It was for aeon.
.