Disney Land

Civilization is ongoing dreamland perpetuated by the dreamers that are men.

( Civilization is DisneyLand.)

Apart from the dream remains the natural world and should we awake from this slumber that is our constructed dreamland we shall find ourselves in the actual world that is nature.

The absurdity, idiosyncrasy and insanity of men is the desire to conform the natural world as a stage of enhancing their fictitious aspirations.

The absurdity in men is the constant attempt to replace the actual natural world with everything that comprises their ideal dream like fantasy.

A philosopher named Hegel once remarked:

“Humanity will only be content when it achieves a entire world of its own making.”


(Updated.) :evilfun:

You wear your nihilism label well.

Thank You. :slight_smile: =P~

Civilization is comprised of phantomatics.

It was first started by shamans practicing lucid dreaming and astral projection only to be tooken up by whole collective governments later on.

The phantomat’s power comes from the immaculate realism of it’s illusions.

Inside it, we can have only the expiriences we want to have.
(Lucid Dreaming)

We can escape not only our personal limitations but also those that go with it as being men.

We escape the limits of our everyday world.


Although I haven’t heard (read?) you say as much, I get the impression that you’re partial to a sort of anarchistic deinstitutionalization of all civilization. Am I right?

If I am, do you see this as preferable as an ideal only, or do you believe such a move could make life better for all mankind in a practical way?


The later.

Well, not to disparage your aspirations, but I really don’t see how that can be done. I can see how it might bring down a lot of the establishments that support tyrants in power and politicians who might be better labeled “warlords”, but the thought of anarchy makes me tremble. As it stands right now, I’m very comfortable with my lifestyle and I don’t want to give it up. If my civilization were to come tumbling down, I’m sure I’d be targeted by bullies who want nothing but to beat the shit out of me and steal my lunch money so to speak.

Even if we justify that by calling it a “learning experience”, my reaction to which should be to adapt and learn how to defend myself, it wouldn’t be long before, on a more world-wide scale, embryonic forms of government would pop up. They’d likely start out as thug gangs who, through shear brute force, gain the upper hand over their own local communities, and form tribes out of them. Civilization would just start over from scratch.

It would make you tremble because you would be forced to awake out of the slumber of your own lucid dreaming.

No longer would you be special, privileged or unique in such a situation like that of the existence in your idealized dream world.

You would become forced out of your dream state like existence in having to deal ongoingly with the reality that is.

Who isn’t comfortable in dreams? :slight_smile: :laughing:

Mythic rubbish.

As of yet I have never seen any evidence of religion, civilization and government being inevitable objective universal existences.

In my eyes they are one shot wonders from the very ancient random anomaly in which they spranged from.

But we need to keep focused on the initial goal: to make life better for all. Unless you can reassure me (and everyone) that life will become barable (and maybe even enjoyable), it wouldn’t be worth “waking up”. If we have to put in our own efforts in order to make this happen, so be it, but it needs to be possible (and reasonably so).

Let’s keep it simple. Forget words like “government”, “civilization”, “religion”, etc. Let’s consider a small band of people living off the land, and you tell, without law and order somehow being enforced, some meanie won’t eventually come along and start making life miserable for everyone, someone who by shear happenstance ends up in an advantageous position (maybe he bands together with other thugs like himself (so he has a rudimentary army) or he gets hold of a highly desired but scarce resource, or whatever) whereby he can dictate the terms by which the community will live (most likely “serve me and do exactly as I say”). Remember, this isn’t a full fledged government, it’s just a bully using scare tactics (think of Biff from Back to the Future III).

Better is a religious dualistic implication. It is relative and it doesn’t matter in the larger scene of things.

There is no heaven to aspire to and the world doesn’t need any saving.

We need nothing.

Worth is a construct. The natural world is indifferent to people’s constructed sense of self worth.

( Selfhood is also another delusion)

ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi … p?t=160310

( Please take a look at that link.)

Anyhow I would say that physical dominance is a prevailing natural characteristic. ( Just another day in the scene of evolution and nature.)

Well, we need some kind of word to describe this, something that answers the question “Why should we?”

Read it; it clarifies your fews quite a bit. OK, so primative man is more likely to be cooperative than competative with each other. A couple good books that might be of interest to you are: The Dobe Ju/’hoansi by Richard Lee and The Yanomamo by Napoleon Chagnon. The former book describes a particular African tribe (the Ju/'hoansi) and their way of life is very much in line with the description you offered in your thread, but then there’s the latter book which is about a South American tribe (the Yanomamo) whose way of life is a lot more brutal (where it is common for the strong to trample the weak).

Generally speaking, I think the prospect of anadoning civilization and its social structure/order is very risky. Indeed, there might be pockets of people across the globe that might get along fine (as you described) but I suspect there would be many more (probably the majority) who would degenerate into a state of terror and slavery due to a few very powerful tyrants who take power by force.

Then again, this might only happen because it would be a very sudden transition from the state of the world as it is today (I think this accounts for what’s happening in Sudan and Somalia today). In other words, tearing down today’s civilization is one thing; getting man back to his primative state of 10,000 years ago is another.

I also find it difficult to fathom that religion, government, and civilization were a “freak accident” that’s not likely to happen again if we revert back to a primative state. I think it’s almost inevitable that some form of institutionalized religion will grow out of the ashes eventually; it may take a while, but its emergence will be steady and certain. But like you said, there is no hard evidence for this, so it’s not something I can prove; it just seems like the most plausible scenario to me.

What do you mean?

I would only say there are different types of cooperation.

Some forms of cooperatin are mutual where others are violent in comparison.

A violent team of marauding pirates might incline themselves to be cooperative with each other through the use of arms for instance.

It is all rather relative on how a group and culture starts out as whether it be through a use of ongoing violence or through mutual negotiation.

This explains the different forms of behavior from tribe to tribe.

It needs to be understood as relative instances though.

I contend to the belief of cultural relativism when it comes to this matter.

The most plausible is not always so plausible. :slight_smile:

I mean that if the usual set of words (‘better’,‘worth’,‘improved’,etc.) is invalid in virtue of their ties to their cultural/religious roots, then we’re left with a language that can’t be used to explain to people why they should abandon civilization. The best you could do is explain why it doesn’t matter (in which case they’d probably choose to go on living in civilization).

That’s a good point. It’s true that what we in the western world often think of the practices of peoples in other areas of the world - that they are deplorable and that certain groups must feel incredibly oppressed (women in Islam come to mind) - is really just “life as usual” for them. It’s amazing how well we adapt to the conditions we are thrown into - so much so that we end up perceiving it as “normal”. However, the transition can be an excruciating experience, sometimes to the point that it’s devastating and just doesn’t work.

I think I can see your vision, Joker, given the context you’re speaking from, but it still seems more like an ideal than something that would work in practice. The problem isn’t so much that the system wouldn’t work, it’s the transition from here to there that I have doubts about. I also wonder how such a system, assuming we make it there, would be sustained. I guess you don’t have a problem with this since you don’t expect civilization, along with all its religion, politics, law, and other institutions, to readily resurrect as though it were a natural outgrowth of human affairs. But from my point of view, the only way the system you’re proposing could be sustained is if we somehow keep the world’s population informed as to the dangers/disadvantages of civilized life and to guard against returning to such a state. But in order to do this, we would need the necessary infrastructure - that is, some means by which to communicate this (educational systems, media, various forms of propaganda), and when that is in place, I wouldn’t know how to tell it from a full fledged civilization.

If these are such random anomalies then how come they arose in very different ways in different isolated communities through-out the world? I am not saying it is inevitable, but there is more evidence that religion, civilization and government arising, than not. In fact out of all human species that have ascended on this planet they have achieved all three of the above at an %100 success rate.

In your ideal world all science would be lost, and the only thing left to attribute phenomena to would be gods. Religions would be formed to worship these god so that these people may be successful in their hunts or that it may rain so that berries and nuts would be able to grow in the woods (agriculture would be out of the question) and they would have water. Society and governments would follow shortly.

seriously I don’t see any problem with humans trying to twist the “natural world” into their dream world. Indeed “Civilization(technology) is ongoing dreamland perpetuated by the dreamers that are men”. So what is the problem? Are you not satisfy when you are typing on this magic keyboard and everything comes out on this beautiful screen and you are able to send your ideas to the whole world using the internet? It is all part of our “Civilization” you may not like some components of it as I do but do not be one of those radicals. Everything on earth has his positive and negative points. I think that some, quite many people immerse themselves in this unnatural world and they should wake up but I still do not get your point, I would like to know What would be an ideal world for you?
PS if you do not like Civilization at all you can go to some primitive countries and have a good life.