Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That Evanda Char's voluval mark is the "Track of the Wolf"?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic: We can only wish...  (Read 13399 times)

Natalcya Katla

  • Captain farkin' Cardboard
  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 492
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #30 on: 08 May 2010, 04:05 »

Idealism is awesome, it makes for great songs. And without it, the entertainment value of history would plummet.  :D
Logged
Ava Starfire > There is evil.
Ava Starfire > Outright evil.
Ruby Amatucci > Hello!

Arnulf Ogunkoya

  • Moral Compass (apparently)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
    • Livejournal profile
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #31 on: 08 May 2010, 05:48 »

Incidentally Vikarion. I didn't take offense at your response. All I was trying to say is maybe specific political discussions are a bad idea here, rather than general expressions of philosophy & outlook.
Logged
Kind Regards,
Arnulf Ogunkoya.

Lillith Blackheart

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #32 on: 08 May 2010, 07:49 »

Idealism is awesome, it makes for great songs. And without it, the entertainment value of history would plummet.  :D

...but it is horribly impractical taken beyond a very minor level.
Logged

Kamiko Hautala

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 49
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #33 on: 08 May 2010, 10:34 »

For the record, this IS idealism. I don't see anyone going "Well now that we have this satirical look at the New York Times out, I'm forcing you to talk about the economic benefits / hindrances of wind power." A shame that something so simple came out to be complex and controversial to the various cynical masses.

I'm not judging anyone, but I always thought that people would respect the idea of not polluting the planet's ecosystem with polluting energy, or that wars ended would be enjoyed. Of course, everyone has their own view, but really? Hmm.
« Last Edit: 08 May 2010, 10:36 by Kamiko Hautala »
Logged

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #34 on: 08 May 2010, 10:55 »

Those weren't the bits I viewed as incredibly unrealistic. (Not that I think humanity's about to end war on its own, mind.)

But some of the economic "news" there seemed more than just unrealistic, it seemed downright counterproductive in multiple ways. :)
Logged

Vikarion

  • Guest
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #35 on: 08 May 2010, 11:16 »

Well, actually, no, I don't want war to end. To be conducted with a minimal amount of casualties, yes, if possibly, but not end.

War is the clash of competing ideas, when there is no other way of resolving the differences between ideas. It is, if you will, a proof of a prototype: is a society based on certain ideas stronger than another society based on others?

Competition is necessary for life in an entropic universe. Without it, we grow stagnant, and then weaken. We become unable to adjust to the challenges that will eventually arise, and therefore, ensure our extinction. One of the reasons humanity is so successful is our strong drive to compete, not just against each other, but against anything.

And I don't want pollution to end. If we take pollution as being "Something that changes nature from the state it would exist in without man", then everything we do is pollution. I prefer a more limited definition of pollution being the negative byproducts of positive changes to our lives. I make this rather general to encapsulate such things as noise pollution and etc.

Now, attempting to limit pollution is good, but trying to limit it to the point that it retards industrial and technological progress is suicidal. This planet only has so many resources, and humanity must either regress to primitivism, or expand into the solar system. Taking the middle road, as it were, of a maintained ecological footprint, population, and lifestyle will not only be exceptionally difficult, but lead to stagnation and eventual extinction as we slowly deplete resources and remain unwilling to tap others.

It's also quite likely that a "sustainable ecological system" will require most people to accept a standard of living a good bit below what we experience today. That simply isn't going to happen, not without use of violence on a regular basis against citizenry - a temporary solution at best, since that will just lead to revolution.

Pollution is the result of technological progress. Minimize it as much as possible without damaging industrial capability and technological progress, but never put that goal before the good of humanity.
Logged

Kaleigh Doyle

  • Guest
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #36 on: 08 May 2010, 11:39 »

Hey I like this Guy
.
Logged

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #37 on: 08 May 2010, 11:50 »

"War" as "competition of ideas" is all fine and good, but the death and destruction and suffering that goes along with it? Not so much.

Certainly, the sort of "total war" the last couple of centuries have brought us doesn't actually advance the state of our species. Something akin to counting coup or even only resulting specifically in casualties among volunteer warriors would differ dramatically.

I don't define "pollution" as "changing the state of nature", because we're not talking about kids making mudpies in the back yard. Contamination to the point that we actively harmthe health of our own species is probably at least a minimum bound for the definition, though of course some folks would go further.

"The good of humanity" is about the most nebulous, subjective metric I could imagine. ;)
Logged

Vikarion

  • Guest
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #38 on: 08 May 2010, 13:48 »

"War" as "competition of ideas" is all fine and good, but the death and destruction and suffering that goes along with it? Not so much.

Certainly, the sort of "total war" the last couple of centuries have brought us doesn't actually advance the state of our species. Something akin to counting coup or even only resulting specifically in casualties among volunteer warriors would differ dramatically.

I don't define "pollution" as "changing the state of nature", because we're not talking about kids making mudpies in the back yard. Contamination to the point that we actively harmthe health of our own species is probably at least a minimum bound for the definition, though of course some folks would go further.

"The good of humanity" is about the most nebulous, subjective metric I could imagine. ;)

In regards to war...

Yes. The two world wars were very, very damaging. At the same time, they propelled advances in science and medicine that have saved more lives than those two wars took. As horrible and destructive as those wars were, consider the ways that those technical advances have cured diseases, removed colonialism, and brought about prosperity for so many.

The key with war is managing it. My view on war isn't "yay, let's all shoot each other", but "we are inevitably going to shoot each other, so let's try to get the non-combatants out of the way and do it in a civilized as possible fashion".

The ideals of unilateral disarmament, world peace, and so forth are not possible, so I say that we use war as positively as possible. Hopefully, we may eventually find a way of waging it that does not even require the expenditure of human life, but I'm fairly skeptical.

As far as "pollution" goes, I would have to say that your definition (harming our own species) is not the one popularly held. For example, suppose we had an industrial process that extended the human lifespan by twenty years, but required dumping a by-product into the ocean that killed blue whales - and only blue whales. That's still pollution, even if the resulting extinction would not harm humans in any significant way.
Logged

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #39 on: 08 May 2010, 14:22 »

Yes. The two world wars were very, very damaging. At the same time, they propelled advances in science and medicine that have saved more lives than those two wars took. As horrible and destructive as those wars were, consider the ways that those technical advances have cured diseases, removed colonialism, and brought about prosperity for so many.

Would we have had similar advances without the >50 million dead in WWII? Neither you nor I can say, to be quite honest, but I suspect that the resources that went into destroying and then rebuilding Europe and much of the Pacific Rim could have done a lot more had they started from where we were in early 1914 (prior to WWI).

And for the record, I would say colonialism has changed, not gone away.
Logged

Lillith Blackheart

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #40 on: 08 May 2010, 14:38 »

Quote
I'm not judging anyone, but I always thought that people would respect the idea of not polluting the planet's ecosystem with polluting energy, or that wars ended would be enjoyed.

All energy sources we have -- including so called "clean energy" pollutes. Wind Energy kills huge swaths of migrating birds. Hydro-electric disrupts spawning beds and migration of fish. Geothermal disrupts the planet's seismic cycles. Even Solar has expensive, highly toxic batteries for storing the energy. Nuclear is actually one of the best yield, cleanest energy sources -- just not the way we do it, because of the nuclear disarmament treaties the Carter era gave us. Spent fuel rods are the vast majority of toxic waste from Nuclear facilities, and still retain ~80% of the energy the initial fuel rod had, but require enrichment processing in order to tap into that, and we decided to make that illegal out of concern for "stopping the spread of nuclear arms", since the process is very similar to enriching uranium and plutonium for weapons-grade use.

Quote
Would we have had similar advances without the >50 million dead in WWII? Neither you nor I can say, to be quite honest, but I suspect that the resources that went into destroying and then rebuilding Europe and much of the Pacific Rim could have done a lot more had they started from where we were in early 1914 (prior to WWI)

No, actually. We can say with incredible certainty that we would not have a huge swath of medical knowledge that we currently have, because the way it would be obtained is barbaric, cruel, and against every ounce of international law.

Edit: Removed redundant wordage.
« Last Edit: 08 May 2010, 14:40 by Lillith Blackheart »
Logged

lallara zhuul

  • Now with rainbows and butterflies.
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1123
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #41 on: 08 May 2010, 15:12 »

Just an aside, the propeller wind turbine things are obsolete.

http://www.windside.com/
Logged

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Lillith Blackheart

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #42 on: 08 May 2010, 15:27 »

...note the toxic batteries, however, remain necessary. Also -- those are neat.
Logged

Kamiko Hautala

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 49
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #43 on: 08 May 2010, 16:02 »

In terms of future combat scenarios, I am not skeptical on the basis that robotics will take over our daily lives. In thirty years time or so, perhaps we may have the ability to wage war with robotics and technological attacks. An enemy wiping out all of the country's power supply is more destructive than losing troops, in my opinion. In terms of getting the WMDs out of the picture, that is not impossible. Don't necessarily assume that human greed will always take over, because if it has then we wouldn't be in the technological and social state that we are in now, as a world society.

World peace, although an amazing concept and wish, will never happen. This, again, all brings me back to my main point: The newspaper is a "WHAT IF".  :bash:
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1671
  • Ex-convict
    • EWF Digital Consulting
Re: We can only wish...
« Reply #44 on: 08 May 2010, 16:14 »

The newspaper is a "WHAT IF".  :bash:
No.. it was some pretty far-left propaganda is what it was.  You should've expected that not everyone would sigh wistfully with rainbows in their eyes after reading it ;)
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5