so overpopulation will sort itself out.You have a warped argument
You say we need to get 'back to nature'; yet you also argue that humans are not 'beyond nature'.
I comprehend fully what you are trying to say, and i agree with certain things, such as overpopulation could be a really big problem, but the 'soultions' you are suggesting are callous and shortsighted, and based upon a false premise.
Almost all of society is based upon agriculture. Some of human kind could survive as hunter gatherers; but it is a stagnent form of living; i for one would like more knowlege, more comfort and more opportunity, and so does the vast majority, or the current set up of society would not exist. This inculdes you're ability to argue your points, a significant point that you have so far failed to answer.
(,
Sun 19 Jun 2005, 13:56,
archived)
You say we need to get 'back to nature'; yet you also argue that humans are not 'beyond nature'.
I comprehend fully what you are trying to say, and i agree with certain things, such as overpopulation could be a really big problem, but the 'soultions' you are suggesting are callous and shortsighted, and based upon a false premise.
Almost all of society is based upon agriculture. Some of human kind could survive as hunter gatherers; but it is a stagnent form of living; i for one would like more knowlege, more comfort and more opportunity, and so does the vast majority, or the current set up of society would not exist. This inculdes you're ability to argue your points, a significant point that you have so far failed to answer.
ok..trying to answer your question..
Agriculture is the backbone of our culture. and thats the problem.
..You are only looking at our own culture ( not just britain , but all totalitarian agriculurists) and not taking any notes from other non agricultural sources,,
ask any pshyclogist and they will tell you that there is better security, comfort, saftey and a better working society in small tribal groups of humans than we will ever appreciate or see.
You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces.
'Opportunity' is only from the perspective of OUR culture, non agri cultures dont see the need to make waves in the world. but you also seem to think that if we were to give up agriculture, artists would stop arting, scientists would stop sciencing etc etc.. that the world would stop... this is not the case... if these changes would happen, mankind would have so much more time free to spend on doing things that he realy wanted to do,.. comminities would form of differnt mindsets and would not be seperated by 'patents and money making'.
I dont think im being callous or shortsighted, drawing my conclusions from 'all of time', not just 10k years of agriculture
.. which is surely more shortsighted to 'ONLY' look at 10k years of agriculture ( and only at that one culture) than millions of years, ( or 200-300k of homosapiens lifestyle ( of all culltures) while all the time knowing about agriculture but choosing not to do it ))
Do you not think then, that forcing people to live the way 'you' want is callous and shortsighted? why do you not want mankind to have this option of life style?
(,
Sun 19 Jun 2005, 14:23,
archived)
Agriculture is the backbone of our culture. and thats the problem.
..You are only looking at our own culture ( not just britain , but all totalitarian agriculurists) and not taking any notes from other non agricultural sources,,
ask any pshyclogist and they will tell you that there is better security, comfort, saftey and a better working society in small tribal groups of humans than we will ever appreciate or see.
You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces.
'Opportunity' is only from the perspective of OUR culture, non agri cultures dont see the need to make waves in the world. but you also seem to think that if we were to give up agriculture, artists would stop arting, scientists would stop sciencing etc etc.. that the world would stop... this is not the case... if these changes would happen, mankind would have so much more time free to spend on doing things that he realy wanted to do,.. comminities would form of differnt mindsets and would not be seperated by 'patents and money making'.
I dont think im being callous or shortsighted, drawing my conclusions from 'all of time', not just 10k years of agriculture
.. which is surely more shortsighted to 'ONLY' look at 10k years of agriculture ( and only at that one culture) than millions of years, ( or 200-300k of homosapiens lifestyle ( of all culltures) while all the time knowing about agriculture but choosing not to do it ))
Do you not think then, that forcing people to live the way 'you' want is callous and shortsighted? why do you not want mankind to have this option of life style?
i dont have to force people to live the way i want, in fact its you suggesting it, which is one of the reasons i said shrotsighted and callous.The human race hasnt been here for the whole of time;
We only have historical knowlage dating back to agriculture.
The clue is in the word
agriCULTURE
It all stems from food. And yes, i think artist would stop etc etc, because without agriculture almost everyone has to spend most of there time finding food; and ther would be nowhere near enough.
As for "You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces" - i can. More poeple can achive more, its simple. Especially with science - were all standing on the shoulders of giants.
"sk any pshyclogist and they will tell you that there is better security, comfort, saftey and a better working society in small tribal groups of humans than we will ever appreciate or see. " - yes, its called a family.
(,
Sun 19 Jun 2005, 14:35,
archived)
We only have historical knowlage dating back to agriculture.
The clue is in the word
agriCULTURE
It all stems from food. And yes, i think artist would stop etc etc, because without agriculture almost everyone has to spend most of there time finding food; and ther would be nowhere near enough.
As for "You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces" - i can. More poeple can achive more, its simple. Especially with science - were all standing on the shoulders of giants.
"sk any pshyclogist and they will tell you that there is better security, comfort, saftey and a better working society in small tribal groups of humans than we will ever appreciate or see. " - yes, its called a family.
in answerThe human race hasnt been here for the whole of time;
wrong, mankind has been here since the dawn of time, but earlier on we were just slime,, the way of life evolved with us fromt that very start of slime life, and changed with us as we changed... wehn mankind started agriculture we forgot the way the way to live that evolved with us and tried something new
an experiment.... its named ' The Great Forgetting' of mankind.
We only have historical knowlage dating back to agriculture.
WRONG again... we have historical knowledge going back 200-300k years for homosapiens, we also have knowledge going back to the first life forms on the planet.
Our culture only tells us that history only started when we started agriculture,(10k years ago) ( the start of the bible ) when mankind tried something new.. This is looking at only a small chapter of the whole history of mankind, we lived for 300k years as what we are now species wise without the need for agriculture.. Remember the nazis tried to forget/change history by burning the books, and that is in effect what the bible has done for us,,, its only the start of the experiment to control the world, and doesnt look at the time before that.
its like looking at america and saying history only started when the indians were wiped out and the land turned to farmland.
agriCULTURE
WRONG again,.. Sorry but non agricultural cul;tures still have culture.. and their culture has ben around and been more fine tuned than ours by over 300 times longer.. in fact going all the way back to the dawn of time...
Animals ALSO have culture...
It all stems from food. And yes, i think artist would stop etc etc, because without agriculture almost everyone has to spend most of there time finding food; and ther would be nowhere near enough.
WRONG again, agriculture takes more effort and time than hunting and gathering, your point is only from the perspective of food already being held away from us... non-agricultutral cultures can spend 3 hours a week to get enough food for the whole week, the rest of the time they spend on friends , family and doing things they want to do.
As for "You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces" - i can. More poeple can achive more, its simple. Especially with science - were all standing on the shoulders of giants.
WRONG agin, go talk to a phsycologist, and ask does mankind 'work better' as small communites workling for each other, or does an unbalanced workforce work better?
( and i mean by 'work' how everything works together,,, your in more danger in london than in a tribe in the middle of nowhere in the jungle)
oh and your last comment just changed one of your points to suddenly agreeing with me,, you seem very confused in your points..
(,
Sun 19 Jun 2005, 15:02,
archived)
wrong, mankind has been here since the dawn of time, but earlier on we were just slime,, the way of life evolved with us fromt that very start of slime life, and changed with us as we changed... wehn mankind started agriculture we forgot the way the way to live that evolved with us and tried something new
an experiment.... its named ' The Great Forgetting' of mankind.
We only have historical knowlage dating back to agriculture.
WRONG again... we have historical knowledge going back 200-300k years for homosapiens, we also have knowledge going back to the first life forms on the planet.
Our culture only tells us that history only started when we started agriculture,(10k years ago) ( the start of the bible ) when mankind tried something new.. This is looking at only a small chapter of the whole history of mankind, we lived for 300k years as what we are now species wise without the need for agriculture.. Remember the nazis tried to forget/change history by burning the books, and that is in effect what the bible has done for us,,, its only the start of the experiment to control the world, and doesnt look at the time before that.
its like looking at america and saying history only started when the indians were wiped out and the land turned to farmland.
agriCULTURE
WRONG again,.. Sorry but non agricultural cul;tures still have culture.. and their culture has ben around and been more fine tuned than ours by over 300 times longer.. in fact going all the way back to the dawn of time...
Animals ALSO have culture...
It all stems from food. And yes, i think artist would stop etc etc, because without agriculture almost everyone has to spend most of there time finding food; and ther would be nowhere near enough.
WRONG again, agriculture takes more effort and time than hunting and gathering, your point is only from the perspective of food already being held away from us... non-agricultutral cultures can spend 3 hours a week to get enough food for the whole week, the rest of the time they spend on friends , family and doing things they want to do.
As for "You can not deny that mankind works better in small groups compared to large workforces" - i can. More poeple can achive more, its simple. Especially with science - were all standing on the shoulders of giants.
WRONG agin, go talk to a phsycologist, and ask does mankind 'work better' as small communites workling for each other, or does an unbalanced workforce work better?
( and i mean by 'work' how everything works together,,, your in more danger in london than in a tribe in the middle of nowhere in the jungle)
oh and your last comment just changed one of your points to suddenly agreeing with me,, you seem very confused in your points..