Posted by: TLC ®
05/12/2003, 12:52:00
Author Profile Mail author
|
James; I haven't yet seen the movie but it sounds like you recieved some valuable inspiration from it. You say you feel a kinship with the mutants. Good for you. Not wanting to be like everybody else is a positive attribute in many ways.To stand away from the maddening crowd and be independent is not an easy task in any society. Keep in mind, that any history book that you open and read, will not spend one sentence on those individuals that thought like everyone else, good or bad. If it were not for the fact that outstanding individuals in history strained to think and act outside the box of complacency, we would have no Albert Einsteins, Wright Brothers, Platos, Rene Descartes, or Frank loyde Wrights. To go along with the herd is easy and is the path that most follow. TLC
|
Posted by: Victoria! ®
05/12/2003, 18:51:32
Author Profile Mail author
|
Hello TLC, What you said here: Not wanting to be like everybody else is a positive attribute in many ways. Reminds me of a quote I read on a coaster yesterday. "Yes, you are a unique individual, just like everyone else." Victoria
;-)
|
Posted by: TLC ®
05/12/2003, 22:33:16
Author Profile Mail author
|
......there are no two living entities of any kind, that are exactly alike. From humans to micro organisms, each and every individual is unique in some way. For that matter, no two rocks, grains of sand or galaxies are identical either. I think you would have to go to the molecular or atomic structure of the basic elements to find two particles that are identical. Even here, I am not completely sure. Maybe there are no two quarks, Gluons or Super Strings that are identical either. Makes you feel rather special, doesn't it? Have a nice day, Terry
|
Posted by: james ®
05/12/2003, 23:26:47
Author Profile Mail author
|
Terry,
That is a good thing to keep in mind, especially in our day and age, uniqueness isn't appreciated very often. Especially with over 6 billion people, and our 'mass produced' culture.
|
Posted by: JAK ®
05/12/2003, 23:55:47
Author Profile Mail author
|
james,I don’t think “our” culture is mass produced, but humans certainly are multiplying at an alarming rate. Starvation, disease, and war do help to reduce numbers. However, a nuclear winter (caused by multiple nuclear bombs going off in the same year) would put a severe strain on the survival of the human species. Other things could terminate the human species as well. But, we ourselves may not be able to survive our own technology. If culture is to survive, if humans are to exist longer rather than shorter in the history of this little planet, we need fewer humans. 6 billion is overcrowding. JAK
Modified by JAK at Tue, May 13, 2003, 00:17:34
|
Posted by: Victoria! ®
05/13/2003, 00:06:52
Author Profile Mail author
|
Hello JAK, I just read your comments to Dan on the thread above. Here you have posted to TLC on james' post. Admit it, you're gaslighting me. ;-) Victoria
|
Posted by: JAK ®
05/13/2003, 00:21:09
Author Profile Mail author
|
james,My apologies for placing as greeting “TLC.” It was a response to you and should have had your name as the greeting. Sorry. JAK
|
Posted by: JAK ®
05/13/2003, 00:24:33
Author Profile Mail author
|
Victoria,My apologies for placing as greeting “TLC.” It was a response to james and should have had his name as the greeting. Sorry for the confusion. The comment was in the right place but with the error in name of address. JAK
|
Posted by: TLC ®
05/13/2003, 08:04:08
Author Profile Mail author
|
JAK; According to E.O. Wilson's "The Future of Life", 8.5 billion is the absolute number that the planet can support, even with advances in food production, given that the present standard of living that exists, remains unchanged. Of course it all goes out the window if 2nd and 3rd world countries obtain the standard that the western world enjoys. In this case, it would take four more planet earths to support everyone. Sad scenerio.Interesting fact: All of the world's present six billion would fit in the state of Texas. Now that would be crowded. TLC
|
Posted by: JAK ®
05/13/2003, 20:40:40
Author Profile Mail author
|
TLC, The most critical point in your post is this:
“Of course it all goes out the window if 2nd and 3rd world countries obtain the standard that the western world enjoys.” There is no question that the 3rd World countries would want what the Western world has -- if they knew, really knew just what it is that we have. At present, most in the 3rd World countries survive at the very margin of life itself. They are diseased, malnourished, and starved. National Geographic and PBS have both done specials on just what life is like in 3rd World countries. With communication improving all the time, one threat to the Western way of life is information in the minds of those 2nd and 3rd World countries. It is NOT in our interest for them to discover, really discover what we have. On our home front, it is not in the interest of the very wealthy in America for the masses to discover just what perks and advantages they really have. Protected, gated homes and communities are designed to keep the masses OUT and to keep them uninformed about just how great wealth is really acquired and maintained. That last paragraph is another issue, of course, but the factor of who has what information is quite connected. JAK
Modified by JAK at Tue, May 13, 2003, 20:42:25
|
Posted by: Darr ®
05/13/2003, 15:06:57
Author Profile Mail author
|
JAK wrote, "If culture is to survive, if humans are to exist longer rather than shorter in the history of this little planet, we need fewer humans. 6 billion is overcrowding."I disagree. It is not so much that there are 6 billon people, as it is that most choose to live together in the same overcrowded places. Isaac Asimov addressed the issue some years back, and though the population was somewhat less then, his computations showed that there would be more than one square mile of land per person on the earth's deserts alone, were they to be made arable.
|
Posted by: JAK ®
05/13/2003, 21:35:47
Author Profile Mail author
|
Darr Stated:
“I disagree. It is not so much that there are 6 billon people, as it is that most choose to live together in the same overcrowded places. Isaac Asimov addressed the issue some years back, and though the population was somewhat less then, his computations showed that there would be more than one square mile of land per person on the earth's deserts alone, were they to be made arable.”
I am a great admirer of Asimov. It is incorrect analysis, however, that “most choose to live together in the same overcrowded places.” People live in the worst of circumstances because they have no means of escape. Overcrowded slums even in the U.S. are not places people select. They are places from which most who live there are unable to escape. They lack the education, mobility, and the skills which would permit their transfer to better places with better food with better surroundings with more space per person. Overcrowded places in 3rd World countries are not places which “most choose to live.” The fact is that to make the deserts “arable” would cost enormous sums of money. Who would provide that money? How would we transport human beings to these newly made places? The logistics of that are beyond comprehension. With the billions (perhaps trillions) yet to be spent just to protect this nation from terrorist, such a proposal of massive and mass relocation are not realistic. Numbers (6 billion) threaten human civilization in many ways. The issue of food available to all -- transported to all is only one. Additionally, there is the matter of health, health care, meaningful employment, the appropriate skills for meaningful employment -- employment which makes genuine contribution to the whole of the 6 billion people -- a contribution which exceeds the consumption requirements of those 6 billion people. Exceeding requirements is needed to ameliorate the human condition. As more nations seek to acquire nuclear weapons, the human species are threatened. And nations which do not now have nuclear weapons want them The United States and other nuclear countries will spend and are spending enormous resources to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. No one other than science fiction writers is attempting to calculate how we can relocate 6 billion people in order that each might have that “one square mile of land.” And no one is thinking about how to make the deserts popular places to live which hundreds of millions of people will choose as their place to live. I stated:
"If culture is to survive, if humans are to exist longer rather than shorter in the history of this little planet, we need fewer humans. 6 billion is overcrowding." There is every evidence to support the conclusion that more and more people threaten the survival of the human species. Part of the threat comes from the have nots discovering what the western civilization enjoys. Terrorists threaten. Terrorists with nuclear weapons would threaten even more. Nearly everyone who sees close-up high quality of life with all which that requires (electricity, mobility, quality of living, quality of information, quality of environment, etc.) wants that quality for himself and his family. Larger numbers of people threaten the quality of life. That is the case even for those who presently live most comfortably. Reduced travel and the virtual collapse of the airline industry is evidence that quality of life has been threatened. Not only is the quantity of humans relevant, what those humans know is relevant. What they can do is relevant. The capacity to destroy is relevant. People threaten people. Population beyond a certain point threatens the species. Relocating people to deserts artificially or attempting to transport (export) food, medicine, hospitals to prevent the toll which disease/starvation would take is not a workable plan...nor is anyone genuinely interested in doing that who has the power to attempt it. We want “tax cuts.” “It’s YOUR money.” “You should have what is rightfully yours.” --George Bush Is there any politician in this great American democracy who is seriously proposing plans to raise the quality of life for all 6 billion people now on the earth? There will be more terrorism. There may be a nuclear exchange somewhere at some time even within the next mere 100 years. The limitation of population will not be to the mathematical map of the “one square mile of land per person” as you hypothesized. And the earth is likely to get surprises which will threaten even beyond what we can imagine. JAK
Modified by JAK at Tue, May 13, 2003, 21:41:50
|
Posted by: Victoria! ®
05/13/2003, 16:38:34
Author Profile Mail author
|
might be special ;-), I am DEFINITELY special!Victoria
Modified by Victoria! at Tue, May 13, 2003, 16:40:02
|
Posted by: james ®
05/12/2003, 20:59:00
Author Profile Mail author
|
TLC,
yes, I would agree that inspiration can be found in the places where 'average' people fail to look. Sometimes the challenge of people with such Genius is a lifetime journey of trying to become a normal person. These people often have a difficult time being accepted, making friends, understanding and getting along with others. Sometimes if they aren't careful, they will see people would aren't as talented, but more socially skilled move ahead of them.Or, the genius might be 'wasted' upon studying the seemingly worthless. Like sleeping on a top bunk with their large toe exposed, hoping that a vampire bat will suck on it. (Actually, this was filmed as part of a study, so it wasn't wasted. But, most people would rather not be the source of food for the bat.) There is also a multimillionaire who goes to the worlds most exclusive and expensive hotels...only to sleep outside in their gardens! He says he likes the fresh air, and the openess. He also says that the gardens are the most beautiful. Another such genius is a great pianist who liked to hum while playing. Amazingly enough, this additional sound proved NOT to be a distraction for the recordings. Even to this day you can purchase a sound recording of this musical genius...with humming included with no extra charge! Imagine wearing a down coat, gloves and a wool hat at all times? Even in the worst heat, or indoors? How about encouraging bats to roost in your house to keep pests out? Genius, heretic, weird? or just someone with fresh ideas? Maybe a little bit of them all exist at the same time. Depends on your point of view.
Modified by james at Mon, May 12, 2003, 21:02:27
|
Posted by: TLC ®
05/12/2003, 23:47:01
Author Profile Mail author
|
James; The important thing in life is to strive to live it your way. In a modern fast paced society, such as we have today, this can be a real challenge. I have read where it is estimated, that 60 to 70% of the populace hate their jobs and look at them as a necessary evil in which they feel trapped. The daily grind. You know, off to work each morning and home again at night to eat and watch TV and then the next day is exactly the same, week in and week out. And all this to meet the monthly bills from buying all the goods that are supposed to make us happy. We own all this stuff, but we are always at work. This industrial society that lives by the clock (invented by medieval monks to tell them it was time for prayer, lest they forget) ticking away, telling them when to do almost everything in their lives, has turned a great deal of people into machine like automotons. Very few individuals can muster the courage or energy to escape this pattern of modern life. A good thing in a way, as our system is based on this pattern and would fail without it. Individualism is harder to obtain in this kind of enviroment, than it was in the past years, before the industrial revolution. Did you know that the concept of the work week and weekends has only been in existence for less than 150 years?
Before this age, we were, for the most part, an agricultural society that performed worked when work needed to be done, and not as a general lifestyle as we have today. The citizens of ancient Rome only worked half as much as we do today and enjoyed a a lot more free time. The Coloseum and other structures were actually built to give the Romans something to fill their free time with. Very few ate at home much and eating out was very popular. You made a comment about people who are not talented, but are socially skilled, moving ahead. This sounds like you might be vocationally experiencing this on a personal basis. Am I correct in my assumption?
Social skills are vital in our society, but I am not sure how much of it is natural "talent" as opposed to a learned attribute. The ultimate lifes experience for a human being, to me, is not to have to do the same thing day after day, but that everyday should be a new adventure. Not many have achieved this. TLC
|
Posted by: james ®
05/13/2003, 00:23:39
Author Profile Mail author
|
Tlc
I never thought of the origins of the clock. Some people do well with the workweek and get a high off the structure, schedules and working a lot. At least its a distraction from other things.My mother is Inuit, so we were not farmers. So, todays schedule is perhaps even more difficult for Inuit people to adjust do than that of farmers. But I seem to have adjusted. People are very adaptible. Some personalities are just better at fitting into the bosses expectations, and societal norms. From my point of view I often see things which don't make sense, why people expect things to be a certain way. I am also not highly social or outgoing. I prefer to keep to myself. I have been overlooked for positions because the boss thought that someone more outgoing was more confident. I have always found that pretty strange, that some people equate being loud or talkative as being more able. In my experience, its best to match jobs and people accordingly. An outgoing person would be good where someone is greeting a lot of people all throughout the day. Such a person would NOT be good where they have to enter data out of sight from other people. I think I would do great where I just worked with machines, or performed medical procedures...but kept personal interactions minimal and to the matters at hand. I am very much of the 'INTJ' personality. I often notice things which are odd, off or wrong with other people. I also dislike people who are excessively controling and arrogant. So, chances are that I will probably not find favor with many people in a position of authority. Also people who are excessively serious I find difficult to work with. My current job is fixing vacuums. Over 50% of job is also sales. But suprisingly I am finding that I CAN sell pretty effectively, or at least I am learning how to do it. Sometimes there are difficult customers who are hard to deal with...
Modified by james at Tue, May 13, 2003, 00:31:30
|
Posted by: james ®
05/19/2003, 18:40:06
Author Profile Mail author
|
I just finished watching matrix reloaded...I really would have liked to have seen the x-men a second time.I felt pretty disappointed by the film.
|
|
|
