do we deserve to perish in a nuclear holocaust?

Page 2 of 12 [ 190 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

chever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

29 Aug 2008, 9:44 pm

twoshots wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Maybe, but how are you deriving a collective dessert of "perish in a nuclear holocaust"? Individuals "deserve" things; they cannot inherit that kind of deserving from a category they are in because humanity can't be killed without killing the individuals who are real while humanity is not so much. Or are you simply implying that every individual deserves to be nuked?

Yes, actually I am implying that every individual deserves to be nuked.

Intriguing. Your derivation of this proposition is?

Our hilarious and consistent failures as a species to act civilized is a pretty good reason

_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

29 Aug 2008, 9:46 pm

chever wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Yes, actually I am implying that every individual deserves to be nuked.

Intriguing. Your derivation of this proposition is?

Our hilarious and consistent failures as a species to act civilized is a pretty good reason

the failures are simply a failure to only see the short term and not the long term and failure to see beyond one's self and failure to see how actions on others effect everything eventually.

that stupid butterfly effect thing except more reasonable and actually happening.

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

29 Aug 2008, 9:47 pm

chever wrote:

twoshots wrote:

I can't believe the "yes" is winning. :roll:

That alone makes me want to switch my vote. People piss me the f**k off.

Yeah me too

With any luck we'll all be stone cold dead in the next two centuries, so don't worry overmuch.

In fact, even though there's only so much I can do personally, I will do my best to succeed academically and land a career running experimental projects for the defense industry to help make sure it happens.

Now I see why you are deep into AI. A world without people but them would be interesting.

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 Aug 2008, 9:48 pm

chever wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Yes, actually I am implying that every individual deserves to be nuked.

Intriguing. Your derivation of this proposition is?

Our hilarious and consistent failures as a species to act civilized is a pretty good reason

You're appealing to a collective property, when I have (completely arbitrarily) restricted the argument to individuals.

_________________
* here for the nachos.

DNForrest
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,198
Location: Oregon

29 Aug 2008, 9:50 pm

I said other, since I support the carpet-bombing of China, India (highest populations), most of Europe and North America (richest countries with too much power and weakening governments), and the more violent parts of of Africa, the Middle East, and Central America (maybe Russia, too).

Reasoning? This will knock down the population to a manageable level where, if we keep it around there, it'll remove most pollution, energy needs, all world hunger, many land/power fueled wars, and help remove the risk of pandemic diseases. Though I suppose it isn't fair that I plan on moving to Australia or New Zealand within the next decade.

I also support global warming, but only if the effects of the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation are what they're predicted to be, since it'll effect everyone equally, both third world countries and the rich ones alike. You'd be surprised with the number of Engineering professors researching alternative energy that agree that this would be a good thing.

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

29 Aug 2008, 10:06 pm

claire333 wrote:

We may deserve to perish, but the planet does not deserve for us to perish in a nuclear holocaust.

Probably the planet deserves it too, for allowing the pest to be, and well, a mars-like planet wouldn't sound that bad. It would be a good time for changes, more peaceful, I suppose.

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

chever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

29 Aug 2008, 10:12 pm

skafather84 wrote:

the failures are simply a failure to only see the short term and not the long term and failure to see beyond one's self and failure to see how actions on others effect everything eventually.

And how do we intend to see past ourselves (consistently and reliably) when we are equipped with really really primitive, backwards instincts that prevent us from doing so?

The one redeeming trait of our species is that we can do ourselves one better than ourselves. I suggest we act on this advantage.

greenblue wrote:

Now I see why you are deep into AI. A world without people but them would be interesting.

Well, statistics at the moment. But that ties in, because of probabilistic reasoning. I have the Tanimoto AI text in my bag—it's really good—and intend to continue with it once I feel that I've made headway on statistics.

_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"

claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

29 Aug 2008, 10:22 pm

greenblue wrote:

claire333 wrote:

We may deserve to perish, but the planet does not deserve for us to perish in a nuclear holocaust.

Probably the planet deserves it too, for allowing the pest to be, and well, a mars-like planet wouldn't sound that bad. It would be a good time for changes, more peaceful, I suppose.

The fact we are the only species who are destructive to the planet makes me wonder if we are meant to be here at all. For some reason, I don't think we were the planet's bright idea, and the planet could very well be plotting to get us after all.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

29 Aug 2008, 10:35 pm

chever wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

the failures are simply a failure to only see the short term and not the long term and failure to see beyond one's self and failure to see how actions on others effect everything eventually.

And how do we intend to see past ourselves (consistently and reliably) when we are equipped with really really primitive, backwards instincts that prevent us from doing so?

greg ginn said it best: rise above.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Aug 2008, 10:39 pm

Even if there is a nuclear war, it's practically just the urban areas and military installations which are going to be affected. Fallout, sure. But it's not going to kill everybody.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

29 Aug 2008, 10:49 pm

twoshots wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Yes, actually I am implying that every individual deserves to be nuked.

Intriguing. Your derivation of this proposition is?

Human beings suck to the point of deserving to be nuked
All individuals are human beings
Therefore all individuals deserve to be nuked.

chever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

29 Aug 2008, 10:49 pm

skafather84 wrote:

chever wrote:

And how do we intend to see past ourselves (consistently and reliably) when we are equipped with really really primitive, backwards instincts that prevent us from doing so?

greg ginn said it best: rise above.

That's a silly platitude

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Even if there is a nuclear war, it's practically just the urban areas and military installations which are going to be affected. Fallout, sure. But it's not going to kill everybody.

Ok, just mop up afterwards and everything will be fine.

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Human beings suck to the point of deserving to be nuked
All individuals are human beings
Therefore all individuals deserve to be nuked.

Thanks Aristotle

_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"

chever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

29 Aug 2008, 10:59 pm

(x)(Hx → Nx)
(x)(Ix → Hx)
∴ (x)(Ix → Nx)
Hs → Ns (UI, 1)
Is → Hs (UI, 2)
Is → Ns (HS, 4,3)
(x)(Ix → Nx) (UG, 6)

His logic is flawless.

_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 Aug 2008, 11:03 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Yes, actually I am implying that every individual deserves to be nuked.

Intriguing. Your derivation of this proposition is?

Human beings suck to the point of deserving to be nuked
All individuals are human beings
Therefore all individuals deserve to be nuked.

Okey dokey. Now, given the above, and the fact that nuclear bombs are more or less contingent on someone actually using them, doesn't this imply that that there exists *someone* who has the right to nuke everyone? After all, it would merely be carrying out justice, and there must exist a logically possible way for justice to be carried out (unless the universe sucks too), so it must be just for someone to pull the trigger. Otherwise it would be like "He deserves to be executed, but no one has the right to execute him". What kind of world would that be?

Or can we just amend this to "everyone deserves to get blown the f**k up, by any means necessary".

_________________
* here for the nachos.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

29 Aug 2008, 11:10 pm

twoshots wrote:

The amendment would be the best phrasing.

chever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

29 Aug 2008, 11:10 pm

twoshots wrote:

Yes

Judge, jury, executioner

_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"

Page 2 of 12 [ 190 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12 Next

Jump to:

do we deserve to perish in a nuclear holocaust? Post Reply New Topic

do we deserve to perish in a nuclear holocaust?