Axtech wrote:"People are stupid. They will believe anything they want to be true or fear to be true. Given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. People can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
Axtech wrote:"People are stupid. They will believe anything they want to be true or fear to be true. Given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. People can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
Which of course flows both ways
yes, and that's why it's paramount that one analyzes facts available and bases their beliefs on the facts, rather than believing a given story without any backup.
starvingeyes wrote:no. i reject the political process of democracy on the basis that it is irrational, illogical, unjust and unreasonable.
So, if I get this statement straight. You think a popular elect leadership is a load of hogswash, fair enough. Leading this further and on the basis of the words you used, I think it would be a fair conclusion that you would find any form of democratic government to be disingenuous. Is there a process you'd prefer instead?
Ummm... as in anarachy? Self rule doesn't work too well. In fact self rule cannot work while we still have individuality. Which is needed for self rule, which can't work with it. You haven't thought that one through too well.
**EDIT**
Unless you have a love to live in utter chaos without anyform of functionality. Then I agree that anarchy works but for arguments sake, for any form of normal life, anarchy an unfeasible, nonsensical and unworkable.
Last edited by Korzic on 5/31/2006, 9:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
cue the debate over anarchism... If this one gets good I might jump in lol
I can't wait until the day schools are over-funded and the military is forced to hold bake sales to buy planes.
"It's a great thing when you realize you still have the ability to surprise yourself. Makes you wonder what else you can do that you've forgotten about"
Korzic wrote:Ummm... as in anarachy? Self rule doesn't work too well. In fact self rule cannot work while we still have individuality. Which is needed for self rule, which can't work with it. You haven't thought that one through too well. **EDIT**
Unless you have a love to live in utter chaos without anyform of functionality. Then I agree that anarchy works but for arguments sake, for any form of normal life, anarchy an unfeasible, nonsensical and unworkable.
i haven't thought it through too well?
quite an assertion. are you sure?
what do you know about self government that leads you to make these claims?
Korzic wrote:Ummm... as in anarachy? Self rule doesn't work too well. In fact self rule cannot work while we still have individuality. Which is needed for self rule, which can't work with it. You haven't thought that one through too well. **EDIT**
Unless you have a love to live in utter chaos without anyform of functionality. Then I agree that anarchy works but for arguments sake, for any form of normal life, anarchy an unfeasible, nonsensical and unworkable.
i haven't thought it through too well?
quite an assertion. are you sure? what do you know about self government that leads you to make these claims?
edit for spelling
Before I go any further I'd like you to clarify just how far you take self governance. Are we talking on an individual level or as large as a self governing city?
**EDIT**
And for the sake of the debate, I want to at least make sure everyone is on the same page. My definition of self governance is the total abolition of law and order and leaving everyone to do as they please essentially. This imo is true self governance. OF course you can have forms of self governance within professions and corporations and the like ie Hyppocratic Oath. And organised crime is usually referred to as self governing because as a collective they have their own laws which they hold their members to which are not what society dictates. However, judging from your past comments (correct me if I'm wrong) you oppose any form of democratic process which is usually how the leaders of any self governing body are chosen (which means you aren't self governing). Which leads us back to square 1. BUt I'd like to hear your defintion first or rather at least your interpretation of it. This way we can all have fun and debate.
