How deep do you blades really think?

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Insurgency, Sep 1, 2010.

  1. Couldn't we say that rationality is knowledge, and knowledge is reason?
  2. i think it all depends on the nature of the people involved in said project. Different regions of the world would provide possible culture gaps that would be really hard to overcome, but if the nature of the people on the island was more intellectual than barbaric, if you will, then the people would possibly strive to overcome these barriers and work together to live efficiently

    At first, the aliens would probably see confusion and chaos, but, after a period of time they would probably see a sort of society to develop, either barbaric or peaceful, odds are in a group of 30 there are going to be at least a couple "bad seeds"

    Personally, if I was in said scenario, i wouldn't worry about material rewards or "payment" as it's put. Living comfortably would be payment enough. That said, I would strive for an efficient island society. It'd be badass.
  3. So why can't we do this in society now? Rewards and payments seem to thrive in our world today :cool:
  4. To the point where there isn't a point. :p
  5. We totally could.

    It's the system, man ;p

  6. No, we totally can't
  7. Reasoning is just as twisted as the person who is doing the reasoning.

  8. Yeah, this is exactly what I meant by them sympathizing with our plight. :smoke:

  9. LOL is this what you're getting at?

    humans would act in their own self interest. i wouldn't stick around and depend on a the next guy for 'shoes', 'shelter', or 'food'. it all depends where you're located, what natural resources are provided for you, and who you're surrounded with. 30 males, i'd fend for myself, by myself. 29 males 1 females, we'll stay and compete for a little while.

    there is no definite answer, what time frame, what parts of the world? people would assimilate with those they could communicate with. i doubt all 30 subjects would stay and participate in a single society. who would even want that? one single society, with one culture, a single ruler, complete submission. that's when i doubt humanity, when they all assimilate into a single construct of social norms. that is far from anything i'd like to be apart of.
  10. Justice would be meaningless without freedom. If peoples rationality leads them to believe that dominance should be exerted, then tyranny would be born. Justice would be perverted by the most dominate, because then it becomes their justice, not justice in freedom. Equal justice can only exist through freedom.

    If i was on the island with 29 other people, i would make a weapon, do a little bit of training with it and imagine how i would use it. And i would live away from the other people independently, unless some of the people needed my help or were banding together, then i would do my part, and if anything occurs in my mind, ill give them my two cents. I wouldn't make myself leader unless people appoint me. And if anyone assumes leadership and is horrible at it, i would branch off and live by myself, and see if anyone wants to live with me.
  11. listen. eli knows the truth.
    [ame=]YouTube - Eli Porter - Dirty Mix[/ame]
  12. #32 Sovereign Psyche, Sep 3, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 3, 2010
    Humans naturally strive for social interaction, but also for autonomy. You may be fair at fending for yourself, but eventually you will probably need help, or entertainment too.

    You bring up a valid point. One society does somewhat imply that the society is never changing. Who says this society is perfect? With only one, how will a better society come into play?
    Competition is natural, but does that mean there isn't another step to evolution?

    With only 1 female, the society would probably perish, but that would also be an unlikely sample of the human species.

    Here's a thought for y'all... some of the people will have to naturally work harder than others due to their specific job. This doesn't necessarily imply that the jobs aren't of equal nature, just that some will be required much more often or in more tribulation than others.

    I think as society continues evolving and learning, this huge database of free information(the internet) ought to speed things up a bit, people will start realizing that it is pertinent to their own survival to not kill anybody. With this, things like classes, racism, and other things that used to be essential to survival, will diminish with it.

    I'm reading 'Island' right now, but I'm only 4 chapters in. Already a really good read.
  13. Humans are tribal by nature, hence, we have the "my god can beat your god" mentality in regard to religions, which are all tribal. If you are stating that "we are much more advanced" today in relation to knowledge alone, then I would agree. In modern society with everything working in relative harmony day to day, it's comparatively easy for people with the ability to reason to suppress their primitive instincts.

    As soon as some cataclysmic event were to happen such as a large meteor strike, nuclear Holocaust, pandemics, breakdowns of the 'breadbaskets' of the world (food production) etc., etc., we would revert to our primitive instincts rather quickly, and anarchy would prevail sooner than later imo. People already have an ~us against them~ mindset as I type this. Liberals and conservitives come to mind, as does the Mosque at ground zero, culture wars, etc.

    As for the aliens from another world, if they're smart enough to get here in the first place, they're smart enough to observe us in our natural environment.

  14. No way. Reason is related to, but not dependent on particular knowledge.

    You squish a bug. You did it because of a combination of beliefs, 1) that bugs are gross 2) that they should die. So it is reasoned.

    I squish a bug, I do it because 1) bugs are sacred 2) squishing them brings their soul home to the mother bug ship. So it is reasoned.

    Both instances are reasoned, but neither is really rational.

    Rationality is a result of a serious epistemological inventory of the mind. Since the content, (things out there in the world) is infinite and ever fluctuating, we can only define rationality as the result of a uniform process by which information is converted to knowledge. (props to Kant w/ the whole "knowledge is a process thing)

    Interestingly, the current school of thought in philosophy is that rationality is something which most people do not possess. Game theorists can quantify pretty much any situation involving any interaction and determine mathematically how to reach equilibriums or the best strategy for winning, (or yielding the greatest increase in expected utility).

    Funniest part of it all is that all they seem to discover w/ the experiments and the research they do is that hardly anyone acts according to the definition of rationality that works w/ what they're doing.

    Google the term, "hyperbolic discounting". Fun stuff. Tells you alot about human rationality.

    Then google "doxastic logic". Even better, gives you a solid breakdown of how people reason from within the framework of perspectivism. (fuck Nietzsche I hate that guy).
  15. Why?

    What do you refer to as reward?

  16. anything thats given in return for your service

    as for a couple of responses above, i am not responding to some because you are not thinking properly for this thread. don't take it personal, i just feel like youre replies are dumb

    mrgoodsmoke and bumtil death thank you, I will also research your suggested topics
  17. so we need tangible objects now in exchange for services?

    everyone workin g together on an island to live decently isn't eneough?

    what, do we have a "banker" stockpile coconuts and set up a monetary system? lol

  18. The island was a scenario to think about, because obviously human beings went through a period of growing from small tribes to large groups.

    Obviously we need tangible objects, do you like in the 21st century? If you have dumb responses, please refrain from posting. I am not saying I know everything or claim to, but you're inputs on this subject are elementary.
  19. #39 DarthBizzle, Sep 3, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 3, 2010
    indeed, not that interesting a matter anyway :bongin:

  20. yeah, the thought process for the foundations of civilization aren't interesting.

    uh oh, i keep feeding the troll

Share This Page