| Author |
Message |
Cameron
Title: :O � O:
Joined: Feb 01 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 4637
|
| Ash Burton wrote: |
| And why are kids all droopy and goth looking for no apparent reason? |
 Sort of.
|
|
|
  |
|
Eddie_Hyde
Title: Ernie with the Disposal
Joined: Apr 13 2009
Location: Gulag
Posts: 707
|
/rant
Kids today are a bunch of droopy-looking goth 'tards because all the other kids see that as being cool. This is because kids today are a bunch of hiveminded drones who have no idea what stupid fat fucks they are, and rely on middle-aged marketing executives and dipshits to tell them what is "in style" and "awesome." Instead, somebody who actually acts like a 15-year old should act is routienly mocked and shunned by most kids, because they don't wear black, self-castrating pants with chains on them and actually have a personality. Ooh, imagine that!
|
 ... |
|
  |
|
Dr. Jeebus
Moderator
Title: SLF Harbinger of Death
Joined: Sep 03 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
Posts: 5228
|
|
     |
|
Doddsino
Joined: Oct 01 2009
Posts: 5316
|
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Community service? How about "get a fucking job"? Honestly, I don't think 99+% of people who get expelled have no business graduating anyway. Their diploma will simply be a means of pushing them through the system and making them someone else's problem. Of course, we're becoming a welfare state so anyone who's expelled will just think they can live off the government for free rather than thinking "Wow, I fucked up my chance at bettering myself. Guess it's off to the coal mines!" |
As far as punishment, community service would be a good route. They shouldn't get a job, in fact there should be a system set up that allows for students who do go to school and work, to have their hours cut depending on how they perform in school. I know that's a little crazy, but I know of some people who treated school like an after thought because they had a decent job at the time. And welfare is a fucking joke, one of the reasons I hate paying taxes so much.
|
|
|
  |
|
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
|
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| You ended your rant before it even began! |
Those are the best rants.
|
|
|
  |
|
Deadmau_5pra
Title: Amatuer film/podcaster
Joined: Feb 10 2009
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 1126
|
Great now were in lockdown, and I can hear the dogs barking (so somebody's going to jail/audie home) and it's in the freshmen hallway.
Now chances are it's for nothing more than weed. Stupid ass kids, man, why the hell would you keep that stuff in your locker? Let alone try and sell/smoke it in school.
|
|
|
  |
|
Ash Burton
Title: AshRaiser
Joined: Nov 10 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1044
|
| RogueShenanigans wrote: |
| @jackfrost - My argument in that post was that religion builds from morality rather than vise versa. (My overall point being that values and morality can exist very easily without religion) People imprint thier own values onto a diety and in turn these values must be correct because they are what thier God would have wanted. Westbro Baptist's do not hate gays because they are Christians, these kids do not need Christianity to make them decent. |
Read this:
Very interesting look at were exactly morality comes from penned by one of the greatest minds of all time.
|

| joshwoodzy wrote: |
Ash is probably just home humping his SNES collection.
|
|
|
   |
|
Ash Burton
Title: AshRaiser
Joined: Nov 10 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1044
|
|

| joshwoodzy wrote: |
Ash is probably just home humping his SNES collection.
|
|
|
   |
|
ODS
Title: Pretty Sweet Guy
Joined: Oct 21 2009
Posts: 139
|
I don't attach myself to any religion and I have morals. History shows that any religious ruling power, if given the chance, would prosecute others. I don't see where violence comes from faith.
|
|
|
  |
|
Tyop
Title: Grammar Nazi
Joined: May 04 2008
Location: Sauerkrautland
Posts: 1414
|
| UsaSatsui wrote: |
I think what Syd means "natural selection", not "evolution". Civilization and society run counter to the idea of natural selection, the idea that only the toughest and most fit will survive to reproduce, and that the beneficial genetic mutations they carry will be passed on to future generations.
Society protects both the strong and the weak. This means the weak get a chance to contribute to the gene pool, and negative mutations will be passed on. The species will evolve, but in a different way.
Behavior that promotes the welfare of a group is not counter to natural selection, since a group may very well be the best way to survive and thrive. Society, however, goes to extreme lengths to protect the rights of those that would be lion chow in the wild. It runs counter to natural selection. |
You keep using that word "natural selection". I don't think it means what you think it means.
Yours is precisely the kind of simplistic misconception about evolution by natural selection that I warned about earlier. Nature does not select the toughest individuals. Nature selects individuals and populations that are most adapted to the survival demands of their environment. For a population "being most adapted" can in many cases mean protecting other, even weaker members of the population and in turn letting them pass on their genes instead of others.
To illustrate this I gave numerous examples of animals protecting weaker members of their 'society', sometimes even at the risk of sacrificing themselves. I explained that the form of natural selection that produces this behavior is called kin selection and how it works. How you can still claim that the human behavior of protecting weaker members of society runs counter to natural selection when this does in fact occur naturally and we know the mechanism by which it occurs is beyond me.
|
|
|
  |
|
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
|
| Quote: |
| How you can still claim that the human behavior of protecting weaker members of society runs counter to natural selection when this does in fact occur naturally and we know the mechanism by which it occurs is beyond me. |
Because I never claimed natural selection was the only force at play in evolution. Clearly it's not.
It's base instinct for the more intelligent animals to protect their own. That way, more of them survive, and that's really the only goal any sort of animal has: To make more of itself...and losing it's own members doesn't help that. Taking care of weaker members of the species -does- run counter to the idea that only the strongest members should breed and thrive. But it doesn't mean it's always the right thing to do for the species.
BTW, I'm using "toughest" or "strongest" as shorthand for "most adapted to the survival demands of their environment". I know it's not necessarily the ones who can win in a brawl that are best suited for the environment.
|
|
|
  |
|
RogueShenanigans
Joined: Sep 13 2009
Posts: 19
|
| UsaSatsui wrote: |
| Quote: |
| How you can still claim that the human behavior of protecting weaker members of society runs counter to natural selection when this does in fact occur naturally and we know the mechanism by which it occurs is beyond me. |
Because I never claimed natural selection was the only force at play in evolution. Clearly it's not.
It's base instinct for the more intelligent animals to protect their own. That way, more of them survive, and that's really the only goal any sort of animal has: To make more of itself...and losing it's own members doesn't help that. Taking care of weaker members of the species -does- run counter to the idea that only the strongest members should breed and thrive. But it doesn't mean it's always the right thing to do for the species.
BTW, I'm using "toughest" or "strongest" as shorthand for "most adapted to the survival demands of their environment". I know it's not necessarily the ones who can win in a brawl that are best suited for the environment. |
Dogs and some other animals will adopt orphans of other species.
|
|
|
  |
|
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
Posts: 2739
|
| Ash Burton wrote: |
| RogueShenanigans wrote: |
| @jackfrost - My argument in that post was that religion builds from morality rather than vise versa. (My overall point being that values and morality can exist very easily without religion) People imprint thier own values onto a diety and in turn these values must be correct because they are what thier God would have wanted. Westbro Baptist's do not hate gays because they are Christians, these kids do not need Christianity to make them decent. |
Read this:
Very interesting look at were exactly morality comes from penned by one of the greatest minds of all time. |
I've not read that book, so I can't make particular arguments against it.
As a pre-emptive argument based on the cover, I would like to note that morality also developed in other parts of the world without the presence of christianity and occasionally without the assumption of a deity proper, and that western morality developed as a work in progress, often in response to charitable humanistic demands and in certain cases even opposed to the key text.
And CS Lewis could hardly be called the greatest minds of anything. A intelligent and charming man who wrote a pretty good children's book series, but lets not elevate him too high.
|
|
|
  |
|
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
Posts: 2739
|
Darwin's Ghost the rabbit and Syd and a few others are playing "Amateur Eugenicist" and its making me angry.
EVOLUTION DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT
The reason we don't practice people breeding is two-fold. The first is people are notoriously ill-equipped to decide whats a good goal and whats not due to self-preference and a lack of effective information.
Okay Syd this'll get you on my side in a hurry- imagine if you will that standard breeding produces people like a more or less free market. Imagine eugenics as a big government program trying to decide what makes a good person or not. When Russia set quotas for shoes, they picked what they thought would be a good benchmark quality and what wouldn't. They picked leather used, and ended up with the thickest soles in the world. Then they picked number of shoes, and ended up with a surplus of childrens and other small sizes. In all instances quality dipped a huge amount at the end of the month when the quotas were due. Imagine people produced like that. Hell, even imagine people produced like dogs, with their myriad of genetic deficiencies and health issues and general overspeciation.
The second is we have a innate sense of morality, that under good psychological health and free from malignant influences is repulsed by certain things like ingroup killing, incest, harming children, stealing, lying, and cheating on a partner. I'm pretty sure and its been demonstrated to an extent that morality comes from evolutionary lines (there are even more examples than tyop or rogue mentioned, like the forceful benevolence of certain species of birds). Its pretty universal though, so if your inclined you could attribute it to a soul of sorts. Religion itself doesn't seem like the cause, other than a mutual desire to develop a moral structure and explain the mysteries of the universe.
Crap, outta time, be back to finish up on this.
|
|
|
  |
|
Ash Burton
Title: AshRaiser
Joined: Nov 10 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1044
|
| RobotGumshoe wrote: |
| Ash Burton wrote: |
| RogueShenanigans wrote: |
| @jackfrost - My argument in that post was that religion builds from morality rather than vise versa. (My overall point being that values and morality can exist very easily without religion) People imprint thier own values onto a diety and in turn these values must be correct because they are what thier God would have wanted. Westbro Baptist's do not hate gays because they are Christians, these kids do not need Christianity to make them decent. |
Read this:
Very interesting look at were exactly morality comes from penned by one of the greatest minds of all time. |
I've not read that book, so I can't make particular arguments against it.
As a pre-emptive argument based on the cover, I would like to note that morality also developed in other parts of the world without the presence of christianity and occasionally without the assumption of a deity proper, and that western morality developed as a work in progress, often in response to charitable humanistic demands and in certain cases even opposed to the key text.
And CS Lewis could hardly be called the greatest minds of anything. A intelligent and charming man who wrote a pretty good children's book series, but lets not elevate him too high. |
Ok, you need to do some serious research before I continue on with this. Lewis taught at Oxford University and won the triple first while studying there. Don't let the title fool you, the book is a very interesting read even for an atheist. It is not a pound you into the ground Bible-fest. Anyways, I'm done with this thread, lock it and lets talk about some fucking Skid Row albums and Mario.
|

| joshwoodzy wrote: |
Ash is probably just home humping his SNES collection.
|
|
|
   |
|
Optimist With Doubts
Title: Titlating
Joined: Dec 17 2007
Posts: 5042
|
|
    |
|
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
|
| Quote: |
| Darwin's Ghost the rabbit and Syd and a few others are playing "Amateur Eugenicist" and its making me angry. |
Okay, I'm tired of people not thinking I mean exactly what I say, and assuming that when I say "society runs counter to natural selection by protecting those who would otherwise not survive to reproduce and pass on genes", they really think I'm the second coming of Bunny Hitler.
Or maybe I'm just tired. Whatever.
No, I am not advocating eugenics (in fact, scroll back about 3 pages to see me condemning the practice). No, I do not thing natural selection should apply to humans (I know full well I'm not one of the "fittest" there). And no, I do not believe natural selection is, or should be, the sole reason or driving force behind human, or any species, evolution.
I am simply stating that natural selection, the idea of "survival of the fittest", is subverted by society. Society protects the whole, which protects the weaker links, and natural selection states the weaker links should not survive.
And no, I do not give a flying fuck about how dogs adopt baby kittens or how other animals show societal or compassionate behavior, it doesn't matter. Animals don't read Darwin. They shouldn't be expected to always act to their evolutionary advantage. Not everything is genetic.
|
|
|
  |
|
Captain_Pollution
Title: Hugh
Joined: Sep 23 2007
Posts: 1591
|
| Eddie_Hyde wrote: |
/rant
Kids today are a bunch of droopy-looking goth 'tards because all the other kids see that as being cool. This is because kids today are a bunch of hiveminded drones who have no idea what stupid fat fucks they are, and rely on middle-aged marketing executives and dipshits to tell them what is "in style" and "awesome." Instead, somebody who actually acts like a 15-year old should act is routienly mocked and shunned by most kids, because they don't wear black, self-castrating pants with chains on them and actually have a personality. Ooh, imagine that! |
No, that's not kids today, that's kids. Look how wonderfully the Beatles did; they were by no means an exceptional hit machine at the start of their career, their popularity was entirely packaged and marketed. They were definitely doing alright in England, but Beatlemania was staged there, too. Epstein and a few others exagerated it for marketing purpuses. Then they went to America and Epstein paid a bunch of girls to spaz out over them and everything. That is why the Beatles got near as big as they did before they were even kind of making exceptional music. It's not as clearly illustrated anywhere I don't think, and I don't know near as much about it, but I'm pretty sure the whole jazz thing in the twenties rose up the same way. If you go back into the eighteen hundreds and further, mob mentality, especially in children, has always been prevelant. It's just a part of human nature.
|
 <Drew_Linky> Well, I've eaten vegetables all of once in my life.
|
|
  |
|
Dr. Jeebus
Moderator
Title: SLF Harbinger of Death
Joined: Sep 03 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
Posts: 5228
|
| Doddsino wrote: |
| Dr. Jeebus wrote: |
| Community service? How about "get a fucking job"? Honestly, I don't think 99+% of people who get expelled have no business graduating anyway. Their diploma will simply be a means of pushing them through the system and making them someone else's problem. Of course, we're becoming a welfare state so anyone who's expelled will just think they can live off the government for free rather than thinking "Wow, I fucked up my chance at bettering myself. Guess it's off to the coal mines!" |
As far as punishment, community service would be a good route. They shouldn't get a job, in fact there should be a system set up that allows for students who do go to school and work, to have their hours cut depending on how they perform in school. I know that's a little crazy, but I know of some people who treated school like an after thought because they had a decent job at the time. And welfare is a fucking joke, one of the reasons I hate paying taxes so much. |
Wait...kids who get expelled shouldn't get a job? You'd rather them just do community service while they go on welfare? It's REALLY hard to get expelled in this day and age. If you get expelled, you fucking deserve it so fuck it up and go cook my McDonalds.
|
dr.jeebus.sydlexia.com - Updated sometimes, but on hiatus!
| UsaSatsui wrote: |
| The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus |
|
|
     |
|
Blackout
Title: Captain Oblivious
Joined: Sep 01 2007
Location: That Rainy State
Posts: 10376
|
That's a bit harsh, there are plenty of people who were fuck ups early in life and made something out of themselves.
|
|
|
     |
|
Rydog
Title: Dragon Slayer
Joined: Aug 11 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1511
|
^This is true, if you do get expelled, you have plenty of time to work your way up the McDonalds Employment Ladder...who knows, one day you could be ASSISTANT MANAGER!!!
|
|
|
   |
|
Blackout
Title: Captain Oblivious
Joined: Sep 01 2007
Location: That Rainy State
Posts: 10376
|
I got a buddy that dropped out and makes slightly more money than me, as a fucking janitor no less. Although this has a lot more to do with the cubicle I've shackled myself to than his job hunting skills.
|
|
|
     |
|
Deadmau_5pra
Title: Amatuer film/podcaster
Joined: Feb 10 2009
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 1126
|
So, if you get expelled , your automatically a welfare case?
|
|
|
  |
|
Rydog
Title: Dragon Slayer
Joined: Aug 11 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1511
|
No, but generally speaking, if you don't graduate high school your chances of getting a well paying job drop considerably. And by dropping out you are displaying your motivation to work is low. It's not a guarantee, it just improves the chances.
|
|
|
   |
|
Deadmau_5pra
Title: Amatuer film/podcaster
Joined: Feb 10 2009
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 1126
|
^ I know.
Well I'll just say this, everyones generation is gonna mock the immediate one, why I don't know , maybe it makes them feel better or maybe its a self-esteem thing ( Not you Ash). But as I stated before, instead of talking down on the youngsters, why not think about the time when you were their age and the adults talked the same way about your generation.
Also if your generation was not working in the fields, the mines, steel mills, or having to go through segregation, sexism or harsh living conditions your generation is no more "better" than any other.
Jus Sayin'.
|
|
|
  |
|
|
|