Balance?

[SkyWriting]

just saying though, how would you make utopia when there is not much left to do anything great with- philosophies have been explored, people’s resources, all the build up we have just leads to war. Jesus was the only new thing, now just entropy. Jesus is the Life you seek.

I'm not at war.

 

[Ana the Ist]

But then there's the third type of adversity. The type that isn't common to everyone, and that we don't choose. Like being born with a deformity. Or having a family member die of cancer. Or being discriminated against. These things aren't fair, and they aren't chosen, and these are the things that are most likely to make us unhappy. But if you can learn that these things are just as much a part of life as the others are, then you'll realize that these things can be just as rewarding as the others are.

I remember being young and thinking there must exist this person faces the least adversity...whose greatest struggle was choosing which curtains to buy.

As years went by....this seemed silly. We all suffer hardships that are unique in ourselves. Though the women had been real, my imaginary struggles for her were not.

It's just that we see some things as being unfair and unjust, as being something that we don't deserve. And we allow these things to make us unhappy. We don't deserve to be cold. We don't deserve to be hungry. We don't deserve to be poor. But if you can learn to accept that life is full of things that we don't deserve, and the measure of a person isn't how they act when things are fair, but how they act when they're not, then you can begin to see the value in the hard times as well as the good times. And you become a person who's character and who's happiness isn't dependent upon their circumstances, but rather it's dependent upon their character.

There's dignity in the pursuit, you just have to find it.

- Tim Dillon

I’l explain my thought again.

So the ideal of our civilization is: all people ought to receive adequate resources and opportunities to lead a comfortable, healthy life of plenty.

Not really what the founding fathers conceived.

Unlimited procreation is good and encouraged (in most of the world that is). Life is sacred. We have to keep developing and increase our comfort and health endlessly. Humanity is superior to and above all life-forms.

Be fruitful and multiply.

(Maybe I don’t formulate it as accurately and as clearly as I should. I’m trying my best)

Historically, this seemed to be a very good ideal that any sane person supported as they saw how well it played out for them. Not so much anymore I think…

The problem is, with very limited resources and innate inequality of people, this model doesn’t really work. Moreover, at a certain point it becomes counter-productive. We begin to destroy and deplete the planet our home. In our zeal to achieve the>lip i<⁷8 Iowa ii<oi above we create a great disparity between countries, regions, population strata.

I'm on another thread atm explaining this to another poster....and our gains are another's loss. A "zero sum game". He doesn't accept this as true. I suppose that we could say that we prefer comfortable lies to uncomfortable truths.

Regardless, I've thought these things true since I was in my teens. There's no need to connect it to sanity. It might be that some of us are better than others at long term planning.

Is Endless Comfort and Consumption I and Endless Procreation to be replaced by Wise Balance? Maybe too late? Is Pendulum too high up and going to swing back fast and create a catastrophe? At least as a advice to future generations if we can record it for them to not follow our disastrous example.


Your opinion?

It's too late to avoid what's coming. I know what the end looks like. It's millions of people desperately searching for comfort anywhere then its a bloodbath Sadly, our government cannot nor will not avoid this. It's the result of flaws in the foundation laid long ago.

It's not as if nothing can be done though. Elect me dictator for life and I will only do what is necessary for our society to continue on as closely to how we are now. I will not burden you with plans, methods, or platforms...I understand these would give you guilt. Instead, you can blame me for doing what must be done.

 

[FireDragon76]

I completely agree. However, I suggest that things like sickness, violence, pain etc could be expunged from the world without losing all the good things you refer to.

Could it? I am skeptical. A world where nobody gets sick and there are no wars would easily become highly overpopulated. I believe there was even a Star Trek episode about that theme.

 

[FireDragon76]

See the signs of the times and the prophecies. Israel is a nation again, climate change, moving toward a world government and religion, earthquakes, war. When all these thing happen at the same time know that it is near.

An interpretation that misunderstands the Olivet Discourse. Jesus never predicted the end of the world in the Gospels.

 

[Unqualified]

An interpretation that misunderstands the Olivet Discourse. Jesus never predicted the end of the world in the Gospels.

matt 24

 

[FireDragon76]

matt 24

Yeah... it's not a prediction of the end of the world. Both the Rev. N.T. Wright and the Rev. Dr. Keith Ward discuss this in depth. It's referring to events that happened in the first century.

 

[Unqualified]

Yeah... it's not a prediction of the end of the world. Both the Rev. N.T. Wright and the Rev. Dr. Keith Ward discuss this in depth. It's referring to events that happened in the first century.

but the end is not yet’.? Then the end will come’.?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Could it? I am skeptical. A world where nobody gets sick and there are no wars would easily become highly overpopulated. I believe there was even a Star Trek episode about that theme.

I'm not sure this is likely. We see our wealthiest and healthiest nations have some of the lowest birth rates, a problem about which some talking heads wring their hands. Short lived animals reproduce a lot and quickly given high infant mortality. Having a lot of children improves the chances of passing on ones genes.

Asimov, in I, Robot, played with this idea a bit. Humans yet on Earth reproduced similarly as we do today (or more), but the hyper-wealthy, hyper-long lived that lived off-world tended to have perhaps 1 child every 150 years or so (IIRC).

I suppose it could go either way or a mix. It could be that it would become overpopulated, but that it will take millennia.

 

[o_mlly]

Having a lot of children improves the chances of passing on ones jeans.

That explains why I see so many of these:

 

[Tinker Grey]

That explains why I see so many of these:
View attachment 314874

Nuts. I'll fix it. Thanks.