I’m thinking I should found my republic on the island of Formosa. There’s an awful lot of architecture that could use demolishing.
Mostly a mix of the questionable and the lame. I do like #14, though. Go, occupied Palestine!
oh come on. It’s got pandas in it, FFS. Everyone likes pandas.
Also, increasing numbers of pandas proves that evolution is wrong.
Pandas are obsolete. Technology marches on.
1 Like
[quote=“rowland, post:50, topic:157925”]
You don’t know what makes a stronger culture in advance. When that culture takes over, then you know.[/quote]
Perhaps, but I can try to contribute to making it better through my own actions. I might be right, I might be wrong, but if I just wait passively for the eventual verdict of “cultural darwinism” the same would also be true. I also strongly suspect that the culture with people who are actively trying to do something would win out in the end, while the one with passive zombie-like people constrained by a fear of doing something wrong will be the one in the dustbin.
More to the point, I have no interest in being a part of the latter culture, and would like to actively promote one similar to the first one, so I will take my chances. Whether my culture wins or loses in this battle is irrelevant in this equation.
But we can look at history and avoid repeating mistakes. That will certainly improve the odds. The phrase “dustbin of history” comes to mind.
Sure, but I don’t see how that contradicts what I’ve been saying.
I get ya, but, I think you are overlooking that ‘the true nature of things" is also just another name, just another of those concepts can can vanish overnight. “God”, or “Justice”, “Nilhisim” or the "Cultural Darwinism’ that you mentioned a couple of times are no more nor less socially constructed than the next phrase around the corner.
The zombies do tend to end up in the dustbin, but the more proactively wrongheaded get there first.
If you’re proactive, you get where you’re headed much sooner. Wherever that turns out to be.
If you must be wrong, be wrong early and then repent early. Move on to the next thing in a timely fashion.
That makes sense, but who’s deciding what’s “wrongheaded” here?
That’s a whole new philosophy right there. Where do I sign up?
I think it’s Taoism. I’ve heard Toe Save say this one before, 無為而無不為 – “do nothing and all will be done”. Traditional Chinese culture leaves all in the dustbin!
Yea, its like the Taiwanese way: stand back and let the other guy make an idiot out of himself. I have to say it is a pretty good philosophy. Its definitely a winner at the poker table.
That’s not how it rolls in China though.
You left off my first adjective 
1 Like
Yea its tricky with the quoting thing, I made toe save insult the world earlier by mistake
The universe decides who’s wrongheaded. The wrongheaded decide when the trial will be scheduled.
Same as what I said then. If we don’t know anything about the potential results of our action or inaction, there’s no difference between adopting one or the other with regards to results. As I said, I don’t see any problem with the ideal of trying to do good under those circumstances.
Just don’t shove your action or inaction down other people’s throats.
Actually, that’s not feasible as long as we all share the same small blue marble. But don’t go out of your way to force your chosen strategy on others. Try to minimize your intrusion on others’ choices.
This means no SJW crap. Unless you’re ready to accept some fierce blowback.
Natural selection only works with a reasonably diverse genome. It culls the weak, but there has to be something less weak to leave behind. Every once in a while there is only a handful of survivors left, but mutations fix that. Totalitarians don’t tolerate mutant points of view. No one is more anti-evolution than a leftist. They seek to stamp out evolution and replace it with engineering, in the mistaken view that they can do better.
97 posts in and I have no idea what any of you are on about…
[quote=“rowland, post:97, topic:157925, full:true”]
Just don’t shove your action or inaction down other people’s throats.
Actually, that’s not feasible as long as we all share the same small blue marble. But don’t go out of your way to force your chosen strategy on others. Try to minimize your intrusion on others’ choices.
This means no SJW crap. Unless you’re ready to accept some fierce blowback.[/quote]
There’s no reason to think any of this from anything I said. If I wanted to do good things, how would I go about “shoving it down people’s throats” for example? What does that even mean? The law will restrain me from taking any unwarranted actions against other people.
Natural selection only works with a reasonably diverse genome. It culls the weak, but there has to be something less weak to leave behind. Every once in a while there is only a handful of survivors left, but mutations fix that. Totalitarians don’t tolerate mutant points of view. No one is more anti-evolution than a leftist. They seek to stamp out evolution and replace it with engineering, in the mistaken view that they can do better.
Whatever.
Don’t worry. As soon as you understand Randian Objectivism, Rowlandian Nihilism will make a lot more sense. Take Rowland’s advice and read The Fountainhead. Or take my advice and save time by watching the film. I’m all for literary culture, but who has that kind of time?
(Rand wrote the screenplay herself and was only forced to make two alterations for legal reasons: a bedroom scene fades out abruptly, and a certain character dies instead of doing something immoral by 1940’s standards. The rest is pure Rand. Wikipedia has an analysis of the bedroom scene i.e. the question of whether or not it’s consensual.)