Do you know who your friends are ? :)

[hutch--]

The end of the world is nigh, how long have we been hearing this ? If something is consistent over history and from what can be gleaned from pre-history, "sh*t happens", if you can't change it, adapt to it and learn to shovel fast. 

[rrr314159]

@hutch

"ignorance is bliss". How I envy you guys!

[rrr314159]

But, I'll stoop to answer.

For one thing, doom-predictors have often been right. Obviously not predicting the "end of the world", but great disaster on the way. For one example (out of zillions), Einstein and others like him tried to convince their "assimilated" brethren that the sh*t was going to hit the fan in a decade, they should bail out of Germany now; many didn't listen, to their regret. They told Einstein (in effect):

The end of the world is nigh, how long have we been hearing this ? If something is consistent over history and from what can be gleaned from pre-history, "sh*t happens", if you can't change it, adapt to it and learn to shovel fast.

He answered, in effect, "Good luck dude I'm outa here"

Another famous example (as long as we're on Jewish examples): Josephus trying to convince the Jerusalemites to make peace with Vespasian before he obliterated them and the city. They were willing to die to save the temple; but they weren't willing to live to save it! After Vespasian was done, all that was left was the Wailing Wall.

Perhaps the most famous example, Cassandra; and on the other side, Ulysses. Then there's Rommel telling Hitler to give up and surrender while he still could ... Eisenhower warning about the military-industrial complex ... on and on throughout history, people like me are jeered at by people like you, who later have a few moments to regret it before the axe falls. Bottom line: predictions of doom often turn out right.

Second point, I don't need to adapt, I'm all set. It's future generations and animals who pay the price. Your attitude: "Who cares, let the helpless go to h*ll, as long as I've got mine". Unfortunately that's simply not an option for me.

Third point, these historical movements often take a lifetime to bear (rotten) fruit, so if your time horizon is 15 seconds (a "sound byte") - or even 15 years - then you don't have to worry. How I envy you guys!

[nidud]

deleted

[rrr314159]

The end is near all right. Always. So you definitively on to something there, but that’s not the point.

- Right, "The end is near" - with no elaboration - is a tautology. The point is to analyze why / when / how things are going wrong, as I do. Ideally people would dissect that analysis, not offer mere tautology. (that's precisely why I shouldn't have "stooped" to answer). It's as though I gave the code to, for instance, calculate pow(X,Y), and asked what people thought of it; and you answered "sure, some code will do some job - so what?"

The Old Testament was written on what, using what alphabet when by who for what reason?

- hmmm ... sounds like a trick question! Let me hear your answer first

[jj2007]

The end of the world is nigh, how long have we been hearing this ? If something is consistent over history and from what can be gleaned from pre-history, "sh*t happens", if you can't change it, adapt to it and learn to shovel fast. 

Obviously, you have a point there, Hutch :P

But rrr is right, too, I'm afraid: Richest 1% will own more than all the rest by 2016.

The combined wealth of the richest 1 percent will overtake that of the other 99 percent of people next year

We are sheep, as rrr has correctly observed. Where I optimistically disagree is the slaughterhouse analogy. My perception is more Australian here: Sheep are for shaving, not for slaughtering. Sheep bear profit if they are kept alive and working for their masters...

Or, see it through another lens: The World is divided into 99% slaves and 1% slaveholders. Let's hope they can handle climate change, biodiversity loss and other really nasty trends, and let's hope they know how to treat slaves decently. Food and shelter, y'know, panem et circensis, iCrap for everybody :t

[hutch--]

> "ignorance is bliss". How I envy you guys!"

Repetition does not validate the assumptions addressed above. Predicting the future is an old con trick, get a fancy outfit, sound mystical and buy a crystal ball and at least the illiterate may believe you but the only proof of a prophet is whether what he/she says comes true.

> Right, "The end is near" is a mere tautology.

No, this statement is a mere nonsense. X implies X is a tautology.

> The end of the world is nigh, how long have we been hearing this ? If something is consistent over history and from what can be gleaned from pre-history, "sh*t happens", if you can't change it, adapt to it and learn to shovel fast.

This is not contentious, it has been heard from pre-history.

[hutch--]

JJ,

I think the French had the right idea, chop their heads off. Enough unhappy hungry people change the world in ways that do not suit the 1%.

[rrr314159]

@jj, Your optimism, jj, is a very good thing! It's only mindless optimism that I object to. Your analogy depends on intelligent sheep-herders, who want their sheep to produce for many years. That probably doesn't correspond to our situation

@hutch,

The French chopped off only about 3000 heads, and they were rich ones. The choppers were the other 99%! You may be right - Louis XIV should have chopped them first - but that's not history. And, in fact, he couldn't possibly have done it: far too many poor, and too few soldiers loyal enough to carry out such an order.

Those who don't know history are doomed to be incorrect

[nidud]

deleted

[rrr314159]

If a cataclysmic event is on the way will you know about it? Will you tell us about it? Do we want to know about it?

- This is the right approach: ask me questions, don't tell me stuff. There's no point: my mind is as permeable as granite, what I know now is all I'll ever know. When (for instance) hutch tells me his opinion, either I already know it (so why bother to tell me?) or else I don't, in which case it's simply in one ear and out the other.

- There's a very good reason to pick my brains: I know topics (in philosophy and related areas) better than anyone (AFAIK). My peers (if indeed they are) have been dead a long time: Aristotle, Liebnitz, Kant, etc. And remember, I'm not going to last forever! People seem to have the attitude "Sure I'd like to know the meaning of life (or whatever) but I'm busy now. I'll ask rrr next year, or the year after that". Might be too late then!

- Actually (full disclosure) I don't know the meaning of life, or much else, for that matter. But my most casual opinion is worth entire 6-volume works from anyone else. You should also ask (while you have the chance) about trivial issues such as racism, holocaust, gender roles, future of the world, etc - if that's what interests you. I'll be happy to tell you, it's easy enough. But if I were you I'd grab this fleeting opportunity to learn about life, death, consciousness, the fate of the universe ...

If a cataclysmic event is on the way will you know about it?

- Not exactly. What I know are the conditions that may (very likely) lead to catastrophe, if the world doesn't wise up; what is really going to happen, well, I can't say. After all,

The future's not ours to see

- Dunno why you guys are so focussed on cataclysm, disaster, holocaust, gloom and doom. There are good things coming up also: space exploration / exploitation, for instance. You should get away from this obsession with the negative: bad for your mental health.

Will you tell us about it?

- Sure! But you have to ask! Have you heard this joke?: guy needs money so he prays to JHWH to let him win the lottery. Big voice booms from the sky, "OK you'll win the lottery!" A month later, guy prays again, "JHWH you promised me the jackpot, I'm waiting, where is it?" Big voice booms from the sky: "You have to buy a ticket!" Similarly, "you have to ask!" I know the answers; what I don't know, are your questions

Do we want to know about it?

- As I've said above you're better off not knowing about cataclysms. Ignorance is bliss (how I envy you guys!). Instead, ask "What am I?" or "Who am I?", stuff like that. Or whatever else you want to know ... as long as it's not practical knowledge. I'm rather weak in that dep't

- Don't get the impression that I'm trying to force enlightenment on you. Believe me I've got better things to do, like eating, sleeping, scratching, staring at the wall in a stupor. In fact it's impossible to teach anyone anything; they have to discover it for themselves. All I can do is put the knowledge in your way and hope, in your aimless wandering, you'll trip over it. If you don't want to hear about it, fine, I can go back to my main occupation: waiting for death

And yes, it is a trick question, and the perception of reality will change by knowing the answer.

- hmmm ... now it sounds like you're trying to tell me stuff again! As I said, it's pointless. Don't try to "win the debate" - none of you is remotely in my league. If Magnus Carlsen dropped by your local chess club, you'd probably challenge him to Blitz

p.s.

[hutch--]

 

Why does this sound like a crock of chyte ?

Oh, I know, its because its a crock of chyte.  :P

[nidud]

deleted

[jj2007]

So there can be no debate when on the floor you stand, only answers, which Aristotle gives, to the questions put before you.

If such grammar to use you continue, Yoda I'll call you from now on :P

[nidud]

deleted