Radical man, I desire to keep my humanity 
Life is overrated: the prognosis is poor and it invariably ends in death 
With silicon, you last as long as you’re plugged into your solar panel and the sun remains. Never have to sleep or eat. Thinking is always clear as a bell. Won’t need a calculator or spell check for anything. Would be plugged into the grid and instantly know everything that is known. It might get boring after a while though, but we could play games where we dumb ourselves down to have an opportunity to relearn at a slower pace. That kinda reminds me of what is going on now in the universe :-"
I dont think life is overrated but I do agree with the rest of what you are saying here.
I find the last piece of what you have written here to be quite deep - the bit that I have highlighted in blue - it takes my mind away from my shallow moments of just existing. It makes me feel connected to all of existence somehow. I do think however that without the rest of what you wrote the scene would have not been set for it. I appreciate it.
If you could model any universe you wanted, you’d eventually model this one
Backing up a little to revisit feminine strengths.
I pulled these off of a simple search in google:
- Intuition. Let’s start with some clinical realities. …
- Pain threshold and tolerance. Of course, this is subjective in many ways. …
- Patience. …
- Emotional focus. …
- Compassion. …
- Networking. …
- Creativity. …
- Part of female strength lies in asking for help.
There might be a couple that have already been mentioned. The one I wonder about is whether females would be good and helping males to network if the males were willing to listen. Following are what I pulled off of a website:
- Collaboration
- Calm Under Pressure
- Attention to Detail
- Openness
- Intuition
- Empathy
I see a couple here already mentioned and overall I see attributes that men are not good at, at all.
The following I pulled off of forbes.com
- Women are Opportunity Experts
- Women are Networking Professionals
- Women Seek to be Relationship Specialists
- Women are Natural Givers
On the topic of Natural Givers: “Women seek to give to others but also to their communities. Why do you think most non-profits are run by women? Women enjoy living their lives through a cause that serves the advancement and acceleration of societal needs. This is why in the workplace women are great at inspiring and lifting those around them. This is why most women leaders are such excellent long-term strategic thinkers. They are less inclined to rally behind a short-term strategy if a more sustainable approach can be executed.”
So that is three sources with some overlap(between this post and the last post that I have made)
- perhaps the overlap are the greatest strengths that women possess.
Nice lists encode_decode. I concur.
I noticed the more physical aptitude side is missing which is what I believe women are exploring currently. This is why they push for physical equality in jobs even though its a far fetched achievement. Women truly cannot comprehend what their physical limits are for they have never taken so many challenges upon themselves. All that time boys played outside, played rough, were challenging one another physically, women didn’t experience much if any of that.
Attention to detail is so true especially in my Mom-My Sister recently thanked my Mom for being such a stickler for details, it’s allowed her to revise the focus of her work down to more specificity which is driving her co-workers crazy, but they are pressing for more precise/accurate results from multiple angles. My Sister works for a robotics company in Silicon Valley where details matter.
Dad used to manage an electronics manufacturing plant where he said never once did a woman apply for a job to run a machine and never once did a man apply for a clean room / circuit assembly job. Women always did the small, detailed work while men operated the dirty machines.
Of course, there was a pay difference, but it wasn’t enough to compel women to apply.
We have been meddling with nature quote a while now, and we are further along in technology not to be able to put us there , so the answers are out there, already, from the state we are in. Its observable.
The big issues regarding gays in the military, orgAn transplants, beneficial and humane euthanasia, use of narcotics for leisure and illness, to name a few, habe already been pretty much disposed as morally workable.
In my mind the answer is yes.
Yes to what?
I found this quote while reflecting on a couple of posts in this thread:
It is more or less saying what I am trying to convey, without the technology component.
To the poll , voting yes.
I was not quite sure to begin with, thanks for that Meno_.
The answers might already be out there but it seems we are still having a hard time implementing them. The real problem is life is too complicated to manage anymore without the help of technology and as I am suggesting it is going to take more than just man by himself to address issues of our future - it is going to take woman as well.
This maybe the case but we are still struggling to make things work on these fronts and why would we think that is? As usual philosophy leads to more questions and I think there are still millions of questions that need to be addressed. The new questions arise with every leap forward that we take.
Humans as they stand right now are not fully communicating - they become apathetic around big questions and dismiss the smaller questions as if they do not matter. We are living life like there is no tomorrow - engaging with our lonely egos more than ever before - not identifying that some of humankind’s traits have become obsolete in the light of the technoworld.
I pretty much agree with the above, that we are on our way to understand what we have to deal with in regards to adapting to the effects of technology, while I’m not sure that technology can adapt to us as well. This talk about the so gularitu of a technological apex arriving in another generation or so, is still an inconceivable largesse of a xhallenged, while the question is whether our capacity to not only understand what’s going on, but our capacity to live in a postmodern world, in fact one could call or a hypermodern world. Can life keep adapting as the technology progresses on. Malthusian curve?
Mankind has the tendency to utilize abundance for increasing the population rather than for maintaining a high standard of living.
Go forth and multiply.
I know that this is part of our animal nature to get caught up in the fox and the rabbit predator-prey relationship.
Imagine where we could go with maintaining the population rather than increasing the population - especially with better health-care - there too, I see the need for machines to help us maintain infrastructure that might become too cumbersome to manage in the wake of a sudden decrease in population.
I really can’t understand why the Chinese abandoned the 1 child family law, guess they threw away sensible policy in favor of having happy families. So goes the wisdom of the east, thrown under the bus.
Wouldn’t turning a certain percentage of Chinese population gay achieve the same result in as far as controlling population numbers is concerned? This way, it’s not a matter of government being controlling and oppressive, but a matter of “personal choice”.
Probably not, since universal family control over family size outnumbered a decline in new population control due to homosexuality, by the gross difference in numbers, since barely 5% max.that any country is considered exclusively homosexual.I may deviate somewhat on the figures.