IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Has humanity or humanism more killed and destroyed than brought peace and happiness?

- Yes.
4
40%
- No.
6
60%
 
Total votes : 10

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Alf » Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:10 am

We must take into account that humans are always to be described in two ways: (1) natural and (2) cultural.

Peter Sloterdijk wrote:On the one hand, we can speak of a natural history of serenity, by virtue of which man was able to become the cosmopolitan, worldly animal; on the other hand, we can speak of a social (I say: cultural) history of taming, by virtue of which man originally experienced himself as the beings who gather together in order to correspond to the whole. The real history of the clearing - from which a deepened reflection on man beyond humanism must take its starting point - is thus composed of two larger narratives that converge in a common perspective, namely in the exposition of how the sapiens-animal became the sapiens-man. The first of these two narratives gives an account of the adventure of hominization. It reports how in the long periods of pre-human prehistory the viviparous mammal man became a species of early-born beings, which - if one may speak so paradoxically - emerged into their environments with a growing surplus of animal immaturity. This is where the anthropogenetic revolution takes place - the blasting open of biological birth to the act of coming into the world. .... For the fact that man could become the being that is in the world has genre-historical roots that can be indicated by the abysmal concepts of prematurity, neoteny and the chronic animal immaturity of man. One could go so far as to describe man as the being who has failed in his being and remaining an animal. Through his failure as an animal, the indeterminate being falls out of the environment and thus acquires the world in the ontological sense. This extatic coming into the world and this "appropriation" to being are laid into the cradle of man from genus-historical inheritance. If man is in-the-world, then because he belongs to a movement which brings him to the world and exposes him to the world. He is the product of a hyper-birth that turns the infant into a worldling.
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Kathrina » Sat Mar 13, 2021 11:31 pm

encode_decode wrote:
Kathrina wrote:It basically doesn't matter who you start with, Encode, one human, or all humans. This was also known in ancient times. But go ahead, please. :)

I had no idea of your level of knowledge and understanding when I started posting in this thread. As I read through your posts I get a better idea of where you are situated in relation to your original post and the rest of this thread.

:-k
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Kathrina
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:50 am

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Sleyor Wellhuxwell » Thu Mar 25, 2021 1:36 am

Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, said that "the great reset clears the way for transhumanism."

Horror!

Actually, the "fourth industrial revolution" is just a logical continuation of the Industrial Revolution. So there are actually not four, but only one of them with subtypes. What Klaus Schwab supports, whether intentionally or not, is a communism which by far surpasses even Orwell's descriptions, e.g. also those of the "thought police". Why Schwab himself does not shudder at such statements is no wonder in view of the fact that he, who first studied mechanical engineering and later business administration, but never worked with responsibility, is a bureaucrat. There have always been people with the interest to control all other people 100%. It has always been about power. Also there have always been people with an interest in e.g. technical, economic, political etc. feasibilities and realizations. The ideology that is best suited for the political implementation of transhumanism is egalitarianism (communism), because it wants to achieve the total control of all people through its ideology of equality, the principle of equality, the eternal egalitarianism with permanent terror. And when it is said that Schwab's „ideas ... are not only very popular in the USA“, but „also in China, Japan and South Korea ... with the transhumanist ideas his book contains“, then this also means that in these countries communism is obviously very welcome.

Klaus Schwab has named many aspects that should be fulfilled by 2030, and one of them concerns all Western values, which should then be very strongly restricted or even disappear. Schwab and his people know exactly which values (the Western ones) and thus which people (the Western ones) can become expensive and threatening for them. These people stand in their way in the realization of their goals. The Westerners are too intelligent, too inventive, too achievement-oriented, too entrepreneurial, too success-oriented, too industrious, too rich, too middle-class, too individualistic, too freedom-loving. The globalists, although or because they are also of Western origin, prefer non-Western countries, because with them the globalist goals are much easier, uncomplicated, smoother, more effective, less resistant (less dangerous and at the same time more violent, more warlike, because with violence and war there are always huge profits to be made) and cheaper to achieve.

1.) "You will possess nothing" - and "you will be happy about it".
2.) "The U.S. will not be the world's leading superpower."
3.) "You will not die while waiting for an organ donor - the organs will be made by 3D printers."
4.) "You will eat a lot less meat" - meat will be "an occasional treat, not a staple, for the good of the environment and our health."
5.) "A billion people will be displaced by climate change."
6.) "Polluters will have to pay for emitting carbon dioxide. There will be a global price on carbon. This will help make fossil fuels a thing of the past."
7.) "You could be preparing to go to Mars - scientists will have figured out how to stay healthy in space by then."
8.) "Western values will have been strained to their breaking point." - "Checks and balances that underpin our democracies must not be forgotten."

Communism for 99.99-99.9999% of all humans.

The "overcoming of man". Everything clear? "I teach you the overman. Man is something that is to be overcome." (Friedrich Nietzsche, "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", 1883, p. 8 ).

- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 3#p2810213 .
User avatar
Sleyor Wellhuxwell
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 2:35 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Alf » Sat Apr 03, 2021 8:32 am

Today the globalists are making the revolution, the permanent one, and the people are being fought as if they were the globalists, the rulers of the world.
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:46 am

Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:
Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, said that "the great reset clears the way for transhumanism."

Horror!

Actually, the "fourth industrial revolution" is just a logical continuation of the Industrial Revolution. So there are actually not four, but only one of them with subtypes. What Klaus Schwab supports, whether intentionally or not, is a communism which by far surpasses even Orwell's descriptions, e.g. also those of the "thought police". Why Schwab himself does not shudder at such statements is no wonder in view of the fact that he, who first studied mechanical engineering and later business administration, but never worked with responsibility, is a bureaucrat. There have always been people with the interest to control all other people 100%. It has always been about power. Also there have always been people with an interest in e.g. technical, economic, political etc. feasibilities and realizations. The ideology that is best suited for the political implementation of transhumanism is egalitarianism (communism), because it wants to achieve the total control of all people through its ideology of equality, the principle of equality, the eternal egalitarianism with permanent terror. And when it is said that Schwab's „ideas ... are not only very popular in the USA“, but „also in China, Japan and South Korea ... with the transhumanist ideas his book contains“, then this also means that in these countries communism is obviously very welcome.

Klaus Schwab has named many aspects that should be fulfilled by 2030, and one of them concerns all Western values, which should then be very strongly restricted or even disappear. Schwab and his people know exactly which values (the Western ones) and thus which people (the Western ones) can become expensive and threatening for them. These people stand in their way in the realization of their goals. The Westerners are too intelligent, too inventive, too achievement-oriented, too entrepreneurial, too success-oriented, too industrious, too rich, too middle-class, too individualistic, too freedom-loving. The globalists, although or because they are also of Western origin, prefer non-Western countries, because with them the globalist goals are much easier, uncomplicated, smoother, more effective, less resistant (less dangerous and at the same time more violent, more warlike, because with violence and war there are always huge profits to be made) and cheaper to achieve.

1.) "You will possess nothing" - and "you will be happy about it".
2.) "The U.S. will not be the world's leading superpower."
3.) "You will not die while waiting for an organ donor - the organs will be made by 3D printers."
4.) "You will eat a lot less meat" - meat will be "an occasional treat, not a staple, for the good of the environment and our health."
5.) "A billion people will be displaced by climate change."
6.) "Polluters will have to pay for emitting carbon dioxide. There will be a global price on carbon. This will help make fossil fuels a thing of the past."
7.) "You could be preparing to go to Mars - scientists will have figured out how to stay healthy in space by then."
8.) "Western values will have been strained to their breaking point." - "Checks and balances that underpin our democracies must not be forgotten."

Communism for 99.99-99.9999% of all humans.

The "overcoming of man". Everything clear? "I teach you the overman. Man is something that is to be overcome." (Friedrich Nietzsche, "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", 1883, p. 8 ).

- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 3#p2810213 .


Nietzsche foresaw transhumanism or made a case for it?
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #2/2

"facts change all the time and not only that, they don't mean anything...."-Peter Kropotkin :evilfun:
"I can hope they have some degree of self-awareness but the facts suggest that
they don't..... "- Peter Kropotkin
. :evilfun:
"you don't know the value of facts and you don't know the value of the ‘TRUTH”... " -Peter Kropotkin :lol:
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby encode_decode » Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:48 am

WendyDarling wrote:Nietzsche foresaw transhumanism or made a case for it?

Do people sometimes ask the wrong question? or do they sometimes ask the wrong person? Or both? The answer is ‘yes’ to both. There is a small chance that you will receive a useful answer in this case.
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Sleyor Wellhuxwell » Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:52 pm

WendyDarling wrote:
Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:
Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, said that "the great reset clears the way for transhumanism."

Horror!

Actually, the "fourth industrial revolution" is just a logical continuation of the Industrial Revolution. So there are actually not four, but only one of them with subtypes. What Klaus Schwab supports, whether intentionally or not, is a communism which by far surpasses even Orwell's descriptions, e.g. also those of the "thought police". Why Schwab himself does not shudder at such statements is no wonder in view of the fact that he, who first studied mechanical engineering and later business administration, but never worked with responsibility, is a bureaucrat. There have always been people with the interest to control all other people 100%. It has always been about power. Also there have always been people with an interest in e.g. technical, economic, political etc. feasibilities and realizations. The ideology that is best suited for the political implementation of transhumanism is egalitarianism (communism), because it wants to achieve the total control of all people through its ideology of equality, the principle of equality, the eternal egalitarianism with permanent terror. And when it is said that Schwab's „ideas ... are not only very popular in the USA“, but „also in China, Japan and South Korea ... with the transhumanist ideas his book contains“, then this also means that in these countries communism is obviously very welcome.

Klaus Schwab has named many aspects that should be fulfilled by 2030, and one of them concerns all Western values, which should then be very strongly restricted or even disappear. Schwab and his people know exactly which values (the Western ones) and thus which people (the Western ones) can become expensive and threatening for them. These people stand in their way in the realization of their goals. The Westerners are too intelligent, too inventive, too achievement-oriented, too entrepreneurial, too success-oriented, too industrious, too rich, too middle-class, too individualistic, too freedom-loving. The globalists, although or because they are also of Western origin, prefer non-Western countries, because with them the globalist goals are much easier, uncomplicated, smoother, more effective, less resistant (less dangerous and at the same time more violent, more warlike, because with violence and war there are always huge profits to be made) and cheaper to achieve.

1.) "You will possess nothing" - and "you will be happy about it".
2.) "The U.S. will not be the world's leading superpower."
3.) "You will not die while waiting for an organ donor - the organs will be made by 3D printers."
4.) "You will eat a lot less meat" - meat will be "an occasional treat, not a staple, for the good of the environment and our health."
5.) "A billion people will be displaced by climate change."
6.) "Polluters will have to pay for emitting carbon dioxide. There will be a global price on carbon. This will help make fossil fuels a thing of the past."
7.) "You could be preparing to go to Mars - scientists will have figured out how to stay healthy in space by then."
8.) "Western values will have been strained to their breaking point." - "Checks and balances that underpin our democracies must not be forgotten."

Communism for 99.99-99.9999% of all humans.

The "overcoming of man". Everything clear? "I teach you the overman. Man is something that is to be overcome." (Friedrich Nietzsche, "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", 1883, p. 8 ).

- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 3#p2810213 .


Nietzsche foresaw transhumanism or made a case for it?

Sorry for replying so late. I just don't post that often.

Nietzsche called for and taught transhumanism, and did so very clearly.

Examples:

"I teach you the overman! Man is something that is to be overcome." (Ibid., 1883-1885, p. 8 ).

"Look, I teach you the overman! The overman is the sense of the earth. Your will say: the overman be the sense of the earth!" (Ibid., 1883-1885, p. 8 ).

"Man is something that must be overcome ...." (Ibid., 1883-1885, p. 40).
User avatar
Sleyor Wellhuxwell
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 2:35 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Sleyor Wellhuxwell » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:11 pm

encode_decode wrote:
WendyDarling wrote:Nietzsche foresaw transhumanism or made a case for it?

Do people sometimes ask the wrong question? or do they sometimes ask the wrong person? Or both? The answer is ‘yes’ to both. There is a small chance that you will receive a useful answer in this case.

And you are the only one who knows who asks whom and what in the right way, right?

She did not ask you. And if she did, she would indeed not "receive a useful answer in this case", as you have said.
User avatar
Sleyor Wellhuxwell
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 2:35 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby encode_decode » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:49 pm

=D>
Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:And you are the only one who knows who asks whom and what in the right way, right?

No, I am not.

Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:She did not ask you. And if she did, she would indeed not "receive a useful answer in this case", as you have said.

Correct, she did not ask me. You don't actually know if she would have received a useful answer from me.

I indicated a chance for a useful answer, not a zero chance.
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby Sleyor Wellhuxwell » Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:14 pm

encode_decode wrote: =D>
Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:And you are the only one who knows who asks whom and what in the right way, right?

No, I am not.

Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:She did not ask you. And if she did, she would indeed not "receive a useful answer in this case", as you have said.

Correct, she did not ask me. You don't actually know if she would have received a useful answer from me.

I indicated a chance for a useful answer, not a zero chance.

I know it from your previous answers and especially from the fact that you yourself said that she will not "receive a useful answer" from you. Look:

encode_decode wrote:
WendyDarling wrote:Nietzsche foresaw transhumanism or made a case for it?

Do people sometimes ask the wrong question? or do they sometimes ask the wrong person? Or both? The answer is ‘yes’ to both. There is a small chance that you will receive a useful answer in this case.
User avatar
Sleyor Wellhuxwell
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 2:35 pm

Re: IS HUMANITY THE BEST OR DANGEROUS?

Postby encode_decode » Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:14 pm

Sleyor Wellhuxwell wrote:I know it from your previous answers and especially from the fact that you yourself said that she will not "receive a useful answer" from you. Look:

You claim that "Nietzsche called for and taught transhumanism, and did so very clearly". This is what you said.
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1276
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

Previous

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users