Solving the Major Problems of Society

[Blaggard]

Kill all humans would probably solve it.

[uwot]

As much as I am itching to debate you, I will merely wait and use my method to see if you are right. I have no proof that my method is inferior to debate, and I don't think that I should abandon the thinking method without trial.

Go for it; there is no substitute for experimentation, but I would be very surprised to discover that the cross section of humanity that is the PN forum could agree about the day of the week.
Still, in the interest of science: I think another major problem faced by society is debt. People in debt do not understand what they have done. The USA, the world's largest economy, is nearly 20 trillion dollars in debt; the UK, fifth or sixth off the top of my head, is over a trillion pounds in debt. Money is just the promise, or legal commitment to pay. Our respective governments have traded our goodwill so that, even if we started to pay back what we owe, it would take several generations, we have mortgaged our great grandchildren. In effect, the western world is now a plutocracy, as capitalists own our children's, children's, children's future. Greece has recently elected an anti austerity government, headed by Alexis Tsipras, with a manifesto that says "We're not going to pay." Personally, I think that is a good thing, but the really rich everywhere will be watching very carefully and the measures they take to contain this idea will shape much of the near future. But try selling that to the free market nutjobs.

[Systematic]

Go for it; there is no substitute for experimentation, but I would be very surprised to discover that the cross section of humanity that is the PN forum could agree about the day of the week.

Truly, there is no substitute for experimentation. I encourage you, when we get to the prove/disprove step, to experiment with all of the hypothetical root causes and solutions. Also you would want to research the experiments of others.

However, I would be irresponsible to ignore what your words are implying (even if you don't mean to imply it). I am fairly certain that science without rationality and formal logic is likely to lead to untrue conclusions. For example: Scientifically we know that if you fire a bullet into another man's heart, then that man will die. So I conclude that if I shoot a man in the heart that he deserved to die. I'm just making the faulty logic obvious with that last example, but here is a less obvious example (to many people): Survival of the fittest is the proponent of evolution, so if I survive at all cost, I am just doing what is natural.

So everyone in the PN forum will likely not agree. I'll categorize everyone in the world agreeing with us on the root causes and solutions as part of Step 5 as it applies to Question 2—namely listing as many possible answers to the question: How do we solve the root causes of the major problems of society. Getting most of the world to agree to effective solutions might be part of the solution.

If everyone in this forum doesn't agree, we can still act. So that doesn't really worry me that much.

[Arising_uk]

Maybe we should start with what we think the problems actually are?

[Systematic]

Maybe we should start with what we think the problems actually are?

I think that we are doing that.

[jimmy cricket]

[quoteI think that the thinking method that I am using is unique, but I would like to hear what the rules for philosophy are. Perhaps you could throw in what the reasoning behind the rules are too. I know about the Socratic method, but it seemed a little inadequate to me. It tears ideas down without giving them a chance. "Reductio ad absurdum means the idea is wrong, so let's move on." It doesn't save time and maintain a good focus by stipulating that only important, relevant topics and questions should be used as the basis of thought. It doesn't require going through all of the possible answers before determining the truth.

And debate is worse. Debate is for cases like law. You don't know whether the defendant is innocent or guilty, but he will certainly not admit to committing the crime. So you must debate it][/quote]

I would like to hear what the rules for philosophy are

Go to college.

Perhaps you could throw in what the reasoning behind the rules are too

Method.

I know about the Socratic method, but it seemed a little inadequate to me. It tears ideas down without giving them a chance.

Do you really?

It tears ideas down without giving them a chance. "Reductio ad absurdum means the idea is wrong, so let's move on." Now you know Latin, and logic?

It doesn't save time and maintain a good focus by stipulating that only important, relevant topics and questions should be used as the basis of thought.

You dip.

[quote It doesn't require going through all of the possible answers before determining the truth.
][/quote] You are stupid, and don't know, or even understand philosophy. When you insulted me, you made an enemy. First impressions last, be prepared to be made to look the fool you are

[Blaggard]

Maybe we should start with what we think the problems actually are?

No fucking shit Sherlock.

Maybe we should start with what we think the problems actually are?

I think that we are doing that.

Captain obvious is of course quite obvious.

[Arising_uk]

Sorry, brain-freeze.

[Systematic]

So now that we have discovered the major problems facing our society: What are some valid solutions?

[Systematic]

I know about the Socratic method, but it seemed a little inadequate to me. It tears ideas down without giving them a chance.

Do you really?

It tears ideas down without giving them a chance. "Reductio ad absurdum means the idea is wrong, so let's move on." Now you know Latin, and logic?

Reductio ad absurdum means, as Socrates would readily attest, that we only know that we know nothing.

Edit: I fully intend to know something at the end of the process.

[Systematic]

So now that we have discovered the major problems facing our society: What are some valid solutions?

It has come to my attention that people have been offering solutions along with the problems that they have presented. I will simply move on to the next step.

[Systematic]

Step 6: Expand all answers as if they were true.

Solution 1: People should stop insisting that other people do things their way. That is wise, because people tend to be averse to change. If you wish them to change, then they should, at the very least, be given good reason to do so. So in response I will encourage anyone who does not want to take up my method of thinking to feel free not to do so.

Solution 2: More nukes. Aside from the fact that a nuclear war would kill us all, there are some very vulnerable countries that do not yet have any nukes. It doesn't seem very conducive to their wellbeing that only their enemies should have nukes.

Solution 3: More answers longer than one sentence. Short answers tend to be highly misunderstandable, so yes, we need longer sentences and more of them. Anything that can be said in 1 sentence can also be lengthened to 3.

Solution 4: Know that even though you do exist, you are not Jesus. I presume that this solution is meant for those with overinflated egos. People tend not to realize when they have a highly inflated ego and furthermore, they do not realize that it hinders any meaningful communication.

Solution 5: Plentiful resources disiminated equally. There is a great need for resources, but it seems that society is deeply entrenched in its own mercantile habits. Those habits tend to keep the resources in the stores rather than allowing those who need them to have them. "Love your neighbor as yourself" did not come with the provision, "as long as he's rich."

Solution 6: Wipe out all idiots. It would be nice not to have loud idiots running amok, annoying the ears of all who hear them. Unfortunately, its not quite as easy as that. In accordance with tradition, idiots have the right to a fair trial. And even though they may not have the capacity, they have the right not to convict themselves.

Solution 7: Everyone mind their own business, and keep their hands to themselves. It is an excellent gesture. I just wonder how to keep the people who refuse to mind their own business to do so with limited conflict. I suppose that if we had killed off all of the idiots, then we wouldn't have said problem.

Solution 8: Everyone should use best methods. It would be rather difficult to use best methods without knowing what they are. So it becomes necessary to learn the best methods, probably through trial and error, since those who already know, aren't sharing.

Solution 9: Respect for diverse points of view. First we know that other points of view exist, then we can give them their fair chance at becoming widely accepted. I find that it is much easier to accept a point of view that is well proven. You should never seek to disprove a point of view that you have not first given the chance to be correct: Accurate until proven inaccurate.

Solution 10: Everyone should know when he/she is wrong. This is hard to do unless you are a habitually skeptical person. Habits are formed through repetition, so I suggest that everyone practice doubt as often as possible. Once you have doubted everything, doubt yourself and your morality as well.

Solution 11: Kill all humans: Hopefully that was just a joke.

Solution 12: Stop going into massive debt. When you go into debt, you must pay it back eventually. Many people don't realize that many smaller debts lead to massive debt. The more you use your credit, the more people will lend you. So it is important not to get started down that path at all.

[Dalek Prime]

Kill all humans would probably solve it.

If I could offer you a sure plan to solve every problem future mankind faces, with all it's inherent suffering, and that plan has no consequence to the universe, would you take it? I can. Stop breeding. Birth is the sine qua non of every problem and every suffering.

No need to kill anyone. And every problem solved. Even the small ones. Even death itself.

[Systematic]

Kill all humans would probably solve it.

If I could offer you a sure plan to solve every problem future mankind faces, with all it's inherent suffering, and that plan has no consequence to the universe, would you take it? I can. Stop breeding. Birth is the sine qua non of every problem and every suffering.

No need to kill anyone. And every problem solved. Even the small ones. Even death itself.

I'll put that in the "not joking" category. Needs further support though; I'm not the one to do that, since I can't even take it seriously.

[Dalek Prime]

Kill all humans would probably solve it.

If I could offer you a sure plan to solve every problem future mankind faces, with all it's inherent suffering, and that plan has no consequence to the universe, would you take it? I can. Stop breeding. Birth is the sine qua non of every problem and every suffering.

No need to kill anyone. And every problem solved. Even the small ones. Even death itself.

I'll put that in the "not joking" category. Needs further support though; I'm not the one to do that, since I can't even take it seriously.

Feel free to prove me wrong. Just because you don't fancy the conclusion, doesn't mean it's wrong.

So you tell me, simply. What problem does my plan not solve?