Philosophy Now Forum

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.

These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?

Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets.

These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?

Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.

Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:21 am

OBVIOUSLY NOTHING can happen through some "magical revolution", if by 'magical' you are meaning that 'it' is NOT a 'real thing'. But just as OBVIOUS is the fact that we can radically change 'it' into a just/utopian system through a REAL revolution. Oh, and by the way, this CHANGE can and will happen through an extremely very simple and very easy process.

'you', peoples, in the days when this was written just need to learn how to be Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS, again.



These, so called, 'extra-terrestrials' are just 'us' coming "back in time", as some call it.



Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written, is because of changing 'your war-torn, polluted, and unjust world' into a Truly Just and Utopian world and way of living. But, because Nature takes care of Itself 'you', human beings, do not reach and achieve "time travel" until 'you' learn what is actually causing that 'unjust world', which 'you', adult human beings, are creating, and CHANGE those ways/"yourselves".

Again this is ALL very simple and very easy indeed.

Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?

I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.

Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:02 am

Oh brother. Am I to believe that you are from the future. Really?

I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am able to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.

Hmm. So is English not your first language?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written

To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:56 am

I am NOT SURE WHY 'you' would WANT to even begin to BELIEVE this. BUT, 'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE whatever you WANT to BELIEVE.

'Personally, i prefer to CHOOSE to just remain Truly OPEN so that I am able to LOOK AT and SEE things how they Truly ARE.

Hmm. So is English not your first language?

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:

Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Yes, and the reason 'we' are actually friendly, in the future to 'you' in the days when this was written

To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.

How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

Hmm. So is English not your first language?

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am The way you write tends to be misleading sometimes. See below:

Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 am

To most, I think that would read as "we, in the future, are actually friendly to you in the days when this was written." Your tenses are pretty mixed up.

How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?

Enjoy your time on the forum. Have a good day.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:50 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:28 am

ONCE AGAIN, 'you' write a statement, which is CLEARLY what 'you' BELIEVE is true, but add a question mark to end, as though pretending to have an appearance of OPENNESS.

But ONLY those who are NOT Truly OPEN do NOT recognize and notice this. Also, 'you' do NOT even KNOW that this is what 'you' are doing.

Now, 'you' can ASSUME and/or BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to. But, just be prepared for BEING Wrong. Otherwise, 'you' end up feeling disheartened AND disillusioned.



Could it tend to be 'misleading sometimes' on purpose?

Or, could I just be PROVING that IF and WHEN 'you', human beings, do NOT CLARIFY with "each other" FIRST, then 'you' can, and will, make ASSUMPTIONS, which can be SHOWN to BEING CLEARLY Wrong?

As just EVIDENCED and PROVEN true here?

Also, 'misleading' in regards to 'what', EXACTLY? OBVIOUSLY some 'thing' can only be 'misleading' to some 'thing else' that is PRE-CONCEIVED. So, what is the 'thing', which, what I wrote, supposedly, "misleading" to, EXACTLY?

By the way, have 'you' EVER even considered just CLARIFYING, BEFORE ASSUMING?



How EXACTLY are "my tenses, supposedly, pretty mixed up"?

What do 'you' perceive/ASSUME I am ACTUALLY SAYING, and MEANING?

What pre-conceived' idea are 'you' holding onto and maintaining here?

Also, what would it mean to 'you' to just CLARIFY with the "other" in regards to what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING, BEFORE 'you' start ASSUMING and JUMPING to a CONCLUSION?

Enjoy your time on the forum. Have a good day.

Here is, ANOTHER, PRIME EXAMPLE of one who makes claims but who is also completely and utterly INCAPABLE of being able to back up and support their CLAIM, AT ALL

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:53 pm Really well written article.

I tend to be fatalistic about things, but who says things must turn out well for us? I don't think we live in a world that we can ultimately control and administer to our own ends. Just look at technology. We invented plastic to better our lives, now the seas and landfills are full of it. We invented pesticides, fertilizers, etc. Now we have people turning back to all naturally grown foods because of all the damage. We invented the combustion engine, nuclear power. Our militaries will soon be employing AI to fight wars, how long before AI itself turns and fights us all? Technology has failed us, it continues to fail us.

No system of government, save for the most draconian, will ever be able to fully tame capitalism (an economic system). Will we all perish? I don't know. Maybe some of us will survive to carry on the species. The idea that revolution will save us is a farce. Revolution has ALWAYS amounted only to a change in leadership. It will continue to always only amount to a change in leadership. the world is out of our control. It is out of the control of academics and planners.

No. I'm not an optimist. But reality is what it is whether we like it or not. The real is rational. Everything we see today is here for a reason and it is here by necessity. We can't radically change it into a just/utopian system through some magical revolution. If we could, we would have by now.

And of course, now, we apparently have extra-terrestrials visiting us, flying over nuclear sites, and military assets. Can we assume that they are friendly, unlike us?