Re: Mind's Eye Selfishness, greed and morality

The firebombings weren't really justified on account of eliminating
war production rigs - I'm sure you know. Indeed, a lot of Anglo-US
funded production in Germany was spared. No doubt we were well into
'revenge' by then. Even the Dambuster raids were failures in terms of
stopping production. It's very doubtful we really needed to use the
atomic weapons and firebombing in Japan. There's been a lot of
philosophical discussion of such since Machiavelli - more recently
thus 'Should political leaders violate the deepest constraints of
morality in order to achieve great goods or avoid disasters for their
communities? This question poses what has become known amongst
philosophers as the problem of dirty hands.'

Hard to stand in judgement once one realises the horror of the world
wars - but this said I'm not sure we really know how they started.
People in the Middle East hardly think any current war started on
9/11. Even Clinton fired 68 cruise missiles around the time Monica
blew him off (reminding me a bit of the old joke that 68 is better
than 69 - you leave owing one). I have no time for moral philosophy
because its finest words (virtue ethics, some religion) come from
people oblivious to slavery as just wrong - making John Brown more of
a 'hero' in his religious lunacy than Socrates.

I believe the 9/11 strategy probably started in the divide and rule
aspect of the British Empire - the one Hitler thought a good model.
One can find the concentration camps, slavery and lust after
commodities (gold, silver, sugar, drugs, oil, gas, water) and the
involvement of rentier finance from the Crusades (and Jihad) and
Conquistadors onwards. I think we have an enemy within (mostly
financial) and the war is largely phony. None of this stops me
knowing which way to point my rifle (there is much vile on the other
side), by I'm not having the 'war on terror' claptrap. Few 'jihadis'
I met knew much ideology. I used to think they lacked education -
until I turned my eye back on my peers and realised they were as
duped. We might once have stood back to back fighting off hostiles
rigs - but self-preservation is enough motivation in such for me - the
hatred and stereotyping of 9/11 propaganda is both everywhere and a
farce. Protecting your face might launch my boat but crooks like the
Bush family never will.

On Feb 20, 1:43 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wars undertaken need to be won or lost. You can't justify any actions-
> consider our use of firebombings in WWII over civilian areas- the
> excuse being eliminating war production and transport. At any rate, we
> are in a new era with hits to the underbelly instead of direct
> confrontation.
>
> On Feb 19, 1:21 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I am not a fan of war..  killing is not right..   I have said in the
> > past that I think surgical strikes like the  that was brought against
> > Ben Lauden (how ever it is spelled) and drone strikes might be a
> > preferred way rather than murdering masses of soldiers.
>
> > You cannot support wars that are for the ego of Presidents, that are
> > producing false evidence  to justify it..  and the killing of non
> > combatants by mass bombing..  all those people should be imprisoned
> > for life because of the murders the order others to commit..
>
> > Actually that does not matter they will no longer be able to hide or
> > justify their actions..  sadly it is a price their souls will pay but
> > their souls knew the effect before they took the actions
>
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:17 PM, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Me too! :-) What was I thinking?//Okay- we support the politics that
> > > serves our interest is what I guess I meant. But we might support
> > > politics contrary to our beliefs in time of war or other disasters
> > > requiring unity and sacrifice. As for suffrage, the votes were dished
> > > out to garner support from individuals or groups to thereby get
> > > elected and weld power.//It is also like church shopping.
>
> > > On Feb 18, 5:54 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'd need that explained rigs.
>
> > >> On Feb 17, 10:59 am, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > The same could be said of political power/universal suffrage.
>
> > >> > On Feb 16, 3:51 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > The turning of greed to the essential element of our economic
> > >> > > salvation is very significant, making economics itself libidinal.
> > >> > > With this admission, the pretence that economics could be an aggregate
> > >> > > of individual choice by rational people should be very difficult to
> > >> > > maintain.
>
> > >> > > On Feb 16, 7:50 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > The emotion of fear is the big detractor...
>
> > >> > > > On Feb 15, 11:33 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > In almost all computer simulations I've seen selfishness only works in
> > >> > > > > 'new markets' and after that cooperation wins.  Stephen Pinker has a
> > >> > > > > book out summarizing why modern societies are more peaceful (despite
> > >> > > > > wars) than primitive ones as does Jared Diamond.  What's gone wrong is
> > >> > > > > out institutions have not developed to full democracy.  In many senses
> > >> > > > > we are not modern at all.  My suspicion is that we haven't worked out
> > >> > > > > how to be modern in a way that combines science and religion.  Science
> > >> > > > > a la Dawkins is just another religion with vested interests vying with
> > >> > > > > those of churches, mosques and temples.  What I know of physics,
> > >> > > > > chemistry, biology and maths in no way gives me much clue why we cling
> > >> > > > > to this rock as opposed to giving up to gnostic nothingness. I don't
> > >> > > > > do religion because I can't stand the lack of  intellectual honesty,
> > >> > > > > but this doesn't stop me wanting religious fellowship.  I'd rather see
> > >> > > > > this as something concerned with how we might develop and can become
> > >> > > > > with science and a more global morality - living in peace with respect
> > >> > > > > for others and the planet - a planet we will have to leave for selfish
> > >> > > > > survival - and we may have to leave as 'not human'.
> > >> > > > > Science and our tiny space adventures have shown we are not fitted for
> > >> > > > > space flight, is hinting other livable planets may be as close as 13
> > >> > > > > light-years and gives us fantasy notions of getting to the edge of the
> > >> > > > > universe in 28 relativity bubble years - during which time billions of
> > >> > > > > years will have evaporated where we started from and go to - we might
> > >> > > > > well emerge at the end point billions of years out of date!  Quite how
> > >> > > > > one would 'drive' from somewhere that will cease to exist to somewhere
> > >> > > > > that as yet does not I don't know.
>
> > >> > > > > 'Driving' in space requires front-back and up-down awareness -
> > >> > > > > something dizzying if you lie in bed dreaming what it would be like.
> > >> > > > > Getting up to speeds fast enough to get us 13 light-years in
> > >> > > > > reasonable time may not be too hard - but we also have to miss
> > >> > > > > everything in a moving field whilst travelling very fast (unimaginably
> > >> > > > > fast) and be able to stop (there are possibilities we could use space-
> > >> > > > > curvature to do this).  My guess is our drivers would have to be
> > >> > > > > android or cyborg and the rest of us genetically altered and in
> > >> > > > > cryostasis.  We don't know what gravity is but we do know we don't
> > >> > > > > live well without it  It may even be that all we can do to leave the
> > >> > > > > planet will be to send life-spores of somekind out to undergo
> > >> > > > > evolution again.
>
> > >> > > > > Of course, we don't really know what the current state of technology
> > >> > > > > is let alone what we might know and have in the future.  Our salvation
> > >> > > > > might yet lie in the 'dark'.  What we don't see now is that we have
> > >> > > > > sufficient technology to establish global peace and good living,
> > >> > > > > subject to population restraint and could be working much harder on
> > >> > > > > stuff like fusion reactors, wind, solar and hydroelectric (etc.) -
> > >> > > > > solar and wind now compete on price with coal.  Instead, we get
> > >> > > > > claptrap about the 'growth economy' - which is full of poor
> > >> > > > > entertainment, fashion trinkets and the rest - a financial system that
> > >> > > > > is a total control fraud - and this gets me back to Andrew's point on
> > >> > > > > 'what is selfishness'?  I suspect that for selfishness to work it has
> > >> > > > > to be hidden - either disguised as in the politician's speech or
> > >> > > > > through ideologies that turn it into a 'good'.
>
> > >> > > > > I'm not much on consensus - I know how insects establish it (piercing
> > >> > > > > shrieks - to them - and hygiene - meaning killing off dissent) and
> > >> > > > > reason quickly gets very unreasonable as most of us don't know enough
> > >> > > > > to be able to agree through reason.  I think laser technology will
> > >> > > > > give us nuclear fusion other than in bombs, but I don't really know -
> > >> > > > > and we were lied to about nuclear power for 60 years - nearly all the
> > >> > > > > reactors until the 60's were about making weapons material and we
> > >> > > > > should have focused on thorium (prototype on line in India this year)
> > >> > > > > - a technology that would not have led to weapons proliferation.
> > >> > > > > Sometimes very selfish and obsession thinking leads us to knowledge
> > >> > > > > and technology of great benefit, but we haven't come up with sensible
> > >> > > > > ways of world development - free trade is a farcical idea that has
> > >> > > > > failed for centuries.  In the end I think we are scared about some of
> > >> > > > > the things Molly talks about - but in the end I'm more scared of
> > >> > > > > idiots with guns.
>
> > >> > > > > On Feb 15, 11:38 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > You haven't got the science right Andrew - but no matter - the
> > >> > > > > > argument from a science fiction scenario is valid.  Selfishness is a
> > >> > > > > > complex and to an extent it and altruism seem to be about gene
> > >> > > > > > survival - but will this remain true if biological intelligence is
> > >> > > > > > coming to and end?  Rigs provides a twist that is important and men
> > >> > > > > > may not understand as directly as a woman who has been pregnant.
> > >> > > > > > Hobbes talked of a war of all against all - hence the need to
> > >> > > > > > surrender to an absolute monarch - though he meant 'a body approved by
> > >> > > > > > the people' - to protect us from selfish behaviour.  In my view this
> > >> > > > > > leaves us with questions about leadership and how much we can trust it
> > >> > > > > > not to be selfish.
>
> > >> > > > > > On Feb 14, 10:40 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > > It's balance. Like "keep a little kid in your Id".
>
> > >> > > > > > > On Feb 14, 8:21 am, andrew vecsey <andrewvec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > > > I was thinking about "The purpose" discussion and got to telling myself
> > >> > > > > > > > that everything has a good and a bad side to it  The bad sides to
> > >> > > > > > > > selfishness and greed are easy to see. What about the good sides of these
> > >> > > > > > > > otherwise bad behaviors. I like to think that unless you help yourself, you
> > >> > > > > > > > can not for long help others, so selfisness is vital for doing good. As
> > >> > > > > > > > well geed for praise and recognition and a feeling of acomplishment and a
> > >> > > > > > > > bit of heath pride are all good and beautiful faces of otherwise not so
> > >> > > > > > > > nice  behaviors. Laziness also has a good side that is very easy to argue.
> > >> > > > > > > > The same goes with seeing the bad side of traits that are normally seen as
> > >> > > > > > > > good.
>
> > >> > > > > > > > On Thursday, February 14, 2013 2:32:15 PM UTC+1, rigs wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > > > > It does seem that living things will fill a vacuum- whether weeds or
> > >> > > > > > > > > opportunists and the basis would be predator/prey behaviors that may
> > >> > > > > > > > > have a
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.