Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 78
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist MovementPage 4 of 11    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
Jiperly:


**** this. I spent all this time debating with you, and you cannot even bother stepping out of your pompous and hubristic comfort zone to read what was written?

That I should bend over and read this book, and that article, and re-watch 3 Zeitgiest movies, otherwise I'm ignorant of how the world "really" works.....but you won't treat me with the same kind of respect you expect of others?



I'm done here. You're being disrespectful.If you were truly interested in an exchange of ideas, you'd have read the ****ing article.

You don't want to exchange ideas. You want to preach.


I can't believe you even debated him in the first place (though I did enjoy your side of the debate). It was quite obvious to me, from my short exchange with him in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread, that the only thing he was really interested in doing was preaching, and had no desire at all to exchanging information in an honest debate. I am pretty sure that he equates winning a debate to writing more than anyone cares to read or respond to, regardless of the fact that majority of what he writes is nothing but a bunch of rhetoric, and does pretty much nothing to adress any truly pertinent points by offering no arguments of any real substance.

Entertaining a debate with this indevidual Is nothing short of a rediculose waste of time.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 79
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/21/2012 2:18:17 PM
Adam:

Here's the simple facts about the matter:

My argument does not stem from ignorance of the subject as you claim. In fact I have investigated the matter more than far enough to convince myself that further investigation is not nessesary to draw a conclusion, and that conclusion is that I am not interested in and do I think that the ideas of a RBE are within the realm of being even remotely accomplishable.

I am not interested because:

1. I think that it is more important for the benefit of mankind to continue to progress technologically. I am not interseted in either slowing down, halting or regressing technologically, the reasons for which I have already stated in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread.

2. I do not agree with you, once again, for reasons that have already been stated, that a RBE is the right course of action to proceed upon to adress the enequalities that the majority of people face in this world.

3. I think that the system you are proposing would result in even more severe enequalities and abuses of the system, if it ever came to fruition, or that it would Tear itself appart or collapse in such a fashion as to end in wide spread ruin the likes of which humanity has never seen, just like all the socialist system before it, but on a much grander scale.

4.I am not interested in giving my freedom of personal governance of my life up to the system that you propose.

5.I am not interested in ending competition. I, instead, seek to make competition more civilized and to level the playing field by injecting more freedom into the system, and removing all socialism from the equation were ever it persist.

I have done the research that I feel is nessecary to draw these conclusions. It is not up to me to convince myself that I am wrong and you are right, and I am not asking you to. What I am telling you is that I will listen to you if you desire that I do so, but this is contingent on the pretense that you do what you can to make an effort not to wast my time. So far I feel that you have done nothing but wast my time.

So since it is you how is trying to present your ideas as being the one true way to proceed it is up to you to convince me that it is so. And the simplest way to do that would be to adress the concrens I have broached on the matter (of which there are many in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread, or if the concerns that I have expressed are not relivent to what you are talking about then you need to show me how that is so.

Anything short of this and it is a waste of my time to be debating with you. Also insulting or talking down to me or any others, who may enter into a debate with you, does not help to make them want to listen to you any long than the must. Just something to think about.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 80
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/21/2012 3:00:25 PM
Adam:

Oh, and one more thing.


Really? So you've gone back on your refusal to even read my posts?


I never refused to do anything. What I acctualy said was:


I have not read the rest of your post and quite honestly I am not sure that I want to.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 81
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/21/2012 4:16:59 PM

quoteExactly my point. You're using an intellectually dishonest tactic, being the appeal to emotion fallacy as an excuse to not consider the information.


Really, this is what you are going to respond to? Rediculose.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 82
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/21/2012 6:57:27 PM

I completely agree. 100%

And take note I have just conceded with you as well.

However, if you don't agree with an RBE on this basis, then you CLEARLY haven't even understood one of it's pivotal, well known and understood attributes. Which is the encouragement, facilitation, development and utilisation of technology to assist in creating an access abundance for all humanity and liberating humanity from life-wasting labour. Feel free to feel silly. lol


Are you serious or are you just being rediculose for effect.

Then please, tell how do you plan on providing seven billion iPhones so that every one can be equal. If you cannot provide everyone with an iPhone then the tech of iPhones must be abandoned on the basis that it will create in fighting among the populous about who gets the iPhones that do exist and when. That is if anyone wants to share at all. Not to mention the thousands of other technologies we can relate this same situation to. And I want it explained I am not interested in more rhetoric.


That's fine if this is your opinion, but there is zero evidentiary support to back this assertion.


What the hell are you talking about. There is zero evidence that your way is the only way. As I have said priviously I support the ideas of Stefan Molyneux.


Please provide specific examples, along with evidence of what would create, manifest, fascilitate and reinforce such "abuses". Believe it or not I would actually like to see if there are any holes in this proposal which can be altered to optimise it. If you have such evidence, then please present it. If you do not wish to, then all this says is that you wish to criticise, but don't want it to be improved. This is fine if this is your own personal opinion and nothing more, and if this is the case, I will respect that. However if you are attempting to assert this with no evidentiary support, then I'm afraid to say I am gonna have to call you out for making yet another baseless claim.


It is common sense. You are proposing that we give all the power to a small elite of planers , and you are saying, don't worry no one is going to abuse the system, rediculose. This is the problem with the current system, not money, and you think that it is not going to be a problem in the world you are proposing. Come on get real man.


Again, please provide evidentiary support with specific examples. However I feel the need to express disappointment that you are trying to tar this with the socialist brush in an appeal to fear fallacy.


Ok sure:

Russia the Bolshevik revolution 1917. No currency or private property. Ended in collapse and mass starvation in 1921 when Stalin introduced the "new economic plan", in which they had to reintroduce a money system

1930's Spain when the anarcho communists took over the majority of the country. Ended in collapse and mass starvation.

Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge, 1975 1979. Ended in collapse and mass starvation.

Just to name a few.


That's fine with us. If you dont wanna live in an RBE, you won't. No-one's gonna force you to accept it with either an actual or figurative gun to your head like previous socialist and marxist revolutions did. As Peter Joseph said in one of his seminars:

"And then there's the moody outburst:
"What if I don't wanna live in your society?"
"Well then don't."

It really is that simple.


That's great you can go ahead and go do your thing and I'll go and do mine. End of story.


Well good luck with that. I would love to see a capitalist system survive without requiring bailouts (which by the way is a socialist act) and all the other socialist mechanisms that capitalism actually requires in order to pull it back from the brink of its own self-destruction. Please by all means create your own new blueprint for how a monetary system can actually work. please, I'd like to see if its possible. At least then you would have a system that would gladly and peacefully co-exist with an RBE.


Are you effin kidding me. You haven't the slightest clue what Stefan proposes do you. Oh my god it's like talking to a wall.


In other words you have looked as far as what is comfortable for you and to maintain your current world view. I know this because every piece of research I do changes my world view at least a little. That's the nature of absorbing transforming information. You cannot expect to learn many things and be the same at the end as you were at the beginning.
 

Just because I learn something does not mean that I have to agree with it. Man does your ridiculousness know no bound, you pompous ass.

 
Actually no, that's not my aim at all. This isn't about WHO is right. This should be about WHAT is right. Big difference.


More rhetorical nonsense. Let me rephrase. I do not think that the ideas you are espousing are what is right. Now you can proceed to convince me otherwise.


So in order to not waste your time I have to blindly believe you and drop my logic and understandings purely because you disagree with them and you would prefer that I think just like you do?


Argggggg! Did I not just get through saying that I would listen to you and give you the chance to convince me. Or are you just getting more retarded by the moment.


Sorry that doesn't fly with me. That's called fascism.


What?!?! Effin hell. Now you're just starting to piss me off. My opinions being different than your has nothing to do with fascism. You sir are a Moron, And I mean that in the most clinical sence possible.


You harp on so much about listening, however you have shown no indication whatsoever that you are willing to concede anything that calls into question your current world view.


If you would but present an argument that was something more than just a bunch of rhetoric. Or attempt to engage me in some of the point that I have already made about the subject, you might see my attitude change tward you.


You project that I'm being ignorant when in fact I actually WANT to be proven wrong. You just gotta prove it first.


Really, hah, ok I'll bite. You can start off by telling me specifically what it is about the arguments in the "what would a perfect world look like, that I have already made, that isn't doin it for ya.


*buzzer sound* wrong again, sorry. As I have explained a couple of times now TZM don't believe what they advocate is the "one true way to proceed" If we thought that, we wouldn't want or need to collaborate with as many other oganisations as we do, and support them as much as we do.


Then what are we event talking about. Why don't you just go on your marry little way.


That may be the case here that I bear the burden of proof, and I take it gladly. But just because I carry it, doesn't mean you can sit back and bat away any point I make witout considering them whatsoever. That's intellectually dishonest. I may have the burden of proof, but by the simple act of applyng the burden of proof upon me you know what you've put on yourself? The burden to consider. And the fact that I have to repeat things over and over because you are not listening and thus making the same incorrect points over and over that I have already addressed demonstrates that you aren't living up to your end of the bargain. You can't just hang the burden of proof on someone and intellectually walk away and wash your hands of it. If you didn't want to consider it then why hang the burden of proof on me to begin with?


You haven't presented any proof at all what-so-ever. Which is the reason why your pissing me off. All you've done up to now is spout a bunch of rhetoric.

And now you are just flat out lying. You have not (to my knowledge) responded to the arguments I have made in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread, as I have asked you to do so from the start of this debate.


Whenever you are presenting irrelevant points I make a point of alerting you.


Oh, yes you have most certainly done that, and absolutely nothing more. Yes I am quite aware that my points are completely irrelevant to you.


And yet again, I agree, debating with me or ANYONE, EVER is a waste of time. We as human beings need to discuss. Coz as I have already said and as it appears I need to keep repeating things for you, debate is about WHO is right. Discssion is about WHAT is right.


Debate: 
"A formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward."

Sounds like what's going on here to me. Other wise you need to stop being so opposed to monetary systems. Retarded.

And that about sums it up unless you have something to offer in your next response, that is it.

Have a nice day.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 83
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/21/2012 10:55:09 PM
Adam it would be great if you went and tackled msg 162 in the perfect world look alike thread. Thats where I gave up the debate. This here is going nowhere, fast. It's killing me just wading through all this rhetoric trying to find a morsel of value.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 84
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 4:34:16 AM
Ah, my mistake it is msg 160 that is the one that would be good to see addressed.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 85
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 11:47:40 AM
gingerosity:

Hay man I want to use you as my litmus test. Because, to me, this guy seems like he is religiously attached to these ideas, in that, he believes and has faith in them, and I don't think that there is any evidence or aurguments that I could put to him that would pull him out of it, and if this is the case it is pointless and an extreme waste of my time (since it will take me quite a while to respond) for me to continue. So, here is my question to you: did his response to message 160 do anything for you? Do you feel that I need to respond? I'm looking for an unbiased opinion here, which I am pretty sure you could deliver. Because to me his response is just more of the same, and all that I am going to be doing is elaborating.

Thanks in advance ging.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 86
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 1:21:02 PM
Adam:


The Scientific Method.


Why don't you try it. I can scientifically account for the logistics involve in the distribution of technologies (such as the iPhone) in the socital system that I propose, down to the most minute detail, and I can provide examples of this methidology actually work in lrage scale real world applications (something that I have done on a very limited basis in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread, but could elaborate if nessesary - and this is a rock solid fact). So far all you offered on the matter is, *paraphrase* "oh it will work like a library". So until you actually offer up some scientific evidence, you really shouldn't keep on acting as though you have. Your just making yourself look more and more ridiculous.

Also, if i do respond to your message I will not be responding to you (since it is apparent in the extreme that you haven't any thing to offer on the matter). I will be responding to any literature you can provide me with from people in your "movement" who actualy know what the hell they are talking about, if that is some thing that indeed exists. I have had enough of you.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 87
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 2:28:24 PM
You've only said that gold currency isn't fractional currency.


Oh my god *begins to pull his hair out in clumps* I have never once mention anything about gold. You lying %#@$.

The truth is you haven't the slightest clue what it is that I am proposing. Why don't you take a little of you own advice and read some of Stefan Molyneux's books before you profess to know what I am proposing (they are free at freedomainradio.com/free) I have at least: 1. Watched all three zeitgeist films 2. Watched many iterviews with Peter and jacque 3. Went over to the venus projects website looking for more information of which I did not find. What the @&$% have you done.

You are the one who started with the talking down to people and insults first @$$hole. So why don't you take some responsibility for that sh!t.

Man you're really stating to piss me off. But I think that that has been your goal from the beginning. And your calling me dishonest, pfft.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 88
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 3:17:02 PM
Like I've said I've had enough of you. I just waiting for ging's response. After that I may post on here one more time. So good luck keeping this thread alive in my absence (as you can see you don't have many fans in this forum) and then, after I am gone, I imagin you and this thread will vanish like a fart in the wind.

And for the record, I never made any statement about gold. Why don't you chech the facts. I know that that is difficult for you but give it a try.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 89
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 3:19:06 PM
Thanks Adam for taking the time to respond to msg 160 from the "What would a perfect world look like" thread.


So, here is my question to you: did his response to message 160 do anything for you? Do you feel that I need to respond?


Well it is really up to you what you do with your time, but certainly I'd be interested to read polite, rational debate about this stuff.

For me it looks like Adam is saying that rather than having to drastically increase supply it will be possible to substantially decrease demand through things like the library model and public transport, and therefore access abundance is in fact possible.

My question is: have there been any calculations or experiments done to demonstrate such ideas will actually create and maintain 'access abundance' (supply>>>demand) in all necessary areas of life for all people forever after?
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 90
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 3:22:40 PM
Like I've said I've had enough of you. I just waiting for ging's response. After that I may post on here one more time. So good luck keeping this thread alive in my absence (as you can see you don't have many fans in this forum) and then, after I am gone, I imagin you and this thread will vanish like a fart in the wind.

And for the record, I never made any statement about gold. Why don't you chech the facts. I know that that is difficult for you but give it a try.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 91
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/22/2012 4:47:26 PM
Ging:

Ok, this is not response I said I'd give. This is just me venting.


but certainly I'd be interested to read polite, rational debate about this stuff.


You've debated with me before. You know that I am usually polite and rational. But this guy man! It pisses me off that he does so much talking down to people. And this is not just my opinion two others (the only two others that have ingaged this individual in debat on this thread) have expressed the same view. He refuses to make a detailed explanation about how the distribution of good to the populous will work, or offer any science to support his claims, and states only that *paraphrase* "it will work". I mean sh!t man how ridiculous is that.


My question is: have there been any calculations or experiments done to demonstrate such ideas will actually create and maintain 'access abundance'


This is also my question, though, I have others, like:

What evidence is there that people will accept this library system. What about the people who need to have certain technologies on a perminant basis as opposed to having to turn them in to the library so someone else can use them. This seem unfair to those who have to turn their stuff in. Will the people accept this (I don't think they will and I can tell you that I am not ok with it). If they will not, then how is any of this supposed to work.

I still think that it is impossible to even create an "acces abundance" of the thousands of technologies that exist for seven billion people. It certainly does not exist today. To take the iPhone example again there has only been a little over one hundred million iPhones produced so far. This is most certainly not an "acces abundance". So what needs to be done? More iPhones need to be created hundreds and hundreds of millions of iPhones at least and that is only if the people will accept being limited to an "acces abundance". I mean what about artist: who gets the guitars full timeand all the other nessesary equipment. Film makers who gets the film equipment and who decide who gets the resources necessary to make high end movies, and who decides this and why. What about the scientists if we have several scientist whith vertualy identical credentials, in need of full time access to scarce and valuable equipmentfor different or even opposing research. Who is to decide who is to get the equipment, and why should these scientists be ok with this with tis decision. What about the entrepreneurs/inventors who is to determine which people will get the resources they need to make these long shot endeavors, which the majority of the time, don't pan out, but when they do they they often have the effect of radically changing the world.

I could go on and on and on like this for many pages worth of text. This kind of stuff needs to be addressed in fine detail it needs to be shown that it can work in real world applications. It needs to be tested and retested and the tested again. But to my knowledge none of this has been done.

I am of the position that it will not work. But this does not mean that I am going to stand in the way of anyone who wants to proceed with testing. It just means that I am going in the direction of idea that I think will work. And then this guy is telling me that *paraphrae* "oh that is fine howere you should know that the ideas you are in favor of are wrong"
I mean what the hell man. Can I see some credentials or at least a detailed credible argument that supports the assertion. I could make make that same claim about the zeitgeist movement but that doesn't make my statement true. I mean it's absurd.

Anyway, I'm still pretty pissed off. I'm not sure if I want to invest the time that would be necessary to make an adequate respons let me think it over. If I do respond it will probably take me about a week or so to compose my response. So if you do see a post by me then, then you'll know what I decided.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 92
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/23/2012 7:25:26 AM
Well things looked good for a while but appear to be degenerating again. Maybe a referee would help, but some of us are in the wrong hemisphere and have wage-slavery to do. It is a shame because I think we can all agree that we are interested in discussing this stuff because we want to understand how the world can become a better place - because we care. All I can offer that may aid your communications are some quotes from wise people that have helped me in the past:

Zhuangzi:

Great wisdom is generous; petty wisdom is contentious.
To be truly ignorant, be content with your own knowledge.

Gandhi:

When restraint and courtesy are added to strength, the latter becomes irresistible.


Without much forthcoming in the way of calculations and testing on access abundance, TZM/TVP don't appear to me to be really well supported propositions at this stage. Perhaps there is support we don't yet know about or that will be put forth soon after small-scale versions are tried?

The thing that has struck me about TZM/TVP and voluntaryist anarcho-capitalism is that there is a lot in common. Both want to get rid of the state as we know it, both seek to build a society based on moral values, both embrace technology, both are about giving people more of a chance of true freedom and both come from a desire to do good for the future people of the world.

CressB - correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think Stefan Molyneux has said that really the only way to allow people to live in a truly moral and free society is through promoting good parenting - to free people from psychological problems brought about by childhood abuse and neglect, and give them the opportunity to think and learn in a happy, supportive environment. Only then will they be able to apply the things like rational secular ethics to their lives that are necessary for changing society for the better in the long run.

I haven't seen it mentioned in TZM/TVP, but I would suppose that in a knowledge-based society with the kind of community values necessary to support it that there would also have to be a focus on promoting good parenting in a very similar way to the anarcho-capitalist alternative. If so, it would seem that the conclusion of this debate about the feasibility of the particular societal models can probably wait a few generations while more data comes in and the initial -shared- stage of promoting good parenting is well underway.

Adam does that inter-generational psychological improvement stuff come up in TZM? Do you think that there is significant overlap in how to improve the world, at least in the initial stages?
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 94
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/23/2012 1:39:34 PM
Lol thank you for backing me up Cress- unfortunately, a quick examination of Adam's response has something that made me stop reading altogether.

They demanded examples.

They are unwilling to offer explanations and examples and proof of their claims, believing everything they say is self-evident, but should anyone offer a dissenting opinion, they need to back up their claims, or they are simply wrong.

It's childish, really.

One simple question for you Adam; If you truly believe such a system is possible- why haven't you or your fellow "Zeitgeist Movement" people started setting up camp? I know of a group of Mennonites who, when fearing the draft during the first world war, fled to Mexico and, together, bought a huge tract of land, and lived as they saw fit.

Why don't you start, and prove us wrong? Why can you only offer ideas, but nothing tangible?
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 95
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/24/2012 1:37:14 PM
>>>And right there you have your problem. Because of your impatience and ignorance you are giving up.

No, I'm dealing with a preacher, when I was told we would be discussing and exchanging ideas.

I offered you a link to a portion of my ideas, which explains it far better than I could, on the merits of a monetary system.

You told me that you didn't need to read it, because you already know what it contains- and that it is wrong.

Such a position is intensely rude when trying to exchange ideas. There is no point in discussing further with someone who is not interested in exchanging ideas. What I read from your response is "I am absolutely right, I have read everything that is to be read, and asking me to understand your position is a waste of my time"- and reading your other responses only re-enforces that.

>>>Well if that’s really the case, don’t bother anymre with this thread.

Don't tell me what to do. It is against the rules of these forums to issue ultimatums Such as those.

>>>when you can’t even be bothered to hear people out because they’re not IMMEDIATELY ringing your dnner bell.

Ironically, that is exacltly my criticism- that you won't hear people out, and are only interested in talking down to people who disagree with you, rather than exchanging ideas, as your initial post suggested.

>>>Examples are everywhere.

You misunderstand me.

I asked for examples. You told me to do my own research.

Other people made, to you, questionable claims- you demand others defend their beliefs against yours.

You are being a hypocrite- when you make claims, you don't have to back anything up- but when others make claims, they must back it up.

>>> We’re not about making communes and pompously saving ourselves. If you’re onboard one of the very, very few liferafts (notice I didn’t say only liferaft) off a sinking ship where the passengers of that sinking ship FAR outnumber the capacity of those liferafts, then what does that spell? Chaos for the commune and inevitably failure.

That makes your stance very clear- for your beliefs to work, or even be ATTEMPTED, the majority of the world must support you, if not everyone.

And what system could possibly fail under such a slanted standard?
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 96
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/25/2012 1:49:20 PM
I was going to address your comments, but why bother? So i'll do you a favour and explain the forum rules to you....

>>>Oh wow. I'm just picturing you stomping your feet shouting "You're not the boss of me!" lol. Grow up.

Under "Polarization" in the rules, it states

"No Thread may exist designated exclusively for Response from a specific Gender, Ethnicity, Orientation, Religion, Public, etc. Such a Thread will be deleted. The entire Concept of a Forum is for anyone to post their Opinions and Thoughts, providing they are On-Topic, on any Threads he or she sees fit. ...More examples of no-no's....
"Free Enterprise. Gov't Shleps have no Business in here"....The Common Denominator is: "You are not Welcome", "Don't post here", "Get Out" ... ie. Exclusion."

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts141520.aspx

In short, telling ANYONE to leave a thread, or that they are not welcome, or that they should leave, or any form of exclusion is against the rules.

If you wish to keep continuing to post on this thread, I suggest you FOLLOW THE RULES.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 97
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/25/2012 3:59:41 PM

Tell you what, let's see if a mod will come along and reprimand me.


People can be reported to the mods
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 98
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/27/2012 1:00:25 AM
Hi fellow posters. I started scanning this thread about pg 6 (time issues) so please forgive me if I ask redundit question or repeat previously discussed issues. Thanks.

I've been a fan of both TVP and TZM since the movie made its apperance. I had attempted to discuss it in forums and in face-to-face discussion and faced many quesitons I wasn't sure of. It took me a long time and a lot of thought and research and then I finally 'GOT IT'.

The problem, I discovered, ALWAYS came down to the concept of money. I had to take the concept and break it down, I began with the question, "When did money begin?" , a lot of research went into following that history. During that search I also discovered just how deeply entrenched we have become in the concept of 'exchanges'.

Read a paper, listen to the news, watch tv, surf the net, conversations with friends .... how much of those interaction include overt, implicit or institutionalized refernces to the monetary system? Then think:

what is money, what is its value and who decides that value? What are human needs and why must we pay 'the going price' to procure them? Why do so many people in the world lack the necessities for a basic quality of life?

There's a circular reference in those questions can you see it? Why do so many people lack necessities? What is necessary to procure the necessities? Yep, right 'money'. Why is that? (rhetorical question - just a cognitive exercise).

There's a particularly large body of peer reviewed research about motivation. One of the most consistant findings is that people who struggle to have the necessities of life and those who want a little extra are highy motivated by the prospect of monetary rewards. But poeple who have 'made it' to the point of having plenty without fear of 'needing' anything are no longer motivated by monetary reward (for Ayan Rand fans, you'll understand how that works).

What motivates people who have no fear of needing anything, is recognition, appreciation, and most all the reward of feeling productive, useful, and needed.

Consider that concept when you think about a society in which all needs are met all the time. Who will work? People will work - doing what makes them feel, appreciated, productive, useful and needed. Want more proof - more studies that indicate that capable people who are not in the workforce volunteer their time in greater numbers than the rest of the general population. People want to work - it's a social function and we are social creatures.

We have it all backwords - we don't work for the necessities of life, we work for money the value of which determines our worth as people. But what if we stopped determing worth by wages, what is we deteremed worth by some other means - like being productive, useful and what if we could choose the work that we enjoy most - teacher, mechanid, doctor, programmer, cook, writer ... would it matter which we choose are they not all valued jobs?
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 99
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/27/2012 10:03:09 PM
MrgoodmanUK - Thoughtful response. Maybe I can add my own to advance the discussion.


What I have learned in that time is that most are quite happy with the current paradigm mainly because we were all indoctrinated into it. As such, change is going to be impossible from within.


The indoctrination you speak of is so deep that its closest rival is the oldest and most enduring of all indoctrinations - Gender concepts.
About change from within - it's exactly where we need to begin and I think that's what Adam-Antium is focusing on. Environmental activism began with small movements some 40 years ago, without it we would not have the endangered species act, humane animal experimentation, or the EPA (not the best EPA could be, but it's the shell of something that started because of the 'attitude' changes from 'within'.


Any species that comes across a niche with massive amounts of excess energy per capita(EEPC) is going to reproduce rapidly and life for the members of this species will be pretty easy.
Once the EEPC reaches peak the downturn is pretty rapid and this is the point we're at now.

Once the old paradigm(of EEPC) can no longer be sustained we do have certain choices though.
Either we kill each other so the EEPC remains constant, we find a new niche to expand into or we find a new paradigm.


Attitudes about the monetary system must begin to change if we are to avoid the worst of effects of climate change.
I agree with your perception about EEPC and peak flow, in fact a recent, very lengthy and in depth, article (find it here act.350.org/signup/reckoning ) indicates that some 25 trillion dollars (the amount of money investment & profits) are already being transacted on in the same financial speculation 'trading' games that resulted in the housing market bubble and the 'virtual' collapse of the global economy. As the article noted: that's a hell of a bubble.

With all of that in mind (climate change and the onset of food and fresh water scarcity, peak flow downside, global economic ruin) wouldn't it seem that the time to prep a change in attitudes is now? And it's happening, look at the rise of interest in organic farming, maintaining the commons (public resources vs. privatized), and the huge number of people establishing and working in 'green' fields (which is not given nearly the amount of mainstream news time it deserves). Coops are growing, and bartering is coming back in style and there will be much more of that as we race into climate disaster and the end of an economy dependent on fossil fuels.

Now is time to work from within - to plant 'organic' seeds so that a movement to change behavior can be formed.

Look how long it took for racial attitudes to (silently) change and how relatively quickly a charismatic leader, MLK Jr., was able gather people together into a mass movement.

Additional thoughts or comments are welcome.
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 100
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/27/2012 10:09:01 PM
Adam-Antium

Fantastic to see fellow like-minded people on the thread. I couldn’t agree more with your statements. : )


I'm a little late in arriving, I hope the discussion continues.
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 101
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/29/2012 8:08:17 PM
>>It is my hope that no-one leave this thread

Says the person who drives away anyone with a dissenting opinion, and has driven out more people from this discussion than any other.

It really is funny how that one statement reflects your beliefs beautifully- you want others to perceive you as open and willing to discussion- while the truth of the matter is, you will not tolerate anything less than compliance from commenters, "correcting" anyone who dares to see things differently as you.

Equally, you want people to perceive your beliefs and the effect they would have on society differently than they actually would be.

I mean, look at MrGoodManUK and emotionalheat- no one is challenging their comments, because they are respectful of other peoples opinions- they simply explain this as they see it, and feel no need to talk down to people or make unsubstantiated assertions, while challenging or completely disregarding other peoples assertions. And frankly, if you really are interested in " lively, mature and insightful discussion", you really could take a page from the previously mentioned users books- stop talking down to people, stop acting like expressing and confirming your beliefs is a chore not worth doing, and simply talk about how your ideas would WORK. Instead, we get told people will continue to do things because people enjoy it. And frankly, I don't think there'd be enough plumbers in that society to clean all the shit-clogged pipes. Because a great number of jobs- necessary jobs- are not enjoyable, and need a form of reward to have people do it. In fact, it's far more fun to sleep in, have sex, and raise children for society to have to support. I don't see why people would give up the chance for raw hedonism to do jobs that are completely unpleasant.

>>> I urge all to act in a mature manner so true, altruistic and intellectual discussion shall continue.

And there it is again- your assertion that we must believe in things like altruism in order for us to be permitted to express out beliefs- that we must agree with you, or else our opinions are invalid.

And you have the gall to believe that attempting to control what kind of opinions are presented in this thread is a form of "discussion". It isn't.

>>> as such urged people to discuss with me as opposed to debate.

There's that condescending manner yet again- that you believe your opinion is so well thought out that all forms of debate are unnecessary- and yet, you claim your opinion has nothing to do with achieving utopia.

Utopia is unachievable, you say- but discussing the flaws in your beliefs are intolerable

>>>It would amount to nothing more than a child "telling on" another for not wanting to play a game.

Isn't that comment itself a logical fallacy? I believe you named it " fallacy of holding me accountable for the superficial assumptions you have created in your own head", though I cannot seem to find any credible websites listing fallacy's agreeing that this is a fallacy to begin with...

>>>Now is it possible to adhere to those forum rules you guys love so much and get back on-topic?

(again- isn't that another logical fallacy? At least, if your own comments hold any weight it is)

I didn't make the rules, nor do I enforce them- but I have witnessed entire threads being closed because one user attempted to exclude another from expressing their beliefs. You don't have to had made the thread for it to be closed.

>>>Who exactly is this "zeitgeist" you refer to?

I'm wondering that myself- what is a "zeitgeist"? What makes someone a zeitgeist and not another? Just your assurance that they aren't?

It reminds me of a discussion I had with a guy about the Terrorist organization "ALF", and how he believed no one in ALF has ever assaulted or killed another person- but at the end of the day, what made someone in ALF was the belief that they are in it- but that anyone could come off the street and say "no, that's not what a real ALF member is"- and suddenly, they aren't a part of ALF.

So, how about you make it perfectly clear- what makes someone a "Zeitgeist"? What beliefs do they hold? And more importantly, who are you to determine this?
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 102
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/30/2012 5:08:27 AM

In the future mankind will have no real option but to live within a resource based economy whether through a 'master & slave' society or an open altruistic one is any ones guess.


Isn't that a false dichotomy? What of a free and open society that has no master or slaves, and does not rely on altruistic central planning?
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >