"Let nature take it course" Mentality is completely bullshit (Class Discussion)

"

Boem wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

On the one hand, civilization is the collective human effort to prevent nature from taking its course.

Again, statements like this make absolutely no sense.

It makes every sense. Civilization is the opposite of natural selection. Unnatural selection, if you will. Nature is anarchy, law is unnatural. And awesome.

.

"

Bars wrote:

"

SpanishMonarch wrote:

Humans are more like a virus than a primate in the grand scheme of things.

Even more like a tumor at our current stage of development (or degeneration, if you prefer).

"

Slayer_Tip wrote:

how can we let nature take its course when we literally fucked with nature with our global warming?

"

C1111 wrote:

the human nature is stupid

You guys should put down the liberal kool-aid. Stop hating humanity, embrace that we're flawed badasses, and lets figure out how to properly colonize and terraform Mars.

"

innervation wrote:

You guys should put down the liberal kool-aid. Stop hating humanity, embrace that we're flawed badasses, and lets figure out how to properly colonize and terraform Mars.

I was misanthropic long before I knew anything about 'politics'.

"

SpanishMonarch wrote:

I was misanthropic long before I knew anything about 'politics'.

To be clear I don't mean to present this as a mainstream liberal political idea, rather that you find humanity-hating in a certain crowd, who run in liberal political circles (obviously, given their choices). Then this happens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

"

Entropic_Fire wrote:

Total loss of thermodynamic free energy does not imply non-existence of the universe. It will just get really really boring by that point.


Viruses simply reproduce their genetic code like all other instances of self propagating genetic code, although they typically do so in a parasitic fashion. I don't see how that has any relationship to the heat death of the universe.


I don't think sol is trolling here actually, just getting emotions mixed up with morality.

The heat death of the universe is contrary to Boem's claim that nature is in some sort of harmony and neutrality. His statement as I read it was implying that viruses are just part of the ecosystem and will naturally come and go because nature will adjust, as if nature is a monolithic and eternal force. I am suggesting that this isn't the case. How is this unrelated?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

On the one hand, civilization is the collective human effort to prevent nature from taking its course.

Again, statements like this make absolutely no sense.

It makes every sense. Civilization is the opposite of natural selection. Unnatural selection, if you will. Nature is anarchy, law is unnatural. And awesome.

Nature is anarchy? Seriously? Tell that to a beehive or a Chimpanzee community. Yeah laws are simpler but are still there. You can even argue that some kind of animal communities are more civilized than humans even with fewer laws. Not to mention that even in our age the laws mean shit.

Anarchy (at least the utopian one) is by far the most fair system to live in. Lack or no form of goverment and hierarchies does not mean chaos when the educational and moral level of a society is high enough. Do not confuse Chaos with Anarchy they have nothing to do with each other.

"

SpanishMonarch wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

Nature, or the combined total of mass/energy resides in combined neutrality. There is nothing wrong with being a virus.

Peace,

-Boem-

This is incorrect. The universe is slowly dissipating, and in the distant future will cease to exist entirely. Viruses only expedite that process in their given ecosystems.

Combined neutrality is my way of saying "nothingness", from which presumably the universe came forth.

So "ceasing to exist" simply means going back to it's original state, which doesn't prevent the rebirth of another non-neutral state after that.

Expediting something in an infinite loop is irrelevant.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit :

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

It makes every sense. Civilization is the opposite of natural selection. Unnatural selection, if you will. Nature is anarchy, law is unnatural. And awesome.

No it doesn't.

I would kill them all and feed the african village next to them.

BTW, if you help this maybe weak baby calf survive he will spread bad gens in nature weakening the whole race.
The spartans had it right.

"

Entropic_Fire wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

It makes every sense. Civilization is the opposite of natural selection. Unnatural selection, if you will. Nature is anarchy, law is unnatural. And awesome.

That only makes sense if you think humans somehow exist outside of the confines of natural selection. Like if god gave humans a soul this could be true, but if we simply evolved from lower animals then all of our fantastically complex social structures are just a product of the natural selection that brought humanity to this point in the first place.

Natural selection brought humanity to a point, then it stopped and no longer applies. We trivialized the survival problem and shattered homeostasis. I'm not saying God set us apart, I'm saying we set us apart.