Humans: Flawed or flawless?

[Corinthian]

The best kind of government is frankly a Benevolent Dictatorship. The only problem is the scarcity of those.

[Darth InSidious]

The best kind of government is frankly a Benevolent Dictatorship. The only problem is the scarcity of those.

Pharaonism ftw!

[Arcesious]

Indeed not.

 

I agree with Corinthian, but the concept of how democracy works would make most people happy, Ctrl_Alt_Del. It gives them a voice, whereas many other systems don't allow as much freedom. Yes, even in a republic there is voting, but a democracy, in a pure concept, is much more desirable to any citizen who wants to have a voice that makes a difference in the higher ranks. However, democracies and other governemtns we have now aren't very 'for the people, by the people'... But of course, democracy can also lead to anarchy if something like the Constitution or a Civil Rights Document is not in place. As corinthian said, a Benevolent Dictatorship is the best government. why? Because soem people need a government that keeps them from havign certain problems, for their own good. However, before anything that is ever put in place, a very specific and detailed civil rights bill needs to be put in place- one that can only be put in place once major issues are finally resolved entirely, such as abortion, gay marriage, religion, science, and such.

[Ravnas]

Then both political ideologies have their unattainable governmental goal. However, A benevolent dictatorship, no matter how great and wise this hypothetical ruler may be, there will always be a splinter group seeking anarchy and rebellion, dreaming of a nihilistic society.

[Arcesious]

Rebellions can be quelled if the majority of humanity is against that group's goals. It would simply be a matter of educating every next generation to beleive valuable life rules/lessons, philosophies and science. And in such a way that it would not be 'brainwashing'.

[Ravnas]

Fair enough, but there will a time if such a society exists no matter how we instill reason and rational though into our children's minds(Whoops, Brainwashing FTW ) There will come a time when the answers society provides won't be enough for one person, and one person is all it takes sometimes.

[Q]

Flawed? erhaps in our own perspective.

What, you need proof?!

 

If this doesn't convince you, nothing will.

[Ravnas]

What, you need proof?!

 

If this doesn't convince you, nothing will.

 

Augghhhh!!! I'm melting!!, I'm melting!!, Oh what a world....

[Corinthian]

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure some of the more infamous Internet Shock Images can go without mentioning as proof of Humanity being the most depraved species on the planet by far.

[Samuel Dravis]

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure some of the more infamous Internet Shock Images can go without mentioning as proof of Humanity being the most depraved species on the planet by far.

With humanity the only species on the planet that can be depraved, I'm pretty sure those are unnecessary examples.

[Q]

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure some of the more infamous Internet Shock Images can go without mentioning as proof of Humanity being the most depraved species on the planet by far.

What, the Rickroll?

[Totenkopf]

Probably more useful for determining (or at least observing) the degree of depravity to which humanity often sinks.

 

If this doesn't convince you, nothing will.

 

Hubbard probably turned over in his grave at least twice.

[Achilles]

I think the important distinction to consider here is "survival of the fittest", not "survival of the perfectly adapted" etc. Organisms do not have to perfectly adapted to their environments in order to survive, they just have to be adapted well enough to be able to produce off-spring.

 

As such, are human "flawless" in their adaptation? Hardly. Our eyes suck. Our lower backs are poorly adapted to walking upright. The list of "flaws" goes on and on. However we do possess the amazing ability to adapt our environment to us which is significantly more staggering than the simple ability to create and use tools. We farm a portion of our food supply. We build habitats to protect us from the elements. To the best of my knowledge, no other animal does this besides us.

 

I say all this because I think it's necessary to point out that the two, seeming opposing ideas presented in the original post need not be mutually exclusive. Humans can be both well-adapted and flawed at the same time. We do not need to reconcile either argument because they are not at odds with one another.

 

And if you don't believe me, ask yourself how many times you've successfully removed a screw with a butter knife, or used a rock to drive in a tent-peg.

 

Thanks for reading.

[Ravnas]

And if you don't believe me, ask yourself how many times you've successfully removed a screw with a butter knife, or used a rock to drive in a tent-peg.

 

 

Or used a coat hanger to unlock a door, not to mention use video games to experience the thrill of a real relationship

[Corinthian]

Besides, what other species on the face of planet Earth has the capability to end all life on the planet at the push of the proverbial button?

[Quanon]

And what other living thing tries to create a living creature/ intelligence.

And then has fear it might destroy its creator...

 

The weirdest thing is that humans know whats wrong or their problems are, but they don't do anything about it.

 

And like posted above, the last decades we didn't adapt, we altered the enviroment to our needs.

 

Though certain Chimps do build a nest/bed to sleep in, so they break off branches and leaves, destroying the structure of a tree.

Then again their ain't 6 000 000 000 chimps.

[Rathoris]

main problem: greed. Enough said really. We've become to intelligent for our own good. All the deceit we are capable of.....

Shamefully we do realise we are exhausting the planet but are to selfish to act.

[Ray Jones]

Every species is exhausting the planet in its "corner of life". Only the whole of all species makes it a "cycle of life". The point is there is sometimes a disturbance in its balance, having its roots in one or more species whose populations are growing to fast/big. We're surely not the first ones who eat up the planet. However, we are (supposedly) the first ones able to actually recognise that and its not like we're doing nothing.

 

I say all this because I think it's necessary to point out that the two, seeming opposing ideas presented in the original post need not be mutually exclusive. Humans can be both well-adapted and flawed at the same time. We do not need to reconcile either argument because they are not at odds with one another.

Correct. We come with an optimum on balance between specialisation and flexibility. Our bodies are developed enough to perform a couple of impressive tasks despite the fact that we are not the fastest, strongest or most robust species on earth. We reached the optimum for pretty much every physical ability out there, and managed not to drift into any overspecialisation at all. As a result, the human evolution almost completely "switched" from 'physical' to 'informational' like 35000 years ago.

 

It is the human knowledge which is currently under heavy development, and not the body. For instance, one idea is that the last time when one human alone could hold ALL the knowledge of all mankind was circa 200 years ago. Today this not possible any more.

 

But if you'd switch a stone age baby (upper palaeolithic) with a 21st century one, it is assumed that neither of them would behave "conspicuous".

 

And if you don't believe me, ask yourself how many times you've successfully removed a screw with a butter knife, or used a rock to drive in a tent-peg.

What really breaks it down to the brain+hands combo again. Pre-human species like the Australopithecines supposedly had brains big enough to have the capacity to come up with a lot of ideas. However, their hands lacked "proper" development and that had a deciding impact on the fine motor skills, making even easy tasks like operating a screwdriver impossible for them.

 

Besides, what other species on the face of planet Earth has the capability to end all life on the planet at the push of the proverbial button?

We surely do not have that capability. We're far away from it.

 

But then again, it's all about the design. No doubt, donkeys intuitionally know how to operate a carrot button.

[Totenkopf]

^Funny, you're anti-nuke Ray, yet you don't think that a global thermonuclear war would basically effectively destroy all or most life on the planet? (mind you, we're talking ability here, not whetther or not that's ever likely to pass)

[Darth InSidious]

I seem to recall that cockroaches are projected to be able to live through such a thing.

[Ray Jones]

Scorpions and ants as well. Then we have life being separated from the rest of the world by kilometres of water in between. Right beside all those creepy, slimy creatures living in caves or who knows where.

 

Alpha and beta radiation can be practically blocked by a sheet of paper. Gamma radiation is a bit more invasive, but a hundred metres of water or rock would basically block any direct radiation from getting anywhere.

 

Fallout and following contamination will hardly reach caves or deeper regions of the oceans.

 

Also we have already found several habitats (mostly undersea) that are completely independent from the sun light.

 

 

^Funny, you're anti-nuke Ray, yet you don't think that a global thermonuclear war would basically effectively destroy all or most life on the planet?

ACH!! And I thought I'm anti-nuke simply because it wastes tax money, is immoral, and gives a bad taint, especially when dropped over a city, not because it might destroy all life when dropped in hundreds.

[mur'phon]

And banana flies, dozends of insects and countless bacteria. To show just how resistant some creatures are, a human can take 5 before dying, a banana fly can take 200.......

[Ctrl Alt Del]

The best kind of government is frankly a Benevolent Dictatorship. The only problem is the scarcity of those.

And what is a benevolent dictatorship? And benevolent to whom?

 

Because soem people need a government that keeps them from havign certain problems, for their own good. However, before anything that is ever put in place, a very specific and detailed civil rights bill needs to be put in place- one that can only be put in place once major issues are finally resolved entirely, such as abortion, gay marriage, religion, science, and such.

I wasn't aware government could sttle those things for good.

 

Rebellions can be quelled if the majority of humanity is against that group's goals. It would simply be a matter of educating every next generation to beleive valuable life rules/lessons, philosophies and science. And in such a way that it would not be 'brainwashing'.

But that's exactly brainwashing. Who determines what are the "valuables" sciences on a dictatorship? The government. Last I heard, they're still made of humans.

 

And, it doesn't matter what justification you have to rule: Divine right, votes, war... there'll always be a resistance where there's opression.

[Corinthian]

Well, that's part of the problem, Ctrl. Benevolence to some is malevolence to others.

 

Also, Ray, with the present nuclear stockpile, most human life would be snuffed out within seconds. The subsequent Nuclear Winter would freeze the Earth, killing everything else in a long, slow, mournful death.

[Web Rider]

Well, that's part of the problem, Ctrl. Benevolence to some is malevolence to others.

which is why democracy was invented, so people can control the level of malevolence in their government.

 

Also, Ray, with the present nuclear stockpile, most human life would be snuffed out within seconds. The subsequent Nuclear Winter would freeze the Earth, killing everything else in a long, slow, mournful death.

 

If every missile was launched and a significant amount of land was hit, yeah, probably. Though enough life in various places would survive, such as the creatures at extreme depths in the ocean.