The Tide of Humanity - Page 10

The Tide of Humanity

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 116
Thank Tree183Thanks

This is a discussion on The Tide of Humanity within the Articles forums, part of the Announcements category; Thinking anything like this does not interest me at all. Sure, I don't like the collective, or mainstream, or whatever ...

  1. #91

    Thinking anything like this does not interest me at all.

    Sure, I don't like the collective, or mainstream, or whatever you chose to call them, this is just as nonsensical to me as anything else I find nonsensical about my generation.

  2. #92

    New here, but not new to MBTI. This 15 posts thing in order to get started is annoying.

  3. #93

    First, I am new here. I thank any post that inspires discussion, even if I don’t completely agree with it. Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by TGW View Post
    Is there a tl;dr version of this? I got like... things to do. And stuff.
    I read it all. There was some interesting back and forth interspersed with some jackassery. The short – people as a whole can suck, and individuals are interesting, potentially amazing beings. Complacency and laziness, as a result of ‘bread and circuses’ (e.g., technological improvements in accessibility to entertainment, food, etc.), has potentially created a scenario that has sapped the collective will to act to change perceived societal ills.

    Corruption, inequality, the ability of the ‘system’ to permit but invalidate protest, the need for revolution rather than words, the importance of justice and order and its potential to foster injustice, the power of people and their potential greatness, were all discussed. This thread initially focused on the U.S., but the issues being discussed were noted as problematic in other locales by various posters. Simply, people can suck, but people can be great. How do we, the people, bring about meaningful change that doesn’t ultimately perpetuate the same problems under new leadership? Discussion is great, but what are we to do?

    There is a rough summary as I perceived it. My own perceptions, like anyone’s, are flawed and therefore so too is this summary. As a result, you really should read the whole. Regardless, to add to the tl;dr catch-22 . . .

    The Importance of Dialogue:

    Quote Originally Posted by Grunfur View Post
    Stop rambling and pretending to sound deep. Honestly. Wrists. Slit. On it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Worriedfunction View Post
    *slow clap* Well done, so what are your plans to deal with this issue? Or is this yet another thumb up the arse observation?
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolls View Post
    Instead of trying to trash the current way of quote things are done and here is why unquote; why not spell out your current ideal system??

    Unless you are a voice of positivity, you will never be a voice of accord in yer so called lazy; unmotivated; American peers; lives. BUT Seriously shame? Or are you going for some other play?
    Quote Originally Posted by EmpathNFP View Post
    Reding this, one of my own thoughts was, "I would struggle so much to stay alive if I viewed the world this way. The weight of such negativity would crush me. But I know I have great weaknesses as a person and perhaps there are some who find fulfillment not in peace with others or joy in life but in a shrewd, sharp, even terrible assessment of the state of things. If this is too personal of a question, I totally get it--just seeking to understand.
    Quote Originally Posted by MagicNine View Post
    Conversations (usually) lead to understanding, consensus, and answers.
    When conversations turn into arguments, when you attack the other side instead of improving your idea with theirs, when the desire to win thus blinds you to your own imperfections.... Conflicts are renewed and deeper entrenched.
    90% of disagreements start from conflicting definitions of some abstract word/concepts ... and from there it only gets worse.

    What happens in the microcosm is bound to happen in the macrocosm.

    And personally, I think any discussion has to start on the psychological level and then build upwards. Just saying... all politics is local.
    Warning Label for any Discussion About a More Ideal Society:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinaswell View Post
    One man's utopia is another's hell.....
    The Truth About People?

    Quote Originally Posted by ItsSunnyOutHere View Post
    3 simple words:

    Ignorance is bliss.

    People who notice the world for what it is will always have the issue of wanting to tell others but the 'others' wont want to listen unless change is forced and hey, I know I don't have the balls or the love for humanity to step up and change everything. I'd rather sit outside and watch the tree's to be honest.

    edit: People will always want equality aswell until it comes to them truly being equal, then they'll point fingers and demand more because it's human greed and survival instincts at play. I dont think that inherently makes people bad but I sure do know if people got over the petty bullshit life would be so much simpler' like maybe equality actually occurring. Or people not arguing and pointing fingers because of 'injustice'. The world's what it already is and there's nothing a single man can do. All we can hope for is someone with much more power decides to wash away the filth that popular culture and stagnation has done to our society as a whole. We can hope.
    Quote Originally Posted by MNiS View Post
    I never said anything about forcing people to change. I said I believe that most people would change their views willingly if they knew the implications. You don't think developing technologies peacefully is more desirable than developing new ways to kill one another? Things like space travel, (if possible)time travel, boundless energy(like fusion?) and other far off technologies can only occur during peace, not war.
    Sadly, many of the world’s greatest and most widespread technological innovations have come about as a result of war. War forces creativity through competition for survival. Still, there is a system of misinformation that will forever oppose this idea of people understanding the implications, and as one poster noted, TMI can muddy the waters and make changing viewpoints difficult.

    Quote Originally Posted by slyspy View Post
    People are amazing. They build pyramids, skyscrapers, governments, societies, corporations, organizations that help the needy, etc. I mean, the list just goes on and on. Not only that, scientists are more and more collaborating to discover new things and get things done. I don't know how you could possibly hate people. People are the reason for your food, your clothing, your shelter, and your education. What kind of person hates people, hates community, hates collectives? I like individuals but even I understand that one person can never be as intelligent, as powerful, and as constructive as people as whole can. Go read The Wisdom of Crowds, man. Maybe, you will learn something.
    Collectives can be bad or good, just like individuals. I don’t believe the OP claimed to dislike communities or people, except in referring to people as a whole and perhaps referencing the crap we continue to let happen on this planet despite our collective power. If anything, this makes me think the OP is merely disappointed in the inaction of the collective to sit down and actually do something meaningful. On the flip side, change is taking place, just perhaps not at the pace or on the scale some of us might prefer, while various collectives continue to try to delay, divert, and discredit such efforts for their own reasons.

    This doesn’t even begin to account for our own ability to get so lost arguing with one another about the ‘ideal’ that we fail to accomplish much of anything, even the simplest concepts most of us could agree on, if we could only get past all the crap we bring with us to these discussions. I daresay none could honestly deny that: things could be better; some places are much worse than others; some groups are suffering more than others; and that some groups have more than they need and perhaps even should given the discrepancies within societies, supported by ‘legal’ processes that permit them to accumulate and concentrate power of whatever form (monetary, political, military, etc.); technology has progressed to a point that with collective will and action EVERYONE could have the basic life necessities and access to opportunity.

    Humanity has such potential, but we are afraid of change in collective, afraid to lose what we have, and afraid that what we create will be somehow worse (which it easily can be). The Occupy Movement, like so many, lost its way partly through trying to change too much and permitting too many voices. Strong leadership is essential, and I agree it should never be a singular voice, but as history has shown us, too many voices can be just as bad.
    Whatever discussion takes place, it should attempt to be focused and efficient. Any change must be incremental, targeting the worst, most obvious ills, and transitioning towards balance. We can imagine a society wherein people can be individuals, while contributing to a collective system that ensures the prosperity of all, if we can simply identify and concur on one broadly accepted issue that needs to be corrected. We then direct our brightest minds towards corrective action that benefits society as a whole.

    Once we’ve ‘fixed’ one problem, we identify another, and another. We can’t fix everything at once, and that has been the greatest mistake of so many people, especially so-called revolutionaries. Revolution would bring with it a host of new, unforeseen problems. Worse, some of the ensuing problems would have been anticipated and even fostered for personal benefit, hence the trouble with the idea of relying on a strong ‘leader’. Change is frightening, especially when people feel like they have something to lose. While some of us might be crazy enough to want to charge full speed ahead, a more balanced approach, carefully progressing towards whatever ideal we might mutually imagine should be our purpose.

    If you don’t agree with me, fine. Suggest a better alternative. Amend my idea or discard it, but if you cannot contribute meaningfully to discussion, you are part of the problem. I have very specific ideas of what I want to do locally to begin addressing these issues, and as I become more familiar with this amazing platform (Personality Café), I shall perhaps express these ideas more fully. Presently, I am simply reveling in the revelation that there is a forum full of amazing people, comprising an amazing collective (again Personality Café), where most members are willing to engage in dialogue and discussion of meaningful and difficult ideas.

    As always, and I may need to make this my sig, these are my opinions. They will evolve over time, especially as I interact within this community, and my understanding of things expands. The most frightening person I could imagine is one whose mind never changes, followed closely by one whose mind too readily changes. Great thread and interesting reading, I'm glad I found you all.
    ThreadDeath thanked this post.

  4. #94
  5. #95

    Quote Originally Posted by RogueWave View Post
    If anyone is familiar with them at all, most people probably consider the band MGMT a one-hit-wonder with their 2008 song Electric Feel (and that’s okay, because it’s a really fucking good song).

    They also have lots of other good fucking songs and have a cult following among stoners, 21st century hippies, hipsters, and people with a good taste in music. But what I think many people miss is that the duo’s songs often contain a critique of their generation (also my generation and that of the bulk of PerC’s users) concealed in a cloak of trippy psychedelic imagery.
    In "Time to Pretend" this criticism is not even cloaked. That is why I like that song so much, it is straightforward


    Quote Originally Posted by RogueWave View Post
    The latest rounds of American protest have centered around the concept of “creating awareness.” “Creating awareness” can be better described as an excuse for half-assed activism. These movements, like Occupy Wallstreet, consist of loosely affiliated cells, under a very loose (essentially non-existent) mission statement/list of demands, with no solid leadership. This way, their opposition will find it difficult to disband them (it also makes it difficult for the protest movement to actually do anything) Basically, the effect they’re trying to create is an IRL version of Anonymous. But, Anonymous manages to get shit done because it still has teeth. They fuck shit up (although Anonymous’ effectiveness is certainly debatable as well).
    I think Anonymous is more effective because it is more like a group of individuals acting on their own will , than a movement and therefore , they don't need leaders.

  6. #96

    Whenever I see this thread title in the list, I get a visual of a literal tsunami of humans about to collide with my person.

  7. #97

    Quote Originally Posted by RogueWave View Post
     
    If anyone is familiar with them at all, most people probably consider the band MGMT a one-hit-wonder with their 2008 song Electric Feel (and that’s okay, because it’s a really fucking good song).

    They also have lots of other good fucking songs and have a cult following among stoners, 21st century hippies, hipsters, and people with a good taste in music. But what I think many people miss is that the duo’s songs often contain a critique of their generation (also my generation and that of the bulk of PerC’s users) concealed in a cloak of trippy psychedelic imagery.

    In one of their songs they modified Timothy Leary’s 60’s counterculture phrase “Turn on, tune in, and drop out” to fit the American mainstream youth of today with “Turn it on, tune it in, and stay inert.”

    Their inclusion of the “it” is really an interesting and understatedly clever bit of writing. There’s very little doubt in my mind this refers to my generation’s obsession with technology. And by Leary’s own prediction, technology is the LSD of the 2000s We are electronic Lotus-Eaters, numbed out and insulated from reality and the state of the world.

    Americans have essentially become lazy. As a whole we fear being inconvenienced. We like our TV. We like our smarthphone. We like our infrastructure. We like all the meaningless bullshit we use to bury our heads in the sand (aka turn it on, tune it in, and stay inert.)

    Laziness breeds complacency, and complacency makes one vulnerable to the slow, silent, dagger of creeping normalcy. For the past few days I’ve been talking to my friend about the direction that the US is moving in, the creation of an Orwellian state ruled by martial law, and conspiracy theories related to UN Agenda 21. This future is descending upon us largely via creeping normalcy, and few but the most perceptive are privy to it due to complacency being the norm.

    The question becomes “What are the American people going to do about it?” Well, the answer is not much. Not for awhile anyway. The solutions to problems arising from a broken/corrupt government are protest and revolution. Americans haven’t very big on either of those lately.

    Remember Americans have become lazy, and don’t want to become inconvenienced. This is reflected in their attitudes towards protest and revolution.

    The latest rounds of American protest have centered around the concept of “creating awareness.” “Creating awareness” can be better described as an excuse for half-assed activism. These movements, like Occupy Wallstreet, consist of loosely affiliated cells, under a very loose (essentially non-existent) mission statement/list of demands, with no solid leadership. This way, their opposition will find it difficult to disband them (it also makes it difficult for the protest movement to actually do anything) Basically, the effect they’re trying to create is an IRL version of Anonymous. But, Anonymous manages to get shit done because it still has teeth. They fuck shit up (although Anonymous’ effectiveness is certainly debatable as well).

    Occupy and movements like it, have no teeth. This is because a protest movement’s teeth are its leadership, mission statement, and organization. Occupy was 0 for 3. And they avoided them because those things are difficult, boring, and require someone with a vision. They wanted to jump right into the glamourous and sexy aspects of it, like showdowns with riot squads and being on tv. Although, they will claim, as they always have, their goal was to “create awareness” *air jerk motion*.

    Contrast this with the American Civil Rights Movement. It was an effective protest movement. It brought forth the change it set out to. It had a list of demands. It had an internal bureaucracy. It made organized use of people and resources through careful logistical planning. And perhaps most importantly, it had a definitive leader with a strong sense of vision. And we all know what happened to him. But he knew the risk and rose to occasion anyway. Presently, we don’t have this sort of person (people) in America to lead a movement like that. Remember, Americans have become lazy, they don’t want to be inconvenienced, and becoming a target is as inconvenient as it gets.

    To backtrack a little, I mentioned that revolution was the other, equally unpopular, solution. This is the sort of scenario in which an IRL-Anonymous-like organization could possibly prove effective. Loosely affiliated cells only have teeth when they’re paramilitary/violent in nature. Basically, Occupy’s organizational structure is better suited for a sort of rebel insurgency than a protest movement.

    But why won’t Americans go for something like this in order to prevent or rise against a Police State? It’s inconvenient. An armed revolution would constitute a major disruption in infrastructure and quality of life. You can’t watch The Big Bang Theory and microwave a hotpocket if you have no power, are huddled in a burnt-out building, clutching an AK-47 waiting to ambush a National Guard patrol.

    This does not mean that Americans don’t want see the direction of their nation change. Many do. However, most of them still naively hold onto the idea that they can alter that direction through their voting habits. But it’s becoming more apparent all the time that we cannot.

    The way we elect leaders is like picking apples from one big barrel. We keep getting a bad one each time, but we never consider that the whole barrel is rotten and we should take a chance and pick one from the tree. Picking one from the tree is a dangerous, scary, difficult task, and we’re lazy, so that’s a no-go on that one.

    The “barrel” is the highly insular world of American politics. And shockingly, this world produces politicians, not leaders. This insular world has a very specific set of parameters for who “makes it” within itself. As a result, the people that “make it” or all pretty much the fucking same. Regardless of the party, they all push one side or the other of these false dichotomies that mostly serve to distract from deeper issues while they cater to the special interests that support them.

    “Going to the tree” would mean voting for someone far outside the aforementioned system. This is scary. This person is unfamiliar. They say weird shit. They don’t have a “proven track record’, the standard for which we’ve accepted from that flawed mainstream system. So we don’t vote for them. And even if we do come close to “going to the tree” the media will be damn sure to force-feed us two of the bad apples from that ancient barrel.

    Early in this rant I said that Americans won’t do anything, not for awhile anyway to stave off an Orwellian fate. Because they will eventually. I know they will. They cannot not. This is going to get into my own, warped, self-contradictory view on humanity.

    I hate people (the collective) I despise them with a passion. I hate looking at them. I hate smelling them. I hate being around them. They’re loud. They’re moronic. They make -no sense- nonesofuckingever. They’re hideous in every single conceivable way and if I never dealt with them again, that would be just peachy fucking keen.

    But at the same time I love persons (the singular/individuals). Individuals one-on-one are different entities than that monster People. But I know, much to my own frustration, that they’re two sides of the same thing. Individuals and People have a push-pull effect on one another. Individuals spur on the development of People, and People provide solidarity for the Individual.

    These specific individuals are the generators of ideas. Most people aren’t these people, most make-up what I call “the tide of humanity” a big mass that just sloshes from one prevailing notion to the other.

    These rare people are world’s artists, scientists, philosophers, poets, authors, and musicians. Ideas are powerful and therefore so too are those who craft them. They have the ability to alter that malleable, Matrix-like, complex system known as culture. Those in the seat of power have always known this. This is why throughout history they have either recruited the generators of ideas to their cause, or eliminated them.

    But the other special part about the Individual-People relationship, is that the Individual will not allow People to be oppressed forever. Basically, someone always comes along who has the clarity of vision and the tenacity to push on the status quo. Someone who’s going to turn it off, tune it out, and get their shit in gear. These individuals have yet to step forth from the tide of humanity on these issues, but I am confident that they’re out there.
    itineranticonoclast thanked this post.

  8. #98

    Hate is a strong word that people toss around all the time without meaning it. Of course he might truly mean it, in which case . . . wow, I guess I kind of glossed over that one and took it at as being exaggeration.

    I say I hate people (as a collective) all the time, but I don't literally mean it. I use the term as so many of us have come to - exaggeration for effect. The idiocy we can so frequently engage in collective is astounding, and it does engender a certain degree of disgust. How can it not?

    There are a great many things in this world we can most of us agree are just plain wrong, but we permit them anyway. Is it because of the laziness the OP mentions? Or is it something more?

    RogueWave, do you truly hate people? That seems a bit harsh. You've convinced me, at the least, to stop saying it due to potential misunderstanding of not saying what I mean. I love people, but I hate (no exaggeration) what we do to each other in collective and the inequity and suffering we permit to exist as a result of how we choose to lvie. Therein lies the distinction, and what I thought you might be saying.

    I am used to people that exaggerate in conversation. Here, in PC, perhaps I need to get used to people that say exactly what they mean. Hopefully you will clarify. I accept and even appreciate your viewpoint either way, but I do not wish to mistake its intent.

  9. #99

    Quote Originally Posted by itineranticonoclast View Post
    Hate is a strong word that people toss around all the time without meaning it. Of course he might truly mean it, in which case . . . wow, I guess I kind of glossed over that one and took it at as being exaggeration.

    I say I hate people (as a collective) all the time, but I don't literally mean it. I use the term as so many of us have come to - exaggeration for effect. The idiocy we can so frequently engage in collective is astounding, and it does engender a certain degree of disgust. How can it not?

    There are a great many things in this world we can most of us agree are just plain wrong, but we permit them anyway. Is it because of the laziness the OP mentions? Or is it something more?

    RogueWave, do you truly hate people? That seems a bit harsh. You've convinced me, at the least, to stop saying it due to potential misunderstanding of not saying what I mean. I love people, but I hate (no exaggeration) what we do to each other in collective and the inequity and suffering we permit to exist as a result of how we choose to lvie. Therein lies the distinction, and what I thought you might be saying.

    I am used to people that exaggerate in conversation. Here, in PC, perhaps I need to get used to people that say exactly what they mean. Hopefully you will clarify. I accept and even appreciate your viewpoint either way, but I do not wish to mistake its intent.

  10. #100

    Quote Originally Posted by Metasentient View Post
    Whenever I see this thread title in the list, I get a visual of a literal tsunami of humans about to collide with my person.
    Me too.

    Your statement changed my views. After you pointed that out, I now see something like this:

    Stelmaria and Metalize thanked this post.


     
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [ESTP] Natural Killers —Turning the Tide of Battle
    By asewland in forum ESTP Forum - The Doers
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 10-04-2014, 09:43 PM
  2. [INFP] Humanity
    By lothweneriniel in forum INFP Forum - The Idealists
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 07-02-2011, 04:19 PM
  3. Map of Humanity
    By Marino in forum Critical Thinking & Philosophy
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-25-2009, 09:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:24 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0