Database Develop

Solution to Laziness/Spendthrift/Negative thinking

In my own words i define laziness as a form of lack of dedication and progress. It is categorized as a Mental Problem which occurs to 99.99~% of humans.
Laziness is also a beginning of other negative thinking such as procrastination, spendthrift and all other forms of negative thinking. Laziness occurs at the teenage term of life. If it is cured early the human can have a very successful future.
The solution to laziness which after taking account of all possibilities I have come to a conclusion that 'fear' is the highest (dangerous/serious) level of medication to this problem.
---- In practical life what you can do is go to a military camp or a life threatening adventure. Something that forces you to work. You need to have yourself threatened till you max out on your performance. Only then can the highest level of laziness be solved. ----
E.g. Living in the extreme North/South poles where its ice everywhere -70*C. This is an extreme form of survival instinct and well it works
Sorry this might be very disturbing content to people who lead a very safe life in their gold cage.
If you watch "Batman Begins", you will probably understand what I mean and where my ideology comes from.

First of all, Thanks for posting such a nice thread. I totally agree with you, mate. It's Survival Of The Fittest.

<tirade>
Sorry, but I freaking hate that term "Survival of the Fittest." It is an example of Howad Spencer's misunderstanding of natural selection and it just does not mean what most people think it does. I blame it for being directly responsible for a large portion of the world just completely not understanding evolution and then doing things like having the theory outlawed in Kansas. Being "fit" in nature does not mean strong or fast or smart or wearing a pointy cowl, it means having the most number of children. Period. The species that survive and outcompete other species are those who reproduce the most, and whose offspring go on to reproduce themselves. The phrase means that those who have six healthy kids are more fit thatn those who have one or two.
Given the amount of time we all spend tweaking, hacking, coding, searching, flashing etc. rather than spawning rugrats I doubt that most of us are going to fall in the category of "fit"
</tirade>

Any atheists in here?

As I stumbled upon the brotherhood of muslims in this thread, I got a little jealous of the unity they and other religious groups sometimes possess.
Since we atheists aren't a homogeneous group that have any words to follow, except maybe science and the neverending falsification-process of it, I would like to greet all those out there that only believe in the world as you sense it, and the physics behind it.
We don't have any books to follow, so here are 10 good old quotes for you:
1. “The civilized man has a moral obligation to be skeptical. . . . Any man who for one moment abandons or suspends the questioning spirit has for that moment betrayed humanity.” –Bergen Evens
2. The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike. -Delos B. McKown
3. Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -Friedrich Nietzsche
4. What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. -Christopher Hitchens
5. Piety is implanted in human nature; it is deemed a sure refuge. To the growing child, that which falls from his elders' lips is a lesson that abides with him all his life. Monks in their cloisters and devotees in the mosques accept their creed just as a story is handed down from him who tells it, without distinguishing between a true interpreter and a false. If one of these had found his kin among the Magians, or among the Sabians, he would have declared himself a Magian, or among the Sabians he would have become nearly or quite like them. -Abu’l‐Ala al Ma’arri 973-1057
6. The doubter is a true man of science; he doubts only himself and his interpretations, but he believes in science. -Claude Bernard
7. I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it. -Mark Twain
8. A believer states everything must have a creator but fail to say how he was created. -Anonymous
9. The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles? -John Adams 2nd president of the USA
10. But the great tragedy of Science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact - which is so constantly being enacted under the eyes of philosophers... -T.H. Huxley
Peace.

i consider "atheist" to be one who is not a believer in any of the religious movements out there. It's very possible for them to believe in a god, just not necessarily the god that anybody else subscribes to.
I fall into that category. I believe that the sun gives everything on earth life. Which it does, in one way or another.
And therefore i am cool. Yeah......

Agnostic?
I agree with Mike, partially, since in my humble and uninformed opinion the primary need for religion has always been fear of pain and death. I will disgree with Mike on the net benefit of religion, specially in the 21st century...
Here's another quote:
"I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong." Richard Feynman
and another by a well known philosopher:
"Your're asking me who to follow. You're asking me who is right. Don't ask me. I don't know!" O. Osbourne

mikechannon said:
All of us have faith in some form or other. An atheist scientist has faith that science will produce all the answers (though there is no proof of that). In fact many scientists acknowledge that most theories (even once proven) are only true until another theory come along to show the first one wasn't quite right or did not apply in all situations.
Given virtually every civilisation that has ever existed has had some deity or other then scientifically speaking there must be a human need to have "faith". Furthermore, given nature preserves through the generations, only those things that aid survival, then faith must have a net benefit to survival rather as opposed to not having "faith".
Perhaps it is that humans, because they can think ahead, have a need to know that there is some overall purpose/reason for things. In other words that life is not just some purely accidental /random fluke of nature. Even if "faith" is a delusion therefore, it nevertheless prevents the alternative which would be a belief in the utter pointlessness of everything.
Mike
PS. This thread will only last as long as there is no discussion of specific religions. We all realise (or should do!) the sensitivities involved if we get into commenting on or arguing about peoples religious beliefs. For as long as there is respect perhaps there can be an academic chat. It may be that another Mod will close this thread as a religious debate and not appropriate even in off-topic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for a thoughtful response. I quite enjoyed reading it. As a follower of the scientific method, I can assure you that we will never find all the answers. Because we are so limited.
The last part (PS.->) I can somewhat agree with, but for peace sake only.
What religious person can claim rights over the religion they are part of? I find that offensive. (EDIT: in general life)
I grew up with a religion that I feel I have all the right to say and mean anything about. It's part of me, even though I don't believe in it.
I understand that there is a time and place for everything

I am of the view that religion (of any stripe) is a parasite on the humankind, taking advantage of our weaknesses and exploiting our strengths. Science is the antidote.
If there are any advantages they are incidental.
Surur

surur said:
I am of the view that religion (of any stripe) is a parasite on the humankind, taking advantage of our weaknesses and exploiting our strengths. Science is the antidote.
If there are any advantages they are incidental.
Surur
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The development of ethics and moral values that glues the societies together (even though the morals or ethics may be absurd) can have a very positive and stable effect on the way people interact.
Security. False in a bigger sense, true for the individual.
Other than that, with a grain of salt, I agree.
But I believe that humans are a parasite on the earth. And to be a parasite is not just a negative thing. We are what we are. All events has made us this way, and more will make us change or dissappear in time.

rhov23 said:
The development of ethics and moral values that glues the societies together (even though the morals or ethics may be absurd) can have a very positive and stable effect on the way people interact.
Security. False in a bigger sense, true for the individual.
Other than that, with a grain of salt, I agree.
But I also believe that humans are a parasite on the earth (hehe)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who says morals and ethics are tied to religion. They seem to arise from simple game theory - do onto others as you would have done to you did not need Jesus to say it.
Surur

surur said:
Who says morals and ethics are tied to religion. They seem to arise from simple game theory - do onto others as you would have done to you did not need Jesus to say it.
Surur
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't say it was only tied to religion. Religion is made by people, and morals/ethics are therefor made by people. Religion is a way to get a social structure, control the masses, make them believe and behave.
Let's have a quote:
Religion is the opiate of the people. Karl Marx. And don't you DARE call me a communist

mikechannon said:
Well at one level I can agree. If by religion we mean that thing that is used as a reason to fight wars, or religion used by governments to control people.
However I don't agree if we mean religion as the thing that is about wanting to know the answers, particularly to the "big" questions. Or religion as the thing that gives comfort in times of stress etc.
That seems to me the biggest problem in talking about such matters. We would have to spend hours defining what bit or slant on religion we are taliking about.
I actually quite like fzzyrn's concept of believing in a God which is not necessarily the same as any other person believes in and not part of any mainstream religion. You see often I think when you hear scientists talking about the big unknowns and then hear religious leaders talking about the meaning of God it is quite easy to detect a lot of similar thinking between the two. Just for example religious people tend to talk about religion giving people generally and as individuals "a purpose". Just the other day I heard a scientist at the Hadron Collider talking about how discovery of fundamental particles would help us to see "the purpose" of life.
The quest it seems to me is the same and even the language can be the same. History actually shows that religions have lead the way in scientific research. It is only in recent times that science and religion have been seen as conflicting rather than opposite sides of the same coin.
Mike
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you, but not on the last part.
The large religions, change when they must, not when they should. And only when it comes to hard facts, like the earth rotates around the sun etc.
The fact is that religion changes only for selfpreservation, and not by logic. And what monster do we get then?

rhov23 said:
Religion is the opiate of the people. Karl Marx. And don't you DARE call me a communist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are legitimate uses of opiates that benefit everyone that is involved... banning them completely, because of specific types of abuses, would be a foolish move.
The same is true of religion.

psionandy said:
There are legitimate uses of opiates that benefit everyone that is involved... banning them completely, because of specific types of abuses, would be a foolish move.
The same is true of religion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Druggie!
Just kidding. Good point, but I never said that I was for a ban. I just want to tell those that are smart enough, that everything around us is connected.
You can't run cars on prayer. Or will someone prove me wrong?

can a free thinker leaning on atheism report in? lol

Baronic said:
can a free thinker leaning on atheism report in? lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, welcome. You are now ready to be brainwashed. Please follow my directions closely, and send me $100.
No, really. If you don't send money you will die from old age!

Some quotes I've picked up. Sorry I have previously deleted most of the speakers/writers names-
Every sensible man, every honorable man, must hold the Christian sect in horror.^Voltaire
But that a camel-merchant should stir up insurrection in his village; that in league with some miserable followers he persuades them that he talks with the angel Gabriel; that he boasts of having been carried to heaven, where he received in part this unintelligible book, each page of which makes common sense shudder; that, to pay homage to this book, he delivers his country to iron and flame; that he cuts the throats of fathers and kidnaps daughters; that he gives to the defeated the choice of his religion or death: this is assuredly nothing any man can excuse, at least if he was not born a Turk, or if superstition has not extinguished all natural light in him.
If God has made us in his image, we have returned him the favor
To pray to God is to flatter oneself that with words one can alter nature.
It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
Our wise men have said that man was created in the image of God. Now here is a lovely image of the Divine Maker: a flat and black nose with little or hardly any intelligence.
God created sex. Priests created marriage.
God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh.
All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God.
Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and common sense.
If the ignorance of nature gave birth to Gods, the knowledge of nature is calculated to destroy them.
If we look back at the begining we shall find that ignorance and fear created the gods; that fancy, enthusiasm, or deceit adorned or disfigured them; that weakness worships them; that credulity preserves them; and that custom, respect and tyranny support them, in order to make the blindness of man serve their own interest.
Opinions have caused more ills than the plague or earthquakes on this little globe of ours.^Voltaire
They condemn what they do not understand.
The devil's greatest trick was convincing the world that God exists.
The best defense against logic is ignorance.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.
Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?
I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting. But it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously.
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.
I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
. . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!
Never argue with an idiot, he'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience
Reason is the antonym of Religion
Reason should be destroyed in all Christians^Martin Luther
Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived^Oscar Wilde
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unitelligible propositions.
God "fashioned hell for the inquisitive"^St Augustine
Ideas must be distinct before reason can be acted upon them.^Thomas Jefferson
The only victimless crime is blasphemy
The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about
If there were no God, there would be no Atheists.

dane cook anyone....
the bible is going to get printed on you!!!!!!!!

hy
u realy donot have books to follow?
so who will u follow my friend?
people like u who may be right or may not?or people who wanted to be worshiped ? if u donot have a book to follow so u can't do anything except follow devils thoughts .. and who worship sun and earth??
who will be the defender of the earth if there is an asteroid come to it?
we should know that there is a creator to all the universe who is ALLAH and i hope i donot bother u friends with that but i know it's hard to be confinced as every one in every religon can't hear to the other and i hope u cud understand me but it's real
see that plz only look to it http://www.quran-miracle.com/
and this also http://www.quranmiracles.com/
and then tell me if islam is a fake religon as people say
thx for reading

MAZAR SCIENTIST said:
u realy donot have books to follow?
so who will u follow my friend?
people like u who may be right or may not?or people who wanted to be worshiped ? if u donot have a book to follow so u can't do anything except follow devils thoughts .. and who worship sun and earth??
who will be the defender of the earth if there is an asteroid come to it?
we should know that there is a creator to all the universe who is ALLAH and i hope i donot bother u friends with that but i know it's hard to be confinced as every one in every religon can't hear to the other and i hope u cud understand me but it's real
see that plz only look to it http://www.quran-miracle.com/
and this also http://www.quranmiracles.com/
and then tell me if islam is a fake religon as people say
thx for reading
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No God = No Devil
No Supernatural Defender = No Supernatural Attacker

MAZAR SCIENTIST said:
u realy donot have books to follow?
so who will u follow my friend?
people like u who may be right or may not?or people who wanted to be worshiped ? if u donot have a book to follow so u can't do anything except follow devils thoughts .. and who worship sun and earth??
who will be the defender of the earth if there is an asteroid come to it?
we should know that there is a creator to all the universe who is ALLAH and i hope i donot bother u friends with that but i know it's hard to be confinced as every one in every religon can't hear to the other and i hope u cud understand me but it's real
see that plz only look to it http://www.quran-miracle.com/
and this also http://www.quranmiracles.com/
and then tell me if islam is a fake religon as people say
thx for reading
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Prophets, too, among us come to teach,
Are one with those who from the pulpit preach;
They pray, and slay, and pass away, and yet
Our ills are as the pebbles on the beach.
- Al-Ma'arri, أبو العلاء أحمد بن عبد الله بن سليمان التنوخي المعري
I hope you get well soon.

Marxism, What do you know of it?

I wanted to start a thread of a subject I know nothing about. However, I am very interested in learning Marx's language within his writing. Capital is a great novel by Marx. However, the book is written with discussion in mind. I would like to know what you know about Marxism and how you agree and disagree...

marxism mean that all means of production is controlled directly by the government
everybody make the same salary
pro
no poor people equal opportunities for everybody no matter the status of parents
con
no way for risk takers and people with bright ideas and people who compete
to excel and make better products and cheaper prices and dreams for those not there
yet to strive to gain what the successfully gained
often see americans abuse these terms along with socialism which pretty much is the same deal
about countries with higher tax's more welfare and more strict gun laws then usa
one can feel what one like about those 3 things but it don't as I see it equal socialism

I feel Marxism is the most wrongly followed belief in the world. For any definition you can refer to wiki.

Marxism takes away all incentive to excel in any area.

Rudegar said:
marxism mean that all means of production is controlled directly by the government
everybody make the same salary
pro
no poor people equal opportunities for everybody no matter the status of parents
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One word: Utopia.
Cheers

^^^wrong. that would be the end of human progress.

It died a few years ago.

Marxism has a noble aim but - as already pointed out - is a disaster in practice.

We will have general elections next weekend. People are bored of the same platitudinous speeches of politicians. The campaign is made of scandals. There is no credibility. No values. No one believes, no one knows, the political philosophies of the parties. Not even them, I think. Abstention will be high.

Marx and Engels had a lot of innovative ideas and Marxism in its pure form is probably as close to a perfect society as humanly possible. It has never been implemented anywhere in the world.
It is debateable if Marxism would lead to stagnation of thought and progress. No way to know for sure, unless we get a real life example. I personally don't agree with that conclusion.
Communism is a perverted version of it that lets a small number of people on top of society enjoy anything they want and have a free hand with power and control while the common people live in poverty.
Capitalism and Communism have more in common than you know...

The truth about cellphones (must read)

True story : I picked up a load of colored painted lumber in Atlanta and dropped it off in Lancaster, pa. An Amish family that made high end custom play sets for rich folks and wow the stuff the could build seemed like some from a Harry Potter movie. We started talking about technology and they didn't desire to have a cellphone or any phone for that matter. They seemed so much at peace with just the basics in life. Clearly they live in a area with malls but still appreciated life in a simple form. Now its 2011 and most folks can't go a day without cellphone use, and have a piss fit if they cell is about to die while at the mall. We stand in long lines waiting for the new it phone then rush home to make an unboxing video as others tune to watch us in awe to remove the plastic off a device. We call up the carriers begging for an update to get a new device.. log in to sites like this and complain about the device and while asking developers to stop spending time with your family and hurry up on that root so i can do a whole bunch of nothing with my phone. I'm not saying cellphones are bad, if your wife ran out to pick up pizza and got a flat you definitely want her to have one in that situation. I'm talking bout being apart of the gimmick crowd...
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

geeksquadryder said:
True story : I picked up a load of colored painted lumber in Atlanta and dropped it off in Lancaster, pa. An Amish family that made high end custom play sets for rich folks and wow the stuff the could build seemed like some from a Harry Potter movie. We started talking about technology and they didn't desire to have a cellphone or any phone for that matter. They seemed so much at peace with just the basics in life. Clearly they live in a area with malls but still appreciated life in a simple form. Now its 2011 and most folks can't go a day without cellphone use, and have a piss fit if they cell is about to die while at the mall. We stand in long lines waiting for the new it phone then rush home to make an unboxing video as others tune to watch us in awe to remove the plastic off a device. We call up the carriers begging for an update to get a new device.. log in to sites like this and complain about the device and while asking developers to stop spending time with your family and hurry up on that root so i can do a whole bunch of nothing with my phone. I'm not saying cellphones are bad, if your wife ran out to pick up pizza and got a flat you definitely want her to have one in that situation. I'm talking bout being apart of the gimmick crowd...
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm happy to be there. My firm belief is that technology will produce the paradise we all want. Unlike some conservative types, I don't adhere to the rule of suffering in life all the time. They think the only good person is one who is 24/7/365 suffering and doing without. We make technology to overcome the environment, not to continue to suffer in it. The only reason there is any form of suffering in the world is because technology hasn't developed to the point of addressing all of the needs. As long as a person holds onto their ethical and moral integrity, suffering is needless.

Don't like this idea. Some people always say that these are just devices that call and text, everything else is excess and we don't need it in our daily lives. Like we should be grateful we have them. But this is called progress. At one time, we didn't have cars or color tv or this latest gadget. And we have adjusted our lives accordingly so that they are essentials in day to day living. It's foolish to just live in the past or sit still, the world moves at a fast pace. If we didn't feel a need for more, innovation would just stop. They don't even call cell phones "cell phones" anymore, they call them mobiles because that's what they are. Mobile devices

Yes, I agree with you geeksquadryder. As we are forgetting what a real life is? We need mobiles for doing our daily work but some people getting mobiles for not satisfying must needs but for fun. We know how much impact these mobiles can have in our life in helping and ruining. So, its upto the head of the home to teach or drive his/her home to be happy with/without things of needed.

Our biggest mistake was coming down from the trees in the first place. Everything since then is just compounded error. Too late to go back now!

aFo3262 said:
Don't like this idea. Some people always say that these are just devices that call and text, everything else is excess and we don't need it in our daily lives. Like we should be grateful we have them. But this is called progress. At one time, we didn't have cars or color tv or this latest gadget. And we have adjusted our lives accordingly so that they are essentials in day to day living. It's foolish to just live in the past or sit still, the world moves at a fast pace. If we didn't feel a need for more, innovation would just stop. They don't even call cell phones "cell phones" anymore, they call them mobiles because that's what they are. Mobile devices
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
people are constantly saying how technology has made ungrateful and ruined lives. I don't see how wanting the most out of your phone can ruin your life. This is called evolution/progress. I'm glad we have cell phones and I'm glad technology is getting better and I hope one day I won't have to lift a finger to do many of the tedious tasks I do on a day to day basis.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

If we just stick to "need" when we live life, we'd be a very poor society. Much of the art and technology we have today have made it so far for want of innovation and pleasure. And yes, also for pure fun.
It's not excessive, it's creative, new, interesting and in this way, important. Especially since we came down from the trees...

DirkGently1 said:
Our biggest mistake was coming down from the trees in the first place. Everything since then is just compounded error. Too late to go back now!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. Now we are describing quantum physics with languages initially designed to tell the other monkey where the fruit was.

yeah, and let's just revert back to farming for every one right...
i'll use whatever tech i want, you can go be a luddite.

ballasdontcry said:
yeah, and let's just revert back to farming for every one right...
i'll use whatever tech i want, you can go be a luddite.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or use two tin cans and a string...
(somebody's sig, that is)

sakai4eva said:
Or use two tin cans and a string...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be 1970's tech to the Amish.
By the way, anyone know what an Amish guy's arm up a horse's butt is? A mechanic.

sakai4eva said:
Yup. Now we are describing quantum physics with languages initially designed to tell the other monkey where the fruit was.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mind = blown! Genius post
I do often think the Amish and others of that ilk have the right idea. It may be luddism but as a society i bet they are generally happier than the rest of the world at large.

DirkGently1 said:
Mind = blown! Genius post
I do often think the Amish and others of that ilk have the right idea. It may be luddism but as a society i bet they are generally happier than the rest of the world at large.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to tell you but technology is important. I always remember the economics of technology, where tech has the potential of drastically changing supply, demand or both.
It increases the quality of life, and frees us to do things that are more important, like putting funny captions on pictures of cats instead of adding up a few thousand lines of labour costs.
You read HHGTTG, there was one book where people used leaves as currency...
p/s: I stole that initial quote from Pratchett.

sakai4eva said:
Sorry to tell you but technology is important. I always remember the economics of technology, where tech has the potential of drastically changing supply, demand or both.
It increases the quality of life, and frees us to do things that are more important, like putting funny captions on pictures of cats instead of adding up a few thousand lines of labour costs.
You read HHGTTG, there was one book where people used leaves as currency...
p/s: I stole that initial quote from Pratchett.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As i said earlier, it's too late to go back now. I disagree that technology improves lives though. More people die because of technology than are saved by it. You have to remember that as a race we have stopped evolving; instead our tools are evolving. Rather than changing to adapt to our environment we are trying to change our environment to adapt to us. This is not a good thing.

DirkGently1 said:
As i said earlier, it's too late to go back now. I disagree that technology improves lives though. More people die because of technology than are saved by it. You have to remember that as a race we have stopped evolving; instead our tools are evolving. Rather than changing to adapt to our environment we are trying to change our environment to adapt to us. This is not a good thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, I could berate you over that. But I won't. The reason I want to is because THAT is a main part of the conservative/religious ideal. It's ignorant because they believe they...embodied in their gray matter...have all understanding and knowledge of the universe and existence. Because of this, they push hardship and suffering on society as something good for us.
These pea-brained idiots never consider they do not know everything. They have a thought, and because *they* have that thought, it has to be correct and righteous. So therefor they proceed to prevent society from having peace and they thwart all technological progress as much they can and call it evil. They are the kind that believes only someone who is constantly suffering is a better person. And they do that to people.
They see one aspect of something and conclude that it leads to what they believe it should.
You'll have to pardon my intensity because here in America, that is exactly what happened to my life. My life was wiped out as though it was nothing to me by ideological/religious/conservative zealots. With an attitude of, "You'll thank me when you recover". The only problem is they had no clue how destructive their ideology was to me and it obliterated my life.

I'm a godless Atheist but this is not a religious discussion! I love technology but i admit that the cost far outweighs the benefits. The global gene pool is getting weaker by the day while we rape the planet that we rely on to survive.
Advancement is inevitable but so is entropy. Equilibrium will be returned but i guarantee it won't be in a way that's favourable to human life.

DirkGently1 said:
I'm a godless Atheist but this is not a religious discussion! I love technology but i admit that the cost far outweighs the benefits. The global gene pool is getting weaker by the day while we rape the planet that we rely on to survive.
Advancement is inevitable but so is entropy. Equilibrium will be returned but i guarantee it won't be in a way that's favourable to human life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amen, I mean, I agree to that (zing!).
Truth is, I believe that technology helped me a lot. I mean, Microsoft Excel is a million times better than an A3 piece of paper and a calculator.
But certain techs makes us dumber, and not smarter. We don't use it to expand ourselves and our capabilities, but to limit ourselves and reduce innovation and creativity.
Case in point; iPhone.

**sniff sniff** smells like..... religious overtones.... wafting through the air....
(What I'm doing here.......... Your seing it??)
Marty, I'm looking in your direction......

conantroutman said:
**sniff sniff** smells like..... religious overtones.... wafting through the air....
(What I'm doing here.......... Your seing it??)
Marty, I'm looking in your direction......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol. Would be like missing John Cleese goose stepping through dining room...
Religion is OK just don't mention the war!!!
Sent from my GT-P1000

nobleskill said:
Lol. Would be like missing John Cleese goose stepping through dining room...
Religion is OK just don't mention the war!!!
Sent from my GT-P1000
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What war? The one where they killed everyone for staying in some place long ago, or the one where they kill everyone else for being someone else?
Wait, I got that mixed up, didn't I, it was the one where they killed people for being different, right?
p/s: religion talk is never ok, especially when it gets slightly out of hand. Note the understatement

Snippets

Things you'd like other people to read, think about and maybe even discuss.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk 4 Beta

"Behavioral scientists often divide what we do on the job or learn in school into two categories: 'algorithmic' and 'heuristic.' An algorithmic task is one in which you follow a set of established instructions down a single pathway to one conclusion. That is, there's an algorithm for solving it. A heuristic task is the opposite. Precisely because no algorithm exists for it, you have to experiment with possibilities and devise a novel solution. Working as a grocery checkout clerk is mostly algorithmic. You do pretty much the same thing over and over in a certain way. Creating an ad campaign is mostly heuristic. You have to come up with something new.
"During the twentieth century, most work was algorithmic -- and not just jobs where you turned the same screw the same way all day long. Even when we traded blue collars for white, the tasks we carried out were often routine. That is, we could reduce much of what we did -- in accounting, law, computer programming, and other fields -- to a script, a spec sheet, a formula, or a series of steps that produced a right answer. ... The consulting firm McKinsey & Co. estimates that in the United States, only 30 percent of job growth now comes from algorithmic work, while 70 percent comes from heuristic work. A key reason: Routine work can be out sourced or automated; artistic, empathic, nonroutine work generally cannot.
"The implications for motivation are vast. Researchers such as Harvard Business School's Teresa Amabile have found that external rewards and punishments -- both carrots and sticks -- can work nicely for algorithmic tasks. But they can be devastating for heuristic ones. Those sorts of challenges -- solving novel problems or creating something the world didn't know it was missing -- depend heavily on ... the intrinsic motivation principle of creativity, which holds, in part: 'Intrinsic motivation is conducive to creativity; controlling extrinsic motivation is detrimental to creativity.'!' In other words, the central tenets of Motivation 2.0 [external 'carrot and stick' motivation] may actually impair performance of the heuristic, right-brain work on which modern economies depend.
"Partly because work has become more creative and less routine, it has also become more enjoyable. That, too, scrambles Motivation 2.0's assumptions. This operating system rests on the belief that work is not inherently enjoyable -- which is precisely why we must coax people with external rewards and threaten them with outside punishment. One unexpected finding of the psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi ... is that people are much more likely to report having 'optimal experiences' on the job [in heuristic work] than during leisure. But if work is inherently enjoyable for more and more people, then the external inducements at the heart of Motivation 2.0 become less necessary. Worse, as [Edward L.] Deci began discovering forty years ago, adding certain kinds of extrinsic rewards on top of inherently interesting tasks can often dampen motivation and diminish performance. ...
"What happens when you give people a [complex] conceptual [problem] and offer them rewards for speedy solutions? Sam Glucksberg, a psychologist now at Princeton University, tested this in the early 1960s by timing how quickly two groups of participants solved the ... problem. He told the first group that he was timing their work merely to establish norms for how long it typically took someone to complete this sort of puzzle. To the second group he offered incentives. If a participant's time was among the fastest 25 percent of all the people being tested, that participant would receive $5. If the participant's time was the fastest of all, the reward would be $20. Adjusted for inflation, those are decent sums of money for a few minutes of effort -- a nice motivator.
"How much faster did the incentivized group come up with a solution? On average, it took them nearly three and a half minutes longer.' Yes, three and a half minutes longer. (Whenever I've relayed these results to a group of businesspeople, the reaction is almost always a loud, pained, involuntary gasp.) In direct contravention to the core tenets of Motivation 2.0, an incentive designed to clarify thinking and sharpen creativity ended up clouding thinking and dulling creativity. Why? Rewards, by their very nature, narrow our focus. That's helpful when there's a clear path to a solution. They help us stare ahead and race faster. But 'if-then' motivators are terrible for [complex conceptual problems]. As this experiment shows, the rewards narrowed people's focus and blinkered the wide view that might have allowed them to see new uses for old objects."
Author: Daniel H. Pink
Title: Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
Publisher: Penguin Group
Date: Copyright 2009 by Daniel H. Pink
Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Nope.. didnt read the whole thing
Need help with CyanogenMod??Go here CM Help Thread ​

This is going to end up being the tl;dr thread...
Also, from a writer's perspective, a snippet is a few lines, a fragment of text no more than 10-20 lines long.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2

"Goats are like mushrooms. If you shoot a duck, I'll be scared of toasters." - Plato in The Republic

ShadowLea said:
This is going to end up being the tl;dr thread...
Also, from a writer's perspective, a snippet is a few lines, a fragment of text no more than 10-20 lines long.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fine, call it the Articles thread...
Not that anyone other than me has posted an article here.

"I am the hope of the universe. I am the answer to all living things that cry out for peace. I am protector of the innocent. I am the light in the darkness. I am truth. Ally to good! Nightmare to you!"
Inspiring, is it not?

"Be yourself, Everyone else is taken"

How does concious free will arise from deterministic phenomena?
Does multiverse theory sufficiently explain the anthropomorphic principle?
---------- Post added at 10:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 AM ----------
Ichigo said:
"I am the hope of the universe. I am the answer to all living things that cry out for peace. I am protector of the innocent. I am the light in the darkness. I am truth. Ally to good! Nightmare to you!"
Inspiring, is it not?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll let the Dr. Hunter S. Thompson take on your inspirational quote:
“We are all wired into a survival trip now. No more of the speed that fueled that 60's. That was the fatal flaw in Tim Leary's trip. He crashed around America selling "consciousness expansion" without ever giving a thought to the grim meat-hook realities that were lying in wait for all the people who took him seriously... All those pathetically eager acid freaks who thought they could buy Peace and Understanding for three bucks a hit. But their loss and failure is ours too. What Leary took down with him was the central illusion of a whole life-style that he helped create... a generation of permanent cripples, failed seekers, who never understood the essential old-mystic fallacy of the Acid Culture: the desperate assumption that somebody... or at least some force - is tending the light at the end of the tunnel.”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Dr_SUSE said:
How does concious free will arise from deterministic phenomena?
Does multiverse theory sufficiently explain the anthropomorphic principle?
---------- Post added at 10:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 AM ----------
I'll let the Dr. Hunter S. Thompson take on your inspirational quote:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dr. Seuss, is that you
Sent from my HTC One X

post-modernists are self-glorifying trolls

SammiSaysHello said:
post-modernists are self-glorifying trolls
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...that get you thinking.

Dr_SUSE said:
...that get you thinking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...... about how post-modernists are self-glorifying trolls.

SammiSaysHello said:
post-modernists are self-glorifying trolls
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Post modern? Wut?
There future is full of trolls?

Anti-post modernism is so post-modernist.
Edit: That's not quite true. It appears precision was sacrificed for succinctness in that statement.
A better statement would be, "Deconstructing post-modernism to the level of its adherents in an effort to subvert the authority of the post-modernist is so post-modern."

"It's not about what stick you're swinging. It's about who's swinging it." - Sgt. Shepherd
Sent through the Time Vortex!

Wolf Pup said:
"It's not about what stick you're swinging. It's about who's swinging it." - Sgt. Shepherd
Sent through the Time Vortex!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sounds wrong
Sent from my HTC One X

Dr_SUSE said:
Anti-post modernism is so post-modernist.
Edit: That's not quite true. It appears precision was sacrificed for succinctness in that statement.
A better statement would be, "Deconstructing post-modernism to the level of its adherents in an effort to subvert the authority of the post-modernist is so post-modern."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really. Instead of providing an interpretation of something, post modernists like to say that there is no point in having interpretations because they essentially mean nothing.
Actually, when you think about it, they're sort of contradicting themselves o.o
Sent from my LT29i using xda premium

Dr_SUSE said:
Anti-post modernism is so post-modernist.
Edit: That's not quite true. It appears precision was sacrificed for succinctness in that statement.
A better statement would be, "Deconstructing post-modernism to the level of its adherents in an effort to subvert the authority of the post-modernist is so post-modern."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Big words make my head hurt.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

SammiSaysHello said:
Not really. Instead of providing an interpretation of something, post modernists like to say that there is no point in having interpretations because they essentially mean nothing.
Actually, when you think about it, they're sort of contradicting themselves o.o
Sent from my LT29i using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What post-modernists reject is definition, not interpretation. To the post-modernist, interpretation is everything, but if you try to define something, that thing is then dead. Krishamurti (The Pool of Wisdom) wrote on that very subject, which is funny because he's not widely regarded as a post-modernist. The statement "post-modernists are self-glorifying trolls" falls short of a definition, and I don't think you intended it as one. If an alien came to earth asking about post-modernism, and that was all he was told, he wouldn't leave with a better idea than the one he came with. I don't think anyone really has a clear idea what post-modernism is, because that's kind of the point of it. What's the meta-definition of post-modernism? Is it art? Philosophy? A method? I'd like to see post-modern math. Wouldn't that be a trip? Wasn't Socrates a post-modernist? He was pretty skeptical. Skepticism is the heart of post-modernism.
Erroneously or not, I took your statement as a rebuttal to my quote from Hunter S. Thompson, who is regarded as post-modern. If that wasn't your intention, my what a coincidence, and look what it hath wrought! Was HST a troll? HST was theoriginal troll. Was he self-glorifying? My yes, he was an arrogant pr**k. Did he raise questions while entertaining us? Yes, and yes. Sometimes trolls have a purpose. Which a post-modernist would say is provided by our subjective interpretation.
I can easily see how some would use post-modern skepticism as a tool by some to deface everything around them as a method of self-glorification, but that's not a very healthy use of skepticism; that is, indeed, trollery. This way of using of skepticism certainly is encompassed by your "deconstructive" statement regarding the post-modernist, but a post-modernist would say that is but one subjective interpretation.
---------- Post added at 06:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 AM ----------
Veeman, Prototype, see:
Post-Modernism.