Democracy

[noob555]

We aren't living in a perfect world, dude.

So since the world isn't perfect, we shouldn't strive for a more perfect world? nice

[Empire]

So since the world isn't perfect, we shouldn't strive for a more perfect world? nice

Perfection is overrated.

[Ferris Bueller]

Perfection is overrated.

And impossible.

[Euphemistic]

So since the world isn't perfect, we shouldn't strive for a more perfect world? nice

No, and what would be the point, exactly?

[noob555]

Perfection is overrated.

It's all we can strive for as a species.

[noob555]

No, and what would be the point, exactly?

If no is at my question, then the 2nd part of your post makes no sense. If you mean no we shouldn't strive more a more perfect world, you're an idiot.

[Euphemistic]

If no is at my question, then the 2nd part of your post makes no sense. If you mean no we shouldn't strive more a more perfect world, you're an idiot.

To have a perfect world would depend on your definition of perfection. As an imperfect person it is firstly about acknowledging these and at the same time moving outwards from that point.

Besides, it's absolutely impossible! Poverty, hunger, political conflicts, tension, the financial crisis, the recession have only aug mented the instability within society. If you look for perfection, you'll never be content.

[noob555]

To have a perfect world would depend on your definition of perfection. As an imperfect person it is firstly about acknowledging these and at the same time moving outwards from that point.

Besides, it's absolutely impossible! Poverty, hunger, political conflicts, tension, the financial crisis, the recession have only aug mented the instability within society. If you look for perfection, you'll never be content.

A person should always continue to look for truth. It is not absolutely impossible. Who would have thought that slavery would be abolished, or that woman would get any rights what so ever. All of the problems you have listed can eventually be solved. We must be the leaders of our societies and the architects of our actions. These problems are up to us to solve, submitting to these problems are cowardly. You should never be content with your life, content makes you a statistic.

[Aborted]

Yea... go on? You're not making a point.

My point is that the general populace is not at an acceptable point of self sufficiency, psychologically speaking, to not run the GDP dry. Our debt is increasing at an astronomical speed, a lot in part due to completely unsustainable social programs. If you feed an animal by hand, it will eventually starve on its own. I don't feel comfortable with creating a spoon fed society, that is if it's even economically possible. Indeed many of the Scandinavian countries are having great successes with a modified version of the system, but there are large differences that bar the possibility. For one, the United State's population far exceeds that of any Nordic country, and with it comes unique challenges. Military and foreign aid are also scaled exponentially, further ringing the budget dry. I see it all but impossible to sustain with the US' current spending. I would honestly be all for it, that is if the damn cronies on Capitol Hill would actually listen to the people and not funnel our funds into their wallets.

[Empire]

It's all we can strive for as a species.

Yet we don't.......so there's that.

A person should always continue to look for truth. It is not absolutely impossible. Who would have thought that slavery would be abolished, or that woman would get any rights what so ever. All of the problems you have listed can eventually be solved. We must be the leaders of our societies and the architects of our actions. These problems are up to us to solve, submitting to these problems are cowardly. You should never be content with your life, content makes you a statistic.

K first "architects of society and leaders with our actions" is the phrase you should have used.

Being content with yourself is a bit different than striving for perfection. True perfection imo would require robotic sentience, that which we have not achieved in the slightest.

Honestly in my lifetime the world isn't going to change all that much. Maybe in another 2-3k years, humanity will solve the problems it knows it has right now, maybe.

I'm not hopeful of the human race nor should I be, we as a people don't want to change for other's sake, we want to change for OUR sake. There is a defining difference in that and what makes humanity slow to change.

[Poison]

obama is a socialist dictator

[blvckrampage]

is it true that if the usa spent half the money they spend in the military field they would still be the country who spends the most on their army?

[Ferris Bueller]

Yet we don't.......so there's that.


K first "architects of society and leaders with our actions" is the phrase you should have used.

Being content with yourself is a bit different than striving for perfection. True perfection imo would require robotic sentience, that which we have not achieved in the slightest.

Honestly in my lifetime the world isn't going to change all that much. Maybe in another 2-3k years, humanity will solve the problems it knows it has right now, maybe.

I'm not hopeful of the human race nor should I be, we as a people don't want to change for other's sake, we want to change for OUR sake. There is a defining difference in that and what makes humanity slow to change.

See this is where i slightly disagree.

I don't believe perfection lies in robots or civilization at all.

See the problem with perfection and the reason the argument "humans will never achieve perfection" is invalid is that perfection is subjective.

Saying that humans will never achieve perfection is like saying humans will never achieve happiness.

Some might say humans have already achieved happiness, does that mean that either side is wrong?

Let me get back to robots.

The real reason I think that robots are not perfect is that they are programmed by imperfect beings.

You can never be perfect if your origin is imperfect.

[Empire]

See this is where i slightly disagree.

I don't believe perfection lies in robots or civilization at all.

See the problem with perfection and the reason the argument "humans will never achieve perfection" is invalid is that perfection is subjective.

Saying that humans will never achieve perfection is like saying humans will never achieve happiness.

Some might say humans have already achieved happiness, does that mean that either side is wrong?

Let me get back to robots.

The real reason I think that robots are not perfect is that they are programmed by imperfect beings.

You can never be perfect if your origin is imperfect.

Happiness and Perfection are two entirely different categories though. Happiness is easily obtained, true-happiness is something of a myth kind of like "true-love' if you will.

Anyway, perfection isn't obtainable by humans because well....in realistic terms, unless our biology and nature changed to an entirely different being, we will never be perfect. There are no signs of humans changing even when we know what must be changed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Robots aren't created from "imperfect beings" though, that's the whole point of Robotic Sentience, not that "origin" really matters in perfection.
------------------------------------------------------------


In a lot of ways, in those "robot apocalypse" movies, the robots are just better than the human race. Not just at the physical stuff, but at ethics, the mind, and philosophy.


It seems odd, but honestly I never root for the humans. Their existence would only come full circle to the same cycle humanity has always had, unless the author just makes the robots entirely stupid(*cough* battlestar galactica *cough*), the robots exist on a higher plane. Much like we are above monkeys or birds.

[Logiaqw]

Happiness and Perfection are two entirely different categories though. Happiness is easily obtained, true-happiness is something of a myth kind of like "true-love' if you will.

Anyway, perfection isn't obtainable by humans because well....in realistic terms, unless our biology and nature changed to an entirely different being, we will never be perfect. There are no signs of humans changing even when we know what must be changed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Robots aren't created from "imperfect beings" though, that's the whole point of Robotic Sentience, not that "origin" really matters in perfection.
------------------------------------------------------------


In a lot of ways, in those "robot apocalypse" movies, the robots are just better than the human race. Not just at the physical stuff, but at ethics, the mind, and philosophy.


It seems odd, but honestly I never root for the humans. Their existence would only come full circle to the same cycle humanity has always had, unless the author just makes the robots entirely stupid(*cough* battlestar galactica *cough*), the robots exist on a higher plane. Much like we are above monkeys or birds.

It depends on how you define perfection and happiness. For some philosophers, happiness is the product of the good = perfection.
--------------------------------------------
What you are implying is impossible. We, as humans, have only been recreating and reinventing from things already in existence. Also, the robots does not have the idea of "perfection" we do. So yes, they wouldn't care.
--------------------------------------------
This "higher plane" reminds me of si-fi books (the giver, the cure) in which they address the nature of conformity at the sacrifice of humanity itself.