|
On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinism
ya great theory.
except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'.
who's the one showing class here?
|
On May 31 2011 02:09 sceroh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Actually I do agree with Ziegfeld; dreamsmasher, you are messing up Darwinism with Eugenics. Besides fittest doesn't have to mean strongest, it's the ability adapt to your environment. And you cannot deny that nowadays the "safest" way to become successful in life is through academic success ... I know that my argument are not extremely elaborated since I m quite busy at the moment, my puprose is just to point out the validity of Ziegfeld's argument.
Yes, education is important and a safe way to get a decent life. But thats not - and SHOULD NOT - be the ONLY way, and NOT something worth DYING for. It's extremely rediculous. Should people that don't get an academic education die? Is that your view of natural selection? Should we all become academics or die out? How many on earth do you think would survive?
Korea has a screwed up education system/society that needs fixing. Period. Nothing justifies the pressure that makes student go suicide, ESPECIALLY not 'natural' selection.
|
On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismbut ya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here?
Eugenics has been around long before Hitler, and in fact, the British were exceedingly fond of it. One of the main reasons that social darwinism and human evolutionary theory took off as it did was due to the significant British racism and eugenic ideals that existed in the 17th-20th centuries. With Darwin's theories, it really kicked off. Now the British had a "scientific" basis for "proving" that they were "superior" to other human beings.
And we could talk about a ton of other occasions in Europe alone, but point is it didn't start with the Germans, and in fact the Germans were just adhering to what was quite popular in much of Europe at the time anyways. And whoever mentioned the holocaust, keep it relevant (it has nothing to do with social Darwinism), or at least mention something that isn't a matter of controversy and perhaps excessively exaggerated, even though many such things are by one group or another.
Eugenics movement and racial prejudice and capitalism started long before Darwin, and the second thing has existed since the beginnings of humanity quite possibly, especially if we are to consider racism at xenophobia of different ethnic groups rather than just genetic races.
Social darwinism relegates humans to being like any other creature, without thought, abstraction, reason, conscience, judgment, etc. I find this quite flawed as humans and human society are infinitely more complex. The person you replied to is attempting to give a poor "scientific" explanation to the situation, though humans cannot in the slightest be evaluated on such simple terms.
|
this is really awful, poor kids =/
|
On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this.
|
On May 31 2011 03:23 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismbut ya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Eugenics has been around long before Hitler, and in fact, the British were exceedingly fond of it. One of the main reasons that social darwinism and human evolutionary theory took off as it did was due to the significant British racism and eugenic ideals that existed in the 17th-20th centuries. With Darwin's theories, it really kicked off. Now the British had a "scientific" basis for "proving" that they were "superior" to other human beings. And we could talk about a ton of other occasions in Europe alone, but point is it didn't start with the Germans, and in fact the Germans were just adhering to what was quite popular in much of Europe at the time anyways. And whoever mentioned the holocaust, keep it relevant (it has nothing to do with social Darwinism), or at least mention something that isn't a matter of controversy and perhaps excessively exaggerated, even though many such things are by one group or another. Eugenics movement and racial prejudice and capitalism started long before Darwin, and the second thing has existed since the beginnings of humanity quite possibly, especially if we are to consider racism at xenophobia of different ethnic groups rather than just genetic races. Social darwinism relegates humans to being like any other creature, without thought, abstraction, reason, conscience, judgment, etc. I find this quite flawed as humans and human society are infinitely more complex. The person you replied to is attempting to give a poor "scientific" explanation to the situation, though humans cannot in the slightest be evaluated on such simple terms.
it was still used as a pseudo intellectual basis for all of that shit?
but yes i agree with the rest of what you were saying, i just typed what i typed and gave a quick wiki link because it was one of those 'i can't believe i'm having this kind of arguments'.
|
On May 31 2011 03:27 ZiegFeld wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this.
what? lol you can justify anything with social darwinism...that's kind of the absurdity of taking a biological concept taking an analogue of it and then applying it to society.
|
ya it's kind of sad.
on the other hand ~30000 children will die in africa today because they don't have enough food to eat.
|
On May 31 2011 03:29 dreamsmasher wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 03:27 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this. what? lol you can justify anything with social darwinism...that's kind of the absurdity of taking a biological concept taking an analogue of it and then applying it to society. It's more than a concept, it's reality.
Also, yes. If someone's intentions are suicide, then they are weak, or in a severe state of weakness. I don't think anything deserves to die, I wish we lived in a utopia with unlimited resources and no conflict what so ever. However, we don't, so sometimes nature separates the chaff from the wheat.
|
I don't know much about South Korea, but you neighbour Japan has the highest suicide rate of the world.
All of this is caused by social pressure. Neighbours, family, colleagues...
Since a lot of young Japanese people are looking towards the european/american way of style, with more vacations, more time with family etc, the suicides are becoming less common (they have a lot of other social problems btw but it's not the thread). They are able to think that way because they lost this overwhelming feeling that they must work the harder they can to be the best of the world, because they are almost already.
That's why I think you'll just have to wait some years to let korean people to learn how to take a break. I think one thing should be to stop this thing with exams (canceling all flights etc) which put a freakin' ton of pressure on students.
|
|
|
On May 31 2011 04:06 ZiegFeld wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 03:29 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 03:27 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. ya and what i am telling you is that you basically you didn't understand natural selection when it was taught to you in 9th grade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this. what? lol you can justify anything with social darwinism...that's kind of the absurdity of taking a biological concept taking an analogue of it and then applying it to society. It's more than a concept, it's reality. Also, yes. If someone's intentions are suicide, then they are weak, or in a severe state of weakness. I don't think anything deserves to die, I wish we lived in a utopia with unlimited resources and no conflict what so ever. However, we don't, so sometimes nature separates the chaff from the wheat.
ya and wat i am telling you is that you misunderstood natural selection in 9th grade and should go retake it.
so when i beat you up and take all of your money that's just too bad. you're weak i'm strong LOLOL. great social doctrine there.
sad that you can't see what's wrong with that line of thinking.
|
On May 31 2011 04:06 ZiegFeld wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 03:29 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 03:27 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this. what? lol you can justify anything with social darwinism...that's kind of the absurdity of taking a biological concept taking an analogue of it and then applying it to society. It's more than a concept, it's reality. Also, yes. If someone's intentions are suicide, then they are weak, or in a severe state of weakness. I don't think anything deserves to die, I wish we lived in a utopia with unlimited resources and no conflict what so ever. However, we don't, so sometimes nature separates the chaff from the wheat.
you realize life doesn't actually have some type of set in stone rule that weak ppl should die off and strong ppl should survive?
that seems to be what you believe.
|
On May 31 2011 08:18 dreamsmasher wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 04:06 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 03:29 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 03:27 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 02:49 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 31 2011 02:35 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 31 2011 01:19 KaiserJohan wrote:On May 30 2011 11:54 ZiegFeld wrote:On May 26 2011 02:24 dreamsmasher wrote:On May 25 2011 08:58 ZiegFeld wrote:
It's survival of the fittest in a world of limited resources. Nature's natural selection at work, there really isn't anything to be done about it.
this is the stupidest shit i have ever heard. go take 9th grade biology again. Great argument, good representation of every post you've made in this thread. No, he is correct, Ziegfeld, that was probably the worst argument I've ever heard. It's like saying the holocaust is fine because of natural selection. Strongest survives eh? Sure some wrong people get caught in the net, but in general it does work. That doesn't mean every death is justified, or beneficial towards society, but it certainty doesn't justify exhausting every resource for unworthy causes. And please don't change the topic towards the holocaust, it has nothing to do with these suicides in Korea and your derailing the thread. ya and what i am telling you is that you basically you didn't understand natural selection when it was taught to you in 9th grade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismya great theory. except social darwinism was a major source of influence for hitler, the eugenics movement, all sorts of racial prejudice, laissez faire capitalism, etc.. that has happened in the past. to boldly claim what you're claiming and then be seemingly ignorant of all that and then go and post in a thread about SUICIDE saying 'oh well this isn't important at all cuz they're all just weak and deserved to die'. who's the one showing class here? Stop bringing your emotions in this. what? lol you can justify anything with social darwinism...that's kind of the absurdity of taking a biological concept taking an analogue of it and then applying it to society. It's more than a concept, it's reality. Also, yes. If someone's intentions are suicide, then they are weak, or in a severe state of weakness. I don't think anything deserves to die, I wish we lived in a utopia with unlimited resources and no conflict what so ever. However, we don't, so sometimes nature separates the chaff from the wheat. ya and wat i am telling you is that you misunderstood natural selection in 9th grade and should go retake it. so when i beat you up and take all of your money that's just too bad. you're weak i'm strong LOLOL. great social doctrine there. sad that you can't see what's wrong with that line of thinking. If someone would care to point it out, please do, I'm open to argument.
And stop crying.
On May 31 2011 10:54 swisher3 wrote:you realize life doesn't actually have some type of set in stone rule that weak ppl should die off and strong ppl should survive?
that seems to be what you believe. There's no rule they SHOULD die, or survive. But in the long run, it's not beneficial to maintain something that doesn't pay for itself, when we don't have the luxury to do so.
|
On May 31 2011 10:54 swisher3 wrote:you realize life doesn't actually have some type of set in stone rule that weak ppl should die off and strong ppl should survive?
that seems to be what you believe. There's no rule they SHOULD die, or survive. But in the long run, it's not beneficial to maintain something that doesn't pay for itself, when we don't have the luxury to do so. [/QUOTE]
explain more? not beneficial as opposed to what? why don't we have the luxury to fix the issues that cause people to become "weak", as you say?
its funny cause you probably think you have a cold logical view on all of this but it's actually very irrational.
do you think we shouldn't help poor starving people either, because they're also weak? they share something similar with the suicidal, you know. they both have no control over the fact that they're starving/depressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
