A God Called Progress

[Tyrant]

I am posting this rant in the My God forum because I believe it has to do with a deity many people surreptitiously worship, but to whom they never refer as God: progress.

Our developments in the field of technology have drastic effects on our quality as a civilization. Advancements in our scientific fields of interest have in turn defiled the inherently spiritual and independently strong people humanity once was. Especially in America, we have forsaken the principles of a strong peoples, replacing it with teh gluttonous self-perpetuation of a strong "nation" separate from its people, ergo guiding them towards passive and submissive sloth, to the condition of physical obesity, and to spiritual and psychic paralysis.

Let's take the first development of progress that helped light the path towards what we now call "civilization": farming.

As nomadic tribes stopped migrating and formed surpluses, the civilization could grow and allow more people. Considering the conditions of the day, this was a significant development. However, now that we survive off the surplus produced by others, we merely detract from the labor of others. This not only leads the average consumer to view the farmer in a Socialist/Communist way - not based on the merit of his character or the stalwart dedication to his family's survival, but on the efficiency of his labor - but it also leads that very same consumer to take what rightfully belongs to the farmer to devour his way into obesity and starve the family. Of course, this analogy represents not one-person parties, but groups of people - industries, organizations, tribes, and villages.

Not only that, but the reliance upon another as a food source prevents an individual from physically and mentally disciplining himself to the art of hunting. He loses his physical and spiritual integrity because he no longer taxes himself or pushes himself, challenges himself nor overcomes what he thought was himself, in order to survive. He is less of a man than he once was.

Let's take two fields of progress - closely linked and intertwined: communication and education.

Someone can argue that the most important thing to a culture or a civilization is communication. Expressing ideas, they argue, is extremely important to the development of a nation into a substantial and effective system. Every principle man ever held close to their hearts was conceived due to communication of ideas - the very definition of education.

While I agree that communication IS important for the continuation of important things like culture and tradition, my cognitive dissonance is with global communication and, therefore, cross-cultural education. Because of this "global communication," alien cultures seem more familiar to me than my own culture. Thanks to the residue of my Behavioral Sciences (rudimentary anthropology) class I took two years ago, had I only relied on that for information, I would know more about African Pygmy tribal religion than I do about the Irish Civil War or Norwegian Independence Day, or even my own family's genealogy. My own culture becomes diluted in the exploration and education of foreign alien culture.

The last field I wish to focus on/complain about, but certainly not the last possible one or even the worst of them: modern medicine.

First of all, the development of modern medicine and the sustenance of life beyond its natural intention has a two-fold damaging effect on the human genus: it prevents the sick and disabled from dying a death of integrity, free from dependence upon others, and it increases the population of the planet to far greater proportions than is healthy for the planet.

However, in practical application, there is a more materialistic and political debate to be had. More money goes into the development of AIDS cure research, birth control, and abortion technique than education. What is the function of this? To make the natural and biological consequences of marital infidelity an option. To make the concept of giving someone your virginity an insignificant thing. To further separate sex from love.

These principles of the fallacy and farce of "progress" are not anywhere close to the last ones. However, they are all I feel like posting now, as I find myself quite nostalgic and frustrated, and even sick, upon thinking of this conflict, and how the Principles of Antiquity is wrenched from the hands of modern man.

Ed: This, unbeknownst to me, marks my hundredth post... not necessarily a fantastic achievement, considering the average post count of Totse posters is 983649563294592675962340957293750273509623495632, but noteworthy nonetheless.

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-11-2003).]

[Spirit of '22]

You hit the nail right on the head, and I think only left out the Progress of the "equality of the sexes." Though every sphere of existence, from the crude and material, to the natural and supernatural, clearly shows men and women that Man is unique and apart from Woman, the hook-nosed high-priests of Progress have determined that to move forward is to ignore this obvious difference, ignore this uniqueness, and lead Man and Woman to an imagined utopia of mediocrity.

This is, of course, only an Effect, and is a symptom of a much greater and far-reaching disease. The mouthpieces of Progress can only justify the weakening of sexual identity and the muddling of Masculine and Feminine along Economic lines. Without a metaphysical, or even biological/scientific leg to stand on, the moderns are content to confuse and degrade the nature of Man and Woman because, as they see it, being a woman used to be bad for business, and this is obviously something to be overcome.

Other than that though, excellent cuz.

Um, no. Let's break it down, kids. I'm feeling charitable, so I'm even gonna try and be polite.

- How do you define a "deity?" Progress is something I can actually prove the existence of (subject to one's admittedly subjective definition of progress). Nobody prays to progress. It's simply a concept that many people - myself included - hold to be an admirable and desirable part of human society.

- How do you define "spiritually strong?" This strikes me as one of those phrases that's so open to interpretation that it essentially means nothing. Are you saying that we were once in closer contact with a deity or deities? You know what's coming, guys... you can't prove one does or ever did exist. I'd view our "loss of spiritual strength" as a form of intellectual growth, growing beyond an idea that was temporarily useful as a spur to culture and psychological defense mechanism.

To be perfectly honest, what I find most confounding about your whole post is the implication that our current situation is, somehow, not natural. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is humanity evolving, while still following the principles that have always guided that evolution. We live the way we live today because it makes sense from the perspective of our biological prerogatives.

Although I certainly agree with the Hemingway-esque assertion that nobody's worried about their manhood anymore, I hardly think farming had anything to do with this. I'd link it to more recent developments, such as the recent idea that masculinity is somehow undesirable and that young boys should be educated to be more like young girls. Guys could be counted on for a certain degree of gentlemanly stoicism right up through the forties, though this sort of behavior has ebbed quite a bit since then. I know, I go to school with a bunch of frat boys.

- Hating modern medicine just seems ridiculous to me. Nothing's stopping the sick and elderly from forsaking their medicine, popping a cyanide pill, and going quietly and bravely to their death, perhaps while reciting a psalm or a line of Shakespeare. Medicine simply gives those undisposed to such gestures the option not to die just then. More choices is good, in my opinion.

I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. Science often builds upon science. The pressure from a population crisis - if it arises; it's about two hundred years late already - would spur us to new heights of the progress you so dislike. There's plenty of space on the ocean floor, if a fire were lit under our collective ass to solve the engineering problems involved. Ditto for space, which, admit it, we'll have to venture out to in force someday.

[Spirit of '22]

- How do you define a "deity?" Progress is something I can actually prove the existence of (subject to one's admittedly subjective definition of progress). Nobody prays to progress.

Not literally, but they certainly use it the same way ancient man did gods. The notion of progress is both outside of man, like gods, and measures what is acceptable and taboo, like gods. Stop being a literla shitstain and read into it a little.

It's simply a concept that many people - myself included - hold to be an admirable and desirable part of human society.

- How do you define "spiritually strong?"

Aware of and loyal to forces and principles removed from the contingent and conditioned, promiscuous world of matter and mere nature.

Are you saying that we were once in closer contact with a deity or deities?

Yes. That should be obvious. The crimes against life that are today rationalized or embraced were literally inconcievable in ancient times. And dont start with the commie bullshit about killing people. Life is more than mortal, shitty, material existence.

You know what's coming, guys... you can't prove one does or ever did exist.

You know what's coming- Yes we can. Not from the telescopes and computers of the modern world though. If you want the reign of machines and masses to be the eyes from which you try and see God, then eat a dick, its your loss.

I'd view our "loss of spiritual strength" as a form of intellectual growth,

And I agree with you, since Intellect is a profane and lower sphere of life that can only contemplate and cope with material needs or lusts. There is no doubt in my mind that intellectual growth just keeps coming, and is one of the fundamental differences between the factories of today and the temples of yesterday.

To be perfectly honest, what I find most confounding about your whole post is the implication that our current situation is, somehow, not natural. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I know. It is clear that we are now wholly natural. Oxen and termites are natural too though. Until fairly recently in human memory, we were super-natural though.



This is humanity evolving, while still following the principles that have always guided that evolution.

Isnt that supposed to breed stronger beings by gradual genetic changes? Because we are, A, way less able to cope with the world around us today, and B, virtually unchanged genetically. We havent evolved at all.

We live the way we live today because it makes sense from the perspective of our biological prerogatives.

I know. But there is more to being human than biology. That notion doesnt sit well with cowards though.

I wouldn't worry about overpopulation. Science often builds upon science. The pressure from a population crisis - if it arises; it's about two hundred years late already - would spur us to new heights of the progress you so dislike. There's plenty of space on the ocean floor, if a fire were lit under our collective ass to solve the engineering problems involved.

I would rather see 3 continents depopulated of mankind than invade another ecosystem so that financiers, industrialists, and crowds of eunichs can eat and breed and enjoy gluttonous consumption or third-world IMF feudalism.

Ah, Spirit of '22, always willing to substitute hateful insult for objective reasoning. Why not mix the two, like I'm about to do? I think you'll find it most enjoyable. Anyway, let's do this.

- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, chuckles, but that "matter and mere nature" is all you've got, and it's all I've got, too. It's all anybody's got. You see no reason to believe in omnipotent ghosts, yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods, and see what it gets you. If you need me, I'll be out here, enjoying the liberating embrace of reason.

You know, my move from theism to atheism was at first a very difficult journey, fraught with shock and rage. But eventually, when my intellect finally grew beyond "the supernatural," I felt relieved, relieved to finally feel the inescapable conflict of what I'd like to believe and what I know to be true slide off my shoulders. Free at last, free at last, thank nobody in particular, I'm free at last.

And if you can prove the existence of your beloved spirits, by whatever means, please do so. I do know one thing, though, that you strive so mightily to blind yourself to - the telescopes and computers work, and we can understand why they work. Neither of these statements apply to your invisible Faerie Folk.

- Pick up a goddamn book, you ignorant fool. Technology and progress are evolution. Cultural evolution is, if anything, more pronounced and useful than genetic evolution. And you accuse me of being a "literalist shitstain."

- You deign to call me a coward? You, who lullaby yourself to sleep with fairy tales and myths about invisible realities and other such nonsense? You say there's more to us than biology, but it's your own brain chemistry that tells you those seductive lies. I know reality can be hard to cope with, but stop being a bitch and start living with it. You don't need your crutch; cast it aside and see the world as it is.

- Your care for the "ecosystem" is touching, it really is, perhaps due to its supreme naivete. Do you honestly think the other animals of the world have such concerns for your wellbeing? When some Hong Kong flu breaks quarantine and kills millions of your fellow humans, do you think some of the viruses will protest the wanton killing of humans? Do you think certain portions of the world will be declared human sanctuaries? Wake up, dipshit, and stop imposing rules on the world that it does not and will never follow.

[Tyrant]

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

Ah, Spirit of '22, always willing to substitute hateful insult for objective reasoning. Why not mix the two, like I'm about to do? I think you'll find it most enjoyable. Anyway, let's do this.

How is any of what he just said considered "hateful"?

quote:- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, chuckles, but that "matter and mere nature" is all you've got, and it's all I've got, too. It's all anybody's got. You see no reason to believe in omnipotent ghosts, yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods, and see what it gets you. If you need me, I'll be out here, enjoying the liberating embrace of reason.

Spirit of '22: The notion of progress(or reason) is both outside of man, like gods, and measures what is acceptable and taboo, like gods.

quote:But eventually, when my intellect finally grew beyond "the supernatural"...

By submerging in what is physical and natural, material and fleeting?

quote:... I felt relieved, relieved to finally feel the inescapable conflict of what I'd like to believe and what I know to be true slide off my shoulders. Free at last, free at last, thank nobody in particular, I'm free at last.

Armed&Angry: ...yet you do it anyway, because it provides a convenient psychological shield. Fine, live in your dream world. Pray to your precious gods (or sciences), and see what it gets you.

Main Entry: defense mechanism

Function: noun

Date: 1913

1 : an often unconscious mental process (as repression) that makes possible compromise solutions to personal problems

Still want to feel relieved?

quote:And if you can prove the existence of your beloved spirits, by whatever means, please do so. I do know one thing, though, that you strive so mightily to blind yourself to - the telescopes and computers work, and we can understand why they work. Neither of these statements apply to your invisible Faerie Folk.

First of all, who mentioned Fairy Folk?

Second of all, we can prove the existence of the ethereal principles, to which we pay homage, as much, if not more, than you can empirically measure and scientifically calculate the Reason you pay homage to.

quote:- Pick up a goddamn book, you ignorant fool. Technology and progress are evolution. Cultural evolution is, if anything, more pronounced and useful than genetic evolution. And you accuse me of being a "literalist shitstain."

I don't think Darwin ever mentioned technology.

The function of my post was to point out that technology and "progress" therein ran counter to evolution. Instead of becoming independent and self-sufficient beings that coexisted with Nature, we are now dependent upon personal organizers, fast food restaurants, escalators, calculators, test results, electrical grid stability, plane schedules, prescription Prozac, and market fluctuations - we are effectively put at the mercy of Nature, and, therefore, of the principles of servitude that we attempted to defy.

quote:- You deign to call me a coward? You, who lullaby yourself to sleep with fairy tales and myths about invisible realities and other such nonsense? You say there's more to us than biology, but it's your own brain chemistry that tells you those seductive lies. I know reality can be hard to cope with, but stop being a bitch and start living with it. You don't need your crutch; cast it aside and see the world as it is.

Your own brain chemistry interprets the world around you. This, just like everything else on the planet, is subject to change, depending on the effectiveness of what parts of the brain in secreting what chemicals and hormones at what rate to what part of your body. Ergo, everything you perceive is only an interpretation of that which exists around you, and therefore does not encompass that which is beyond you.

Reason.

quote:- Your care for the "ecosystem" is touching, it really is, perhaps due to its supreme naivete. Do you honestly think the other animals of the world have such concerns for your wellbeing? When some Hong Kong flu breaks quarantine and kills millions of your fellow humans, do you think some of the viruses will protest the wanton killing of humans? Do you think certain portions of the world will be declared human sanctuaries? Wake up, dipshit, and stop imposing rules on the world that it does not and will never follow.

Tyrant: ...the reliance upon another as a food source prevents an individual from physically and mentally disciplining himself to the art of hunting. He loses his physical and spiritual integrity because he no longer taxes himself or pushes himself, challenges himself nor overcomes what he thought was himself, in order to survive. He is less of a man than he once was.

None of what I just said implies:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI>Nature can not take care of itself

<LI>Nature holds humanity in a special regard (why would he need to tax himself?)

<LI>Can not kill us at any point (i.e.: medicinal dependency vs. natural immunity)

</UL>

Humans have not conquered Nature. We are simply convinced it's not a threat anymore... despite the very existence of Disease.

Humans have not analyzed Nature. We are simply convinced we can see everything that ever existed... despite the very existence of the electro-magnetic spectrum.

Humans have not "gone beyond" Nature. We are simply convinced that what we create is worth more than what we were created from... despite the very existence of the Planet.

Humans have not "advanced." We are simply convinced there is no order to nature or principles by which to continuously abide... despite the very existence of mortality.

Ed: italics

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-12-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Tyrant (edited 09-12-2003).]

I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by cutting and pasting crap from your previous posts. Do you think it'll be sensical the second time around?

I know what a defense mechanism is, moron. You're using one right now. How can my thought process be defined as such? I've simply rejected what was never there to begin with. And by the way, I'm still waiting for your vaunted proof. Any time you're ready to share it would be just super.

Believe it or not - I know it sounds crazy - but the study of evolution has advanced quite a bit since Darwin. You might say it's experienced great progress... but I digress. We now know considerably more about the twin mechanisms of inheritance, physical and cultural evolution. The unit of physcial inheritance is the familiar gene, whereas Dr. Richard Dawkins coined the term "meme" to describe a unit of cultural inheritance. A meme is essentially any idea, from written language to heroin abuse. Good memes - or sometimes bad ones, but that's beside the point - are passed on through the generations, as more and more people say "Damn, that's a good idea." Since memes literally spread by word of mouth, rather than waiting perhaps millions of years for genetic mutations to develop, cultural inheritance is much, much faster than physical inheritance. There. Does that clear things up a little?

We were never "independent and self-sufficient." A lone hunter in the paleolithic would have gotten his shit ruined; there's nobody to help him trap and kill animals, and nobody to gather berries and such in case the hunt doesn't pan out. This whole Garden of Eden thing you've got going on it your mind is pure rubbish.

In days of old, we risked our lives every single day for a slab of fresh meat. We had terrible teeth, nothing even approaching health care, and we died at age 20. How are we more dependent on nature now? Cripes, back in the paleolithic, if you got caught in a heavy downpour, you were probably doomed to death by pneumonia.

Of course my brain chemistry interprets the world around me. And of course I can't see what's beyond me. Because there's nobody up there, kids. Prove me wrong or shut the hell up.

Reason!

You're making a lot of generalizations about humans. I, for one, never said we had conquered nature, nor that we can see everything about it, nor that we've "gone beyond it." As for us advancing, I just explained why we've advanced, and explained in some detail the mechanism of it. And there is no absolute universal ethics set, unless you can whip out that God-proof of yours I keep hearing about.

Look, we need not speculate on these matters. There are plenty of examples of peoples in history who've rejected sedentary agriculture and a life of settled convenience. They were called "barbarians." Mongols, Huns, Scythians, Cimmerians, Dorians, Medes, Avars, and Magyars, to name a few. The repeatedly robbed, raped, and murdered the decent, hard-working people of the Fertile Crescent and Europe. Every few decades, the horsemen from the steppes would crash down on civilization in great waves, killing the men, raping the women, and stealing whatever they could carry. When Chingis Khan lead his troops into the Khwarezm Empire, it was the single most destructive war, proportionally speaking, in human history. Something like 75% of the population was killed or lead into slavery. Every major population center was razed to the ground. Columns of refugees were surrounded and slaughtered by the rampaging Mongol tumens. Khan even went so far as to destroy the irrigation in the area - which is why, even today, Afghanistan and Central Asia are essentially deserts. Fun guys, huh?

In the more traditional hunter-gatherer vein, we have the Yanomamo of Brazil and the !Kung of the Kalahari bush. Despite their supposedly enlightened and fulfilling manner of living, the !Kung have a higher murder rate than modern-day New York City. Well, geez, what could possibly be getting on their nerves? Maybe people who've actually tried it don't care for a life of squalor? Over in Brazil reside the Yanomamo, who determine alpha male status by bestowing honor and power on - get this - the most prolific rapist. The man who has attacking, beaten, and violated the most women gets to be the chief. By God, this is living, isn't it kids?

Tell you what. Put down your copy of Ishmael and take a little jander down to your local library. There you'll find such fascinating and enlightening books as The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright, and The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. Just give them a chance. Hell, Wright is even one of you consarned theists.

[Spirit of '22]

Believe it or not - I know it sounds crazy - but the study of evolution has advanced quite a bit since Darwin. You might say it's experienced great progress... but I digress. We now know considerably more about the twin mechanisms of inheritance, physical and cultural evolution. The unit of physcial inheritance is the familiar gene, whereas Dr. Richard Dawkins coined the term "meme" to describe a unit of cultural inheritance. A meme is essentially any idea, from written language to heroin abuse. Good memes - or sometimes bad ones, but that's beside the point - are passed on through the generations, as more and more people say "Damn, that's a good idea."

And what "good ideas" do we have? Facial scanning databases and drive-through pharmacies? National policy that hands out resources to third-worlders so they can open another 7-11, so they can get their equality of opportunity? Factories with animals hooked up to them so they can cannibalize the young ground into food pellets and be radiated and genetically altered so a street-sweeper can have meat 7 days a week? Widespread eating disorders and alienation as a rule of culture? Thanks memes.

Since memes literally spread by word of mouth, rather than waiting perhaps millions of years for genetic mutations to develop, cultural inheritance is much, much faster than physical inheritance.

That makes it shitty. One little social gap caused by any large number of possible chaotic scenarios make people forget, or not give a shit, because this valued "cultural achievement" list is not compatible with the pace of their bodies or spirit.

We were never "independent and self-sufficient." A lone hunter in the paleolithic would have gotten his shit ruined;

Thats probably why people are not naturally solitary under most avoidable circumstances, ass.

there's nobody to help him trap and kill animals, and nobody to gather berries and such in case the hunt doesn't pan out.

What the hell culture have you ever heard of that consisted of solitary men going out by themselves as a rule of their society?

In days of old, we risked our lives every single day for a slab of fresh meat. We had terrible teeth, nothing even approaching health care, and we died at age 20.



That is pure fallacy.

How are we more dependent on nature now?

I think we are. Perhaps not more dependant on natural machinations, like the weather or seasonal migrations, but natural motivations have far more of a predominance than ever before. We are far more dependant on the concern to eat and breed all day than do anything that makes us better than binobos.

Cripes, back in the paleolithic, if you got caught in a heavy downpour, you were probably doomed to death by pneumonia.



No. If that were true, none of us would be here.

Of course my brain chemistry interprets the world around me. And of course I can't see what's beyond me. Because there's nobody up there, kids. Prove me wrong or shut the hell up.

Look. Thats usually good enough. You Since you seem incapable, you can just rely on the testimony and evidence of other people who have looked and found.



You're making a lot of generalizations about humans. I, for one, never said we had conquered nature, nor that we can see everything about it, nor that we've "gone beyond it." As for us advancing, I just explained why we've advanced, and explained in some detail the mechanism of it.

How can you call our machines and computers "advancement"?

And there is no absolute universal ethics set, unless you can whip out that God-proof of yours I keep hearing about.

The common denominators behind all ancient traditions point out the Primordial Tradition that is continually reaffirmed every day in all spheres of life, from the profane to the sacred. Even your precious and shitty, contingent world of biology and chemistry is subject to the laws of its principles, and manifest them for anyone who looks beyond the surface level of anything.

Look, we need not speculate on these matters. There are plenty of examples of peoples in history who've rejected sedentary agriculture and a life of settled convenience. They were called "barbarians." Mongols, Huns, Scythians, Cimmerians, Dorians, Medes, Avars, and Magyars, to name a few. The repeatedly robbed, raped, and murdered the decent, hard-working people of the Fertile Crescent and Europe. Every few decades, the horsemen from the steppes would crash down on civilization in great waves, killing the men, raping the women, and stealing whatever they could carry.

The poeple who farmed were often not related to the people who ruled over them. The land-owners never farmed and generally hated work. They roamed around killing people too.

So what?

When Chingis Khan lead his troops into the Khwarezm Empire, it was the single most destructive war, proportionally speaking, in human history. Something like 75% of the population was killed or lead into slavery. Every major population center was razed to the ground. Columns of refugees were surrounded and slaughtered by the rampaging Mongol tumens. Khan even went so far as to destroy the irrigation in the area - which is why, even today, Afghanistan and Central Asia are essentially deserts. Fun guys, huh?

Their culture and way of life was far superior to the inert one of couches and MTV that is so advanced today.

In the more traditional hunter-gatherer vein, we have the Yanomamo of Brazil and the !Kung of the Kalahari bush. Despite their supposedly enlightened and fulfilling manner of living, the !Kung have a higher murder rate than modern-day New York City.

You are arguing on a very human, liberal, shitty level here, obsessed with this percieved sanctity of all life, despite the quality of it. Why do you cite death like its the worst possible fate a man can undergo? Everything is going to die, get used to it.

Well, geez, what could possibly be getting on their nerves? Maybe people who've actually tried it don't care for a life of squalor?

The presence of the jet-age alongside them probably skews their perspective on life anyway.

Over in Brazil reside the Yanomamo, who determine alpha male status by bestowing honor and power on - get this - the most prolific rapist. The man who has attacking, beaten, and violated the most women gets to be the chief. By God, this is living, isn't it kids?

I dont think thats true.

For the record though, neither me nor Tyrant really think people from Africa or South America are men in the sense that you understand Humanity.

Tell you what. Put down your copy of Ishmael and take a little jander down to your local library. There you'll find such fascinating and enlightening books as The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny by Robert Wright, and The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. Just give them a chance. Hell, Wright is even one of you consarned theists.

Science is a worthless confusion of effects for causes.

[Faithless]

Tyrant. So you are upset that the current state of society doesn't come up to your standards and want to turn time back?

You could always wait ten years or so and then Mad Max would be a documentary or you could start doing some actions rather than as you call it 'rant' in a forum.

You fucking idiot. I give you reasoned argument, and what do I get back? Meaningless question-begging. Could you maybe present some reasoning behind your statements? Let's look at these brilliant rebuttals:

"That makes it shitty."

"This is pure fallacy."

"How can you call our machines and computers 'advancement'"

Oh, my, you sure showed me, Spirit! I'll start living in fear of mastodons and shitting behind bushes right away. Fuck, are you twelve or something?

Raging against memes, as a concept, is just fucking stupid. Every animal replicates efficient behavior from its peers, forming the building blocks of cultural inheritance. Humans are just the only species for whome cultural has largely supplanted genetic inheritance. Even your ahistorically virtuous hunter-gatherers had memes, such as "trap the mammoth in the ravine" and "rape that woman." And if you like those memes, fuck, you can have them. Idiot. Oh, and there you go again about the spirit and how we've lost touch with it. Still waiting on that evidence, kiddo.

And you blatantly contradict yourself. You piss and moan about how independent and self-sufficient we were, and when I pointed out how idiotically wrong this is, you just go "Duh." These are mutually exclusive statements, dipshit. Pick one and shut the fuck up.

Your response to established proven fact? Blind denial! Nice work! It has been established that hunter-gatherers DID have terrible teeth, DID have nothing compared to modern medicine, and DID, in fact, die at very young ages. What do you stack up against this? "That is pure fallacy." Oh... ok...

We are considerably LESS dependent on our natural urges than we were in your nonexistent golden age. Ancient life consisted of lust, some of the sexual variety, or the blood sort when it came to animals and sexual competitors. Why? Because we were monkeys then. Talented monkeys, but nothing more. It was the creation of agriculture that lead to food surpluses, which allowed people to take up different professions and hobbies. This allows some people today to become a celibate monk, to spend their life studying philosophy, or in my case, to drink heavily and try desperately to set ignorant asses like you straight. None of this was possible in your Garden of Eden.

Why do you think that somebody who you in a completely arbitrary, not to say brainless fashion declare possesses a superior lifestyle, therefore has the right to rob and murder innocents? Are you really such a fascist as that? Just because people are going to die someday doesn't mean you and your idiot nomad idols have the right to go around killing them for fun.

And in the next response, we see more of your denial of facts, plus some nice, blatant racism as a garnish. The habits of the Yanomamo are well-documented. Read a book and stop being an ignorant shit. As for Africa and South America, well, I've got some bad news for you, chum. We're all descended from the Great Rift Valley in Africa, so it looks like you're not human either. Sorry, so sad. Think before you say stupid shit like this.



[This message has been edited by Armed&Angry (edited 09-12-2003).]