Is it right to rage or start wars?

[flamingspinach]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

rofl deltro you obviously don't know **** about the history of the Indian revolutionary movement.

This doesn't even ****ING touch ethics. This is instinct.

Yeah that's my point - instinct is not exactly the best way to handle things, you retarded caveman As for "negative feedback", do you even know what that means? You might want to try actually knowing something about a topic before linking to a wikipedia article about it - otherwise it might turn out to be totally unrelated to what you're talking about and make you look like a moron. Let's quote from that wikipedia article you just linked:

Negative feedback (shortened to NFB) is the process of feeding back to the input a part of a system's output, so as to reverse the direction of change of the output.

Emphasis mine. I.e. negative feedback is the mechanism by which a system regulates itself through its own output - an example of this would be an enzyme which catalyzes the formation of its own allosteric regulator. LEARN DA ****, SNORLAX IS FUCEN HELPING EVERYBODY RIGHT NOW

if they didn't have him you'd be done

You are the biggest overthinker on the forum.

lol, sorry, my response was pretty much a joke, I know you didn't mean that literally as formulated.

-fs

[deltro300111]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

rofl deltro you obviously don't know **** about the history of the Indian revolutionary movement.
Yeah that's my point - instinct is not exactly the best way to handle things, you retarded caveman As for "negative feedback", do you even know what that means? You might want to try actually knowing something about a topic before linking to a wikipedia article about it - otherwise it might turn out to be totally unrelated to what you're talking about and make you look like a moron. Let's quote from that wikipedia article you just linked:

Clearly, instinct hasn't gotten the world to such an advanced stage today. But yeah, ignoring instinct is great- you put your hand on a piece of metal, it burns your hand. Instinct says to move your hand away.

**** THAT! BE A REBEL! KEEP YOUR HAND THERE! RETALIATION SOLVES NOTHING!

Emphasis mine. I.e. negative feedback is the mechanism by which a system regulates itself through its own output - an example of this would be an enzyme which catalyzes the formation of its own allosteric regulator.

They push us, we push back with equal force.

[T0rajir0u]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

The answer to questions like these actually depends a lot on what people think the answer is.

If an entire society is willing to live with, say, genocide to protect their freedom and security, then from the point of view of that society, violence against those whom they perceive as enemies is entirely justified. Regardless of whether you (hypothetically, you aren't in this hypothetical society) think they're doing the right thing or not, they think they're doing the right thing, they can live with it, and it will help them survive. The point is that people in this society would be less likely to want to work toward a peaceful solution, so if they tried, it would have a worse chance of working.

If an entire society is unwilling to live with genocide, then from the point of view of that society, violence of that kind isn't justified. A society like that would try harder to come to a more peaceful conclusion. The people in this society will try harder, so they'll have a better chance of maintaining peace without the need for war.

Everything depends on context. There isn't just one answer to questions like these.

[flamingspinach]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

Clearly, instinct hasn't gotten the world to such an advanced stage today. But yeah, ignoring instinct is great- you put your hand on a piece of metal, it burns your hand. Instinct says to move your hand away.

**** THAT! BE A REBEL! KEEP YOUR HAND THERE! RETALIATION SOLVES NOTHING!

Uh - there's some instincts that work today and some that don't. If you don't understand that, I'm afraid you're beyond my power to correct.

They push us, we push back with equal force.

but that's not negative feedback you retarded assclown

[Z3ratul]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

deserved to die

My bad =(

Please clarify, I'm interested in understanding what you're talking about, but this post doesn't express it.

I'm right and you're wrong because I say so. In the post of yours I was referring to, that was essentially the logic you used. I decided to use this against you, and therefore, I am now right and you are the one that has the wrong ideas. I'm using your own logic against you in an attempt to make you realize that your reasoning in aforementioned post sucks.

I'll quote it, just incase you missed it.

Because people don't define what's right.

Right and wrong is a matter of opinion. It is completely subjective. Hopefully you see what I'm getting and Deltro.

[T0rajir0u]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

Uh - there's some instincts that work today and some that don't. If you don't understand that, I'm afraid you're beyond my power to correct.

qft

The human mind is structured to allow us to curb instinct to a degree to work in groups. Humans are social animals. Our close relatives are also social animals.

The entire concept of a social animal is the idea that you have a group of members of your species with whom you closely associate. Ties within the group are strengthened by the birth of new members, by common experiences, and so forth. Each member of the group helps out other members of the group so that their individual chances of survival increase. (If a member is sick or injured, the rest take on extra food-gathering to provide for them; children get the attention of multiple adults; this should all be obvious from experience) A lot of this is contrary to base instinct, but there are other instincts, as well as the faculty of learning, that allow this concept to work very well.

Generally, conflict within a social group is rare (and if it occurs, it is to establish a better hierarchy), but conflict between groups is very common, since winning a conflict with another group allows you access to more food, possibly more mates, etc. It raises the survival of your group, and hence it's a common activity of social animals.

Then there are two issues at stake here:

1) Whether it works better today to define our social groups in terms of nationality, etc., or whether the entire human race has become one group, worthy of mutual protection.

2) Whether conflict within a group is justified.

[flamingspinach]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

Another thing that's important to note is that in a group of the size prescribed by our "natural" tendencies (i.e. a tribe or band of 50-200 people), serious intra-group tensions are almost nonexistent. But when your group is a nation of hundreds of millions of people, or a global society of billions, there are vastly more tensions, especially since you don't know even a tiny fraction of the people in your group. Another reason why, in today's interconnected world, where social groups become ever larger, we must look beyond our instincts in order to survive.

-fs

[T0rajir0u]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

in today's interconnected world, where social groups become ever larger, we must look beyond our instincts in order to survive.

<3

[Sniper911]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

In my opinion. I think wars are nessasary.
Sure they sometimes might be meaningless...
(like the jihad from al quaida and stuff)
But to give country peace you need to fight sometimes.

Losing patriotism is the key to defeat.
It happened to Rome, the Byzantine empire.
and it could happen to us.. (maybe)

Now is the time to heavily arm ourselves since we are fighting a needless war right now. (cough Iraq war cough)

All the president wants now deals with oil. (ex. Syriana)
If it was for 9/11 then we would still be chasing al quaida.

[Omeganitros]

Re: Is it right to rage or start wars?

Loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocked