How about vacuum cleaners … I for one am sick of hauling carpets outside and beating on them …
I swear, every time I read Machinaforce’s threads, his baseline assumption is that Humans should never have evolved past semi-sentience, that this was the perfect state and highest quality of life.
Well, if you want to take the apple as a metaphor for sentience, we’ve eaten and lost the garden (which was no heaven). There ain’t no going back, and that is for the best.
I’m not saying that (though plenty of philosophers argue that point). I’m just saying that that points in favor of modernity don’t seem as logical as those against it.
You’re citations are (laughably) irrelevant to the point I made. We are talking about civilization here. You also seem to have left out the vast amount of poverty in modern times.
Machinaforce, most of your threads go like this:
- Make gloomy statement about the world
- Demand that people debunk your gloomy statement, or cheer you up
- When people do so, say “It’s not good enough, try again”
- Repeat step 1#.
The condescending arrogance of your statements is superseded only by their ignorance of the subject.
He got the “you’re”-“your” thing wrong, too.
But, on point, I agree with you.
This is something I call “Arguing God with a Believer” and refuse to engage in. Where one person can make any claim they want without providing any proof for their claims, then require the other side to constantly prove them wrong even as they use ad-hominem attacks to belittle the people who argue with them.
Your claims, Machinaforce, your proofs. No one is required to argue any point to your satisfaction.
Being more involved, using more effective communication and defending your own points without insults will get you a lot further in life.
You’re absolutely right, they’d probably laugh at people reading books too (and after understanding, perhaps make comments to the effect, “Look at all the burdens your technologies place on you. Having to spend most days in a room learning for years and years, instead of living your life.”). But here’s where your equivalence between books and screen entertainment rings false, in modern contexts, we know better, that reading tends to be much more nutritive than tv or playing candy crush. They’d laugh even after grasping what the two-dimensional chunk of plastic does. (For a modern treatise on the vapidity of some of our modern entertainments, for anyone who likes reading (a lot), see David Foster Wallace’s “Infinite Jest”.)
Meh. I’ll wait for the movie.
You vastly underestimate our ancestors creativity and intelligence.
Enjoy,
Steven
One thing I’ll say is that the posters who respond to Machinaforce’s queries inevitably elevate the value of the thread. Despite my frustration, I always learn something.
Dude, did you even read the posts on page one of this thread? Hell BeepKillBeep made the effort to give you formal citations!
I’ve documented the significant decrease in poverty over the past 200 years and the extreme and rapid decrease in particular over the past 30 to 35 years.
True perhaps that in many years past not as many lived by young adulthood, so probably fewer officially committed suicide. Data that we have may not be reliable as suicide as cause of death may have been hidden at times when societies commonly viewed such as a mortal sin … but what data we have shows
In any case it certainly occurred in the Middle Ages and occurred enough that the Church and regal rulings saw it necessary to make specific laws punishing it and extending that punishment to the families of the deceased. Happy times!
Depression is not a new thing.
Were the severely depressed labelled as ill and cared for in ancient times, or felt to be possessed and killed, or allowed to just not eat and die? We have no way of knowing and your imaginings do not qualify as inferences.
Doing this for the kicks, but really BeepKillBeep is absolutely correct: culture here at least is that if you make a claim it is on you to support it; it is not true until proven false.
Again, I seriously doubt they would laugh once they knew what the TV did. A TV is more than a simple chunk of plastic.
As for “living life” that’s an almost meaningless statement used to achieve some sort of moral high ground. Not to mention it is way open to interpretation. It sounds like those self help books that make it seem like you have to do something great in life. Considering that it all amounts to dust in the end and most people will be forgotten, it’s a hallow statement. If it provides happiness cheaply then what’s the issue? Seems like the people who feel they have to “live their life” are the ones with an issue. You can’t take any of it with you.
They could see it as a “burden” and they would be wrong. But then again it wouldn’t mean much for people who thought slavery was moral and the earth was flat.
Saying what their reactions would be seems more like you putting your words in their mouth.
Infinite Jest though was really long and hard to follow for me.
Just to be clear here; You’re now arguing FOR civilization and the modern conveniences of technology as a way of avoiding having to “live life”?
Not really, but I feel the need to strike down anyone stupid enough to spout “living your life”. It’s the most vapid statement anyone could say.
That shore is a strange thing to feel the need to do … maybe try taking up crossword puzzles or something instead … or is this just the need to strike at people for whatever reason … I think the most vapid thing to say is “I live my life solely to please my parents” …
More like to limit the amount of vague motivational nonsense that really just about trying to claim some sort of high ground. Live your life is so vague and can be spun any way people like. Of course then the usual response is “not like that”.
Life. Don’t talk to me about life.
Given Settimo’s use of that phrase and your response, it’s difficult to see how you are not insulting him by calling him stupid. I’ll give this a pass assuming this isn’t what you intended. Do not appear to insult other posters.
[/moderating]