Community rejects Comcast and instead builds their own municipal broad brand network

[Redshadowz]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

On a personal level being good is the best we can give.

But true greatness does not exist in the individual, but in a society of people we’re good nature is common.

You wrote, "I have great belief in the possibility and natural tendencies of man to achieve such greatness."

What does that mean? And can you give me an example? Because to me, greatness is more akin to being "victorious" or "being strong" or "being rich" or "setting records" or "curing a disease" or "inventing something" or "being remembered in the history books".

By many measures Donald Trump is a "great man". And by other measures America is a "great country". But is it?


I suppose what I'm trying to get at is, "What are your values?"

Or more-importantly, what are your hierarchy of values?


Which is more-important to you, technological and material-progress or equality?

Which is more-important, technological and material-progress or morality?

Which is more-important, freedom or equality?

Which is more-important, morality or security?


What value do you place on the possibility of humans exploring the universe? Would it be a tragedy if we never left Earth ever again?

How long do you think humans should live? If someone dies at 20, is that a waste? If they die at 40, is that a waste? If they die at 60, is that a waste? Should we try to live as long as possible? Should we strive to live forever?


Government isn't an end, it is a means to an end. Ideologies aren't ends, they are means to an end. Communism isn't an end, it is a means to an end. So what is the end?

"Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end" - Henry David Thoreau

"While civilization has been improving our houses, it has not equally improved the men who are to inhabit them. It has created palaces, but it was not so easy to create noblemen and kings." - Henry David Thoreau

"What is the use of a house if you haven't got a tolerable planet to put it on?" - Henry David Thoreau

"The preachers and lecturers deal with men of straw, as they are men of straw themselves. Why, a free-spoken man, of sound lungs, cannot draw a long breath without causing your rotten institutions to come toppling down by the vacuum he makes. Your church is a baby-house made of blocks, and so of the state....The church, the state, the school, the magazine, think they are liberal and free! It is the freedom of a prison-yard." - Henry David Thoreau

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by Redshadowz

You wrote, "I have great belief in the possibility and natural tendencies of man to achieve such greatness."

What does that mean? And can you give me an example? Because to me, greatness is more akin to being "victorious" or "being strong" or "being rich" or "setting records" or "curing a disease" or "inventing something" or "being remembered in the history books".

By many measures Donald Trump is a "great man". And by other measures America is a "great country". But is it?


I suppose what I'm trying to get at is, "What are your values?"

Or more-importantly, what are your hierarchy of values?


Which is more-important to you, technological and material-progress or equality?

Which is more-important, technological and material-progress or morality?

Which is more-important, freedom or equality?

Which is more-important, morality or security?


What value do you place on the possibility of humans exploring the universe? Would it be a tragedy if we never left Earth ever again?

How long do you think humans should live? If someone dies at 20, is that a waste? If they die at 40, is that a waste? If they die at 60, is that a waste? Should we try to live as long as possible? Should we strive to live forever?


Government isn't an end, it is a means to an end. Ideologies aren't ends, they are means to an end. Communism isn't an end, it is a means to an end. So what is the end?

Where I’d like to see humanity and in what way?

Equality in relative terms (meaning not complete equality), freedom for each individual to participate in that equality (or not), and other such values.

It is impossible to calculate what is the best of anything when it comes to age or other such issues as it is a case by case scenario, but on the general scale longer life tends to correlate with a healthier life.

Less obesity, tobacco consumption, etc. can have positive affects and in that meter it justifies longer living. To the question what is the moral value of living to 40 vs 60... I don’t know, or at least I’m not sure.

Medical advancements aren’t necessarily good being as people’s standards change dependent on the norm, so modern medicinal usage is taken for granted offering the same mental enjoyment of such things. But longer lives do have other affects:

1. Greyer societies equate to less conflict (I was reading an article that with both China and Japan aging, the capability for war and the will for war decreases).

2. Larger population to care for. This is a negative for me, not because of efficiency or debt, but only for the fact that drains others without the same moral connection (the longer my grandmother lived, the less I had the capacity to love/respect her as she weighed down hard on our family).

Modern day structures are very much structured towards a more organized, safer, and less free society. Personal fear should not be a deciding factor in human society less it ruins all. America moreso than the rest of the world is a very scared country. When the sniper hit DC I lived in the MD suburbs and people from way off were to afraid to go outside.

Fear is part of our national conscious and it allows for a greater proliferation of crime and less freedom.

Yes power can limit individual freedom, but so can the self. That is also how the patriots act got passed.

As for progress, it depends on what kind. You can still have material advancements without the need to apply them. But there other forms of progress outside of technology. There is social progress.

Social capital is the realm competitive spirit should be most applied to, not material capital.

And yet I still have an unspecified fear that no progress in even the material field could leave us vulnerable in some capacity (or in better terms the past can only last for so long, if things stay the same they will naturally deteriorate over time). The goal of humanity shouldn’t be to advance to the future, but such advancements shouldn’t be artificially held back.

I guess what I’m trying to say is there is more to life than bettering the function of people. And I would not find it a tragedy if we never left earth, because humans will never last forever as a species.

Greatness is not something a person can achieve, but if it is to be achieved then it should be on the basis of something good. Great without good is just a call for power, good without Great is a compromise to what we should do.

Morality, kindness, and freedom are traits that offer a more humble view of the world. Nothing in excess is good, but safety is a practice, not an end.

[ditchoc]

Something here about a free market place and competition does not quiet fit.

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

Where I’d like to see humanity and in what way?

Equality in relative terms (meaning not complete equality), freedom for each individual to participate in that equality (or not), and other such values.

It is impossible to calculate what is the best of anything when it comes to age or other such issues as it is a case by case scenario, but on the general scale longer life tends to correlate with a healthier life.

Less obesity, tobacco consumption, etc. can have positive affects and in that meter it justifies longer living. To the question what is the moral value of living to 40 vs 60... I don’t know, or at least I’m not sure.

Medical advancements aren’t necessarily good being as people’s standards change dependent on the norm, so modern medicinal usage is taken for granted offering the same mental enjoyment of such things. But longer lives do have other affects:

1. Greyer societies equate to less conflict (I was reading an article that with both China and Japan aging, the capability for war and the will for war decreases).

2. Larger population to care for. This is a negative for me, not because of efficiency or debt, but only for the fact that drains others without the same moral connection (the longer my grandmother lived, the less I had the capacity to love/respect her as she weighed down hard on our family).

Modern day structures are very much structured towards a more organized, safer, and less free society. Personal fear should not be a deciding factor in human society less it ruins all. America moreso than the rest of the world is a very scared country. When the sniper hit DC I lived in the MD suburbs and people from way off were to afraid to go outside.

Fear is part of our national conscious and it allows for a greater proliferation of crime and less freedom.

Yes power can limit individual freedom, but so can the self. That is also how the patriots act got passed.

As for progress, it depends on what kind. You can still have material advancements without the need to apply them. But there other forms of progress outside of technology. There is social progress.

Social capital is the realm competitive spirit should be most applied to, not material capital.

And yet I still have an unspecified fear that no progress in even the material field could leave us vulnerable in some capacity (or in better terms the past can only last for so long, if things stay the same they will naturally deteriorate over time). The goal of humanity shouldn’t be to advance to the future, but such advancements shouldn’t be artificially held back.

I guess what I’m trying to say is there is more to life than bettering the function of people. And I would not find it a tragedy if we never left earth, because humans will never last forever as a species.

Greatness is not something a person can achieve, but if it is to be achieved then it should be on the basis of something good. Great without good is just a call for power, good without Great is a compromise to what we should do.

Morality, kindness, and freedom are traits that offer a more humble view of the world. Nothing in excess is good, but safety is a practice, not an end.

Also I’ll add a lot of new diseases/disabilities like Alzheimer’s came into play because humans were living so long. When the average age was 40 these states never surfaced causing new problems for society as a whole.