Is intelligence evil/unnatural? - Page 2 - Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions

theburningbush · 06-22-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixxx(sic)six

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds as if you're saying: "If the man is content with being man, why does man still strive for contentment; and why does contentment even exist?"

Is that rubbish? Perhaps...

not really my point.

The statement is interesting however but it has the big problem of requiring a defintion for contentment.

But if we look at contentment as a concept, and we use your previous statments: "man has built a world that he is content with" and "man was not content with being man" it leads to the conclusion that man has reached the pinnacle of evolution for the species. Is this your overall point?

my argument is that man can not be content we strive for more both as a society and as an indivdual. The reason we cant be content is because every step we take towards that goal leads to more problems and possiblities in effect takeing us farther away.

sixxx(sic)six · 06-22-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruning

my argument is that man can not be content we strive for more both as a society and as an indivdual. The reason we cant be content is because every step we take towards that goal leads to more problems and possiblities in effect takeing us farther away.

But if that is the case, then is that not a form of contenment? Are we not content doing so?

theburningbush · 06-22-06

solid point sort of an eye of the storm

its like a fortune cookie contentment is in the pursuite of not in the state.

I think a definition of contentment relative to the conversation is required to make head way

how about satisfaction in the current state of being. Kinda of loosee goosee though, the problem is that you can be content and still pursue progress (tech, society, econmics ect). Its tuff to argue one way or the other because the point contentment is not concrete.

But to address directly your question, I think no, but then again have we reliazed it is unattainable and are content in pruseing it, what is your thoughts?

Dark Messiah · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixxx(sic)six

The point being that we can compare our station in life with those stations in the past. The evolution of science, of philosophy, and it doesn't really look like it shall evolve any further. Why should it? You had logic/faith science, then faith science, now logic science. What's left?

I'd be extremely careful. History has a habit of making those who claim there's nothing left to do out to look like idiots.

Aside from the general region of the unknown, you're overlooking the possibility of actually coming to understand not only the hows, but the whys of the Universe, and an eventual reconciliation between science and philosophy, whether it would closer resemble Hinduist, Jeudo-Christian preconceptions, or even just a Matrix knockoff.

doebathory · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixxx(sic)six

I think you missed my point completely. The point is, no matter in what ways we're improving ourselves, we're content with our station in life. We're content with being man, with being the masters of our life, with the knowledge we've gained or are gaining. When you really dissect it, when you look at technological philosophies, we as man have created a world where we are content.

I must admit I don't agree. If we were content we wouldn't still be warring to change things, we wouldn't feel the need to improve on any of the inventions or aspects of social structure we already have, we wouldn't feel the need to learn anything further and we wouldn't be trying to explore the universe around us. I know many people who are not content with man's dominant position, with the world we've altered (rather than created) for ourselves or with some of the knowledge we've accumulated. I see us as a very discontent species as a whole. I think the item I would agree with is that for the most part people are generally more content to be a human being than to be any other kind of animal. I know I wanted to be a mermaid when I was younger but other than that kind of childish fantasy I've never once actually longed to be a member of any other species.

theburningbush · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by doebathory

I think the item I would agree with is that for the most part people are generally more content to be a human being than to be any other kind of animal. I know I wanted to be a mermaid when I was younger but other than that kind of childish fantasy I've never once actually longed to be a member of any other species.

this is impossible to know as I said a person cant be another species so how can we know.

theburningbush · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Messiah

I'd be extremely careful. History has a habit of making those who claim there's nothing left to do out to look like idiots.

Aside from the general region of the unknown, you're overlooking the possibility of actually coming to understand not only the hows, but the whys of the Universe, and an eventual reconciliation between science and philosophy, whether it would closer resemble Hinduist, Jeudo-Christian preconceptions, or even just a Matrix knockoff.

to true in the early 1890's physics had supposedly made all of its discoveries. Of course along came Einstein and some quantum mechanichs. We are however limited to our perceptions which allows us to only go so far. We cant think in terms of space/time, we cant conceptulize the emensity of the univerese nor the dynamics of the atom. In short at some point the statement will be correct because we will not be able to ask the right questions.

doebathory · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by theburningbush

this is impossible to know as I said a person cant be another species so how can we know.

Of course you can know. Just because you can't have something does not mean that you can't want it. I'd agree that you can't know whether or not everyone is content without asking every single person on the planet but whether or not you can change species doesn't even come into it.

doebathory · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Messiah

The 10% of your brain thing is a commonly repeated, even by scientists, myth, with no basis in fact.

I also don't see people as content. I think people today are constantly wanting to prove themselves. The world, the Western world, anyway, is a perpetually improving place at this point in history. Things, nearly everything, are really getting better; crime is going down, murder is going down, divorce is going down, tolerance is rising, college education is more common, the standards of living are up, we have an increasingly powerful internet. Wikipedia, for the love of God. Do you know what Socrates would've done for something like Wikipedia? And I-pods. Christ, I'm of the generation that is supposed to take this shit for granted and I'm constantly amazed. It's approximately five billion times better to be alive in a first world country today than in almost any other place and time in history. Based on this, I'd say our intelligence certainly isn't evil to us. Intelligence causes people to think things through more thoroughly and be more humane/good, in my experience. Intelligence is, however, highly over-rated, in that a lot of people underestimate how common it is and tend to inflate their opinions of themselves on account of this.

What about the intelligent thought that goes into planning murder, war, abuse, theft, etc.? With our intelligence we constantly devise more and more terrible weapons. Is that better than a world where you only had bows and arrows or swords? Does the fact that people in first world countries are more comfortable mean that it's OK that people in third world countries are not and that we have more destructive firepower?

With regard to the last comment, I suppose I am thinking more along the lines of basic human intelligence, the part that lets us figure out if you turn the tap left you get water, if you strike the match you get fire, rather than intellectualism itself.

theburningbush · 06-23-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by doebathory

Of course you can know. Just because you can't have something does not mean that you can't want it. I'd agree that you can't know whether or not everyone is content without asking every single person on the planet but whether or not you can change species doesn't even come into it.

so then how can man know he is content being man if he cant know what it is like to be another species? Or in other words man is only man we have no other percspective on which to make observations and or draw conclusions. This is the flaw in your statement, "you may have wanted to be a mermaid", what you really longed to be was the human perception of what a mermaid is, but not truely a mermaid. This is the overall problem with man as a species as well. all we are and do is based on our perceptions of the universe theirfore it is impossible to draw a true conclusion on the true universe we can only draw conclusions on the universe we percive. It may be that man is the greatest species to be it may be the worst.

phalium · 06-23-06

evolution has to continue, so to say that no species would eventually develop the ability of reason is being ignorant to what our world is founded upon.

sixxx(sic)six · 06-23-06

OKAY, WHOA...OVERLOAD...

To start one at a time...with BURNING BUSH...perhaps contentment doesn't need to be synonymous with happiness? Perhaps it means to be merely sated...in which case, even the most troublesome parts of the world can be sated with their positions to it (i.e., not being a bum, but working at Walmart).

DOEBATHORY...uh...re-read my posts.

DARK MESSIAH...I agree that there might be the possibility of knowing the why's and how's and yaddah, yaddah, yaddah...but, I personally believe it'll be revealed philosophically rather than scientifically, which I feel is nothing more than modern faith-based idealogies anyway. However, being that I hate the "if" games, all I really have to look at is what we know as of now.

theburningbush · 06-24-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixxx(sic)six

OKAY, WHOA...OVERLOAD...

To start one at a time...with BURNING BUSH...perhaps contentment doesn't need to be synonymous with happiness? Perhaps it means to be merely sated...in which case, even the most troublesome parts of the world can be sated with their positions to it (i.e., not being a bum, but working at Walmart).

.

agreed but your defintion or interprutation does not conecide with your statements. Your example is indicitave of discontent or not being sated as the bum chooses one state of being over an other. A logic thought string would be bum, discontent, works at walmart, discontent, seeks promotion, ect. This is not a shot at you the defintion just does not seem work under your argument.

I perfer a defnition of contentment as not seeking change.

sixxx(sic)six · 06-24-06

But how many of us ever NOT seek change? Give an example...everyone seeks change...if not, people wouldn't want vacations, or promotions, or date, or move, or buy new things, or try new meals, and yaddah, yaddah, yaddah...

Is that not contentment in its own?

Dyshade · 06-25-06

I would not see it as contentment. Change is the perpetual seeking of contentment. I do not think anyone is ever content no matter where they are in life. If so it is fleeting.

theburningbush · 06-26-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixxx(sic)six

But how many of us ever NOT seek change? Give an example...everyone seeks change...if not, people wouldn't want vacations, or promotions, or date, or move, or buy new things, or try new meals, and yaddah, yaddah, yaddah...

Is that not contentment in its own?

thats my point. I am in the opposite camp I dont think that man is content being man.

seeking change = contentment, could be, but change occurs when it does your not seeking it, ie you have now become discontent. From every angle we appear to be in a perptuale state of reoccuring discontent. This is my counter argument to the orginal "man is content being man" argument

Dyshade · 06-26-06

I agree that man is certainly not content.

InKY · 08-27-06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowborn

Using our intelligence is no more evil than a chamelon using its tongue to catch bugs, or a cheetah using its superior speed to run down prey....

I agree that intelligence is a tool and so isn't evil or good but can be used either way. Besides, there's no way being unitelligent would make us more fit, so we're not going to evolve into purely instinctual beings and the question should be how to use intelligence, not whether we "should"have it in the first place.