Culture in Decline - Video Series from the Creator of Zeitgeist

[Romulus]

So Monsanto and the big Food corps are just OK? There comes a point where these Food/Health/Money/Insurance industries share the same motive and ruin the free market, right?

 

[jmdrake]

So Monsanto and the big Food corps are just OK? There comes a point where these Food/Health/Money/Insurance industries share the same motive and ruin the free market, right?

Monsanto wouldn't exist without big government. (Patents, subsidized agriculture etc).

 

[KingNothing]

So Monsanto and the big Food corps are just OK? There comes a point where these Food/Health/Money/Insurance industries share the same motive and ruin the free market, right?

Monsanto isn't evil. Monsanto is just a company. Once they start doing things to actually harm individuals, instead of having the state interfere on their behalf, I'll criticize them.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

As far as the whole "Free market capitalism equals/does not equal nature" thingy is concerned, I believe that's besides the point. As a Christian I believe that we are called to go above and beyond nature. You know one species will hunt another to extinction and not lose sleep over it?

Completely false. Unless an outside disturbance is introduced (i.e.-modern human civilization), one species will NOT hunt another to extinction. That is not how nature works, sorry.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

Monsanto isn't evil.

Does anyone take this clown seriously? I mean, WOW! Talk about cognitive dissidence.

 

[jmdrake]

Completely false. Unless an outside disturbance is introduced (i.e.-modern human civilization), one species will NOT hunt another to extinction. That is not how nature works, sorry.

A) Man is part of nature.

B) Would you call rats floating on a piece of driftwood an "outside disturbance?"

C) It's called "survival of the fittest" for a reason.

 

[erowe1]

Goldman Sachs? Monsanto?

I have a hard time understanding how anyone could think either of those, or any other big corporations, are anywhere close to the problem that big government is.

 

[erowe1]

That's interesting. Why do you say that?

Because of the religious aspects of it.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

A) Man is part of nature.

B) Would you call rats floating on a piece of driftwood an "outside disturbance?"

C) It's called "survival of the fittest" for a reason.

A) The way man lives in modern societies is NOT how nature functions. These are inventions of man. Yes, man is a part of nature but is man living in harmony and balance, like all of nature? No.

B) Yes

C) Again false. Nature does NOT operate solely by the "survival of the fittest" model. There are FAR more examples of cooperative systems in nature than competitive. This is not saying competition is not present in nature, but it most certainly is not the "driving model" that you were indoctrinated to believe during your public schooling.

 

[erowe1]

A) The way man lives in modern societies is NOT how nature functions.

Obviously it must be.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

Obviously it must be.

Then show me one other example in nature. Nature has a pattern, and follows it to a T everywhere in the world.

 

[erowe1]

Then show me one other example in nature.

We don't need another example. It only takes one example to prove the existence of something.

 

[jmdrake]

A) The way man lives in modern societies is NOT how nature functions. These are inventions of man. Yes, man is a part of nature but is man living in harmony and balance, like all of nature? No.

B) Yes

C) Again false. Nature does NOT operate solely by the "survival of the fittest" model. There are FAR more examples of cooperative systems in nature than competitive. This is not saying competition is not present in nature, but it most certainly is not the "driving model" that you were indoctrinated to believe during your public schooling.

Nature balances itself out through the very act of the competition. Man just happens to be one helluva competitor. I don't think if the African savannah got down the the last two zebras, the lion would say "Hmmmm....if I kill this last zebra there will be no more later."

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

We don't need another example. It only takes one example to prove the existence of something.

It only proves the system exists! It doesn't prove the system is part of nature. Seriously, this isn't that hard to understand.

EVERYTHING in nature has one thing in common. The systems and inputs are sustainable. If you think modern civilization is sustainable then, I'm sorry but you're crazy. Humans could live in complete equilibrium with the environment if they choose so (even improve it in some instances) but modern society has chosen not to.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

A) The way man lives in modern societies is NOT how nature functions. These are inventions of man. Yes, man is a part of nature but is man living in harmony and balance, like all of nature? No.

B) Yes

C) Again false. Nature does NOT operate solely by the "survival of the fittest" model. There are FAR more examples of cooperative systems in nature than competitive. This is not saying competition is not present in nature, but it most certainly is not the "driving model" that you were indoctrinated to believe during your public schooling.

Regarding A, other species-especially primates-can and do alter their environments for their own self-interest, generally not living "in harmony" with nature. Hell, nature pollutes a lot with volcanoes and all sorts of things and creates "disharmony".

Earth is a closed system. You couldn't destroy it if you wanted to. You can change the nature of things (like oxidizing trees, aka burning them), but that's not changing the system.

 

[erowe1]

It only proves the system exists! It doesn't prove the system is part of nature. Seriously, this isn't that hard to understand.

What's the difference between existing and being a part of nature?

If you think there's a difference, then to me, yes, that is hard to understand.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

Nature balances itself out through the very act of the competition. Man just happens to be one helluva competitor. I don't think if the African savannah got down the the last two zebras, the lion would say "Hmmmm....if I kill this last zebra there will be no more later."

You just repackaged your argument here. You jump to an improbable situation and then use it to justify and prove your thinking.

AGAIN,

Nature does NOT operate solely by the "survival of the fittest" model. There are FAR more examples of cooperative systems in nature than competitive. This is not saying competition is not present in nature, but it most certainly is not the "driving model" that you were indoctrinated to believe during your public schooling.

 

[erowe1]

EVERYTHING in nature has one thing in common. The systems and inputs are sustainable.

That's a pretty bold claim. What's your basis for saying it?

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

Regarding A, other species-especially primates-can and do alter their environments for their own self-interest, generally not living "in harmony" with nature.

I'd be very interested to see the study that confirms this

Hell, nature pollutes a lot with volcanoes and all sorts of things and creates "disharmony".

It only appears as "disharmony" to you because you don't understand the system. Only where volcanic activity happens on a very regular basis does it bring most of the systems of nature to a halt(i.e.-trees, nutrient cycling, water cycling). In most of the volcanic areas, they only receive eruptions every now and again. This allows the systems of nature to regenerate and actually, in many ways, improves the systems.

If you think the pollution coming from a volcano is the same as that coming from your tail-pipe, you need to refresh your scientific understandings.

Earth is a closed system. You couldn't destroy it if you wanted to. You can change the nature of things (like oxidizing trees, aka burning them), but that's not changing the system.

Doesn't change the system but most certainly changes the course of the system.

 

[wrestlingwes_8]

That's a pretty bold claim. What's your basis for saying it?

Haha, you can't be serious. If you don't know anything about the systems of nature why are you even participating in this conversation? This is BASIC biology, jeesh!