Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Economic, Political, And Soci . . .

SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories upon economic and social growth and tend to be based upon the highest class people being the ones who work hardest which is not true considering that the majority of the low class people work harder and longer than higher class people, majority of the higher classed people do not work hard at all and tend to live off of the things their forefathers had worked for, although its true that many of the richest people in the world were born into poor families and worked hard for their positions most rich people have not done a hard day of work in their life. Many of the people who are rich (and did not work for their position) like to justify it as their superior work ethic which is simply a faulty argument to justify you. Mind you all this is talking about those who have never worked hard in their life.

Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:42:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories upon economic and social growth and tend to be based upon the highest class people being the ones who work hardest
No, they are based on those people being most productive of value. Effort is irrelevant.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:43:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Assuming by "Darwinism" you mean laissez faire rather than fascism or even occasionally communism.. "Darwinism" outside a biological context is really really really f***ing vague.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:45:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
majority of the higher classed people do not work hard at all and tend to live off of the things their forefathers had worked for
http://blogs.wsj.com...
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:55:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 2:42:35 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories upon economic and social growth and tend to be based upon the highest class people being the ones who work hardest
No, they are based on those people being most productive of value. Effort is irrelevant.

Effort = Value.

Manpower is one of the three unalienable resources.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:55:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories

All theories and systems have pros and cons, which is why pragmatism is the best solution. Take the pros from all these systems and incorporate them into one model..?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:57:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 2:55:39 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/12/2010 2:42:35 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories upon economic and social growth and tend to be based upon the highest class people being the ones who work hardest
No, they are based on those people being most productive of value. Effort is irrelevant.

Effort = Value.
I can punch a wall all day. Takes a lot of effort. No value though.


Manpower is one of the three unalienable resources.
Unalienable from what, and what are the other two supposedly?

All theories and systems have pros and cons, which is why pragmatism is the best solution.
That doesn't follow.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 2:58:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 2:55:40 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 12/12/2010 2:04:35 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Economic, Political, and Social Darwinism suck, they are incomplete theories

All theories and systems have pros and cons, which is why pragmatism is the best solution. Take the pros from all these systems and incorporate them into one model..?

Wtf?

Who is this guy?

I like your posts, dude. 2 for 2, so far today.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 3:00:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Pragmatism as a prescription, btw, is the theory that everyone is wrong except the speaker for no particular reason. If you introduce a reason other than a meaningless unspecified "It's practical (which itself can have no reasoning behind it or...)... it's no longer pragmatism.
(Pragmatism as a description is the theory "If it's useful then it's true." It would be useful for me to have a better internet connection than I do now, therefore, it's true.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 3:21:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 3:00:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Pragmatism as a prescription, btw, is the theory that everyone is wrong except the speaker for no particular reason. If you introduce a reason other than a meaningless unspecified "It's practical (which itself can have no reasoning behind it or...)... it's no longer pragmatism.
(Pragmatism as a description is the theory "If it's useful then it's true." It would be useful for me to have a better internet connection than I do now, therefore, it's true.

What side are you on?
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 3:35:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 3:21:11 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 12/12/2010 3:00:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Pragmatism as a prescription, btw, is the theory that everyone is wrong except the speaker for no particular reason. If you introduce a reason other than a meaningless unspecified "It's practical (which itself can have no reasoning behind it or...)... it's no longer pragmatism.
(Pragmatism as a description is the theory "If it's useful then it's true." It would be useful for me to have a better internet connection than I do now, therefore, it's true.

What side are you on?

Clearly, I'm not a pragmatist.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2010 3:48:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/12/2010 3:35:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 12/12/2010 3:21:11 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 12/12/2010 3:00:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Pragmatism as a prescription, btw, is the theory that everyone is wrong except the speaker for no particular reason. If you introduce a reason other than a meaningless unspecified "It's practical (which itself can have no reasoning behind it or...)... it's no longer pragmatism.
(Pragmatism as a description is the theory "If it's useful then it's true." It would be useful for me to have a better internet connection than I do now, therefore, it's true.

What side are you on?

Clearly, I'm not a pragmatist.

Hmmm . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.