Comments | deusexpirata: End of Wars

deusexpirata

End of Wars

Nov 16, 2004 09:22

It seems to me that governments and politicians never learn. I mean, all through history humans have killed humans in the name of religion, politics, and exploration. People settle disagreements by fighting, people try to prove that their religion is better than another because they can beat the shit out of people better. Wars are fought and won by ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

anonymous December 28 2004, 02:16:09 UTC

We fight because we're HUMAN!!!! OMFG!!! I have read this journal and everything I come up against is all "hey! I'm going to pick fights with as many people as possible because I'm a bored college student that has no life and is unimportant ( ... )

Darwin? deusexpirata January 11 2005, 19:37:43 UTC

Wow.. you made a reference to a very prominent theorist in the field of animal survival and called Hunter a child.. as if understanding the fundaments of Darwin's theories makes you more mature than him. What I find most pathetic about your feeble attempt to "retaliate" in this post is the hopelessly unintelligent over-generalizations you're using. Everything you've come up against is us picking fights with people? You imbecile. You're sitting here arguing that we fight because we're human and then bash us for picking fights (of the verbal variety) with people. You don't think before you type things, do you? That's okay, it doesn't seem like you're good at thinking, which is why nobody really paid attention to you until I, out of the goodness of my heart, decided to make fun of you just for the sake of giving you attention. I would like to point out that "The Giver" is a child's book, child. If you want to talk philosophies of war and survival, read some REAL books ( ... )

Re: Darwin? deusexpirata January 11 2005, 19:37:58 UTC

As a side note, I don't pick fights here. I present ideas. (picking fights is Sloth's job) Other people pick fights with me for my ideas. In this post I intended to present my ideas that war is a bad idea. If you read my later post, "religion and war, revisited," you would have realized that I changed my views slightly to say that war is sometimes inevitable, but I still think it a bad idea. Once again, I'm not picking fights, just stating my views. I'm doing the opposite of picking a fight, I'm presenting the idea of not picking fights. I don't sit here and try to bash other people or fight with people, I present my views for the world. I put myself out there, allowing the rest of the world the chance to attack me. I don't like that they'd attack me, but how else will my views be heard unless I speak them? It's people like you who pick the fights by insulting me and my ideas without really reading or considering what I have to say. Now, I don't mind people debating with me or presenting opposing viewpoints. This is constructive, it ( ... )

Re: Darwin? anonymous January 23 2005, 05:50:08 UTC

Well, as it turns out, that's just dandy. Because "sloth" over-there really thought he had things figured out for awhile, didn't ya' sloth? Every time you find "the newest thing" or something that makes MORE sense doesn't mean it makes the most sense. "He who is wisest among us knows he is not wise." And going off of the sociobiology tiff going on here, you will choose which ideas appeal to you most, so I can post nothing truly "constructive". Stop deluding yourself. You're not teaching anyone anything groundbreaking here. Everything you're saying comes from something or another and you cease to contain originality. I hope for your sake you never have to write for a doctorate. Yes, I attacked you. Yes, it was rude. Wake up, man. You're on the internet blogging what you call philosophy. I'm helping more than hurting (did I already type this? I think I did. Deja vu ( ... )

Philosophy deusexpirata February 22 2005, 20:22:52 UTC

Nice asshole post. You were doing great until you thought you caught me blogging philosophy. I'm not posting shit I read. I'm making stuff up as I go along. I think that's fairly obvious, I see no reason why anyone should think I'm posting some transcribed philosophy book in my own words onto this bloody website. Plus.. we're not really assholes. We just like to pretend we're assholes because we spend so much time in real life doing stuff like.. "living normally" and "not arguing about stupid garbage concerning Darwin and philosophy because in the long run we know it isn't important." This explains for my blatant disuse of philosophy in general and my narrow point of view. If you want to say I've raped what ideas I have and am displaying them for you here as though they are my own.. you are giving me far too much credit. I'm not even raping ideas.. I'm just giving them out. I don't really care if they're right or not.. because like you said, I [and everyone else] will choose which ideas appeal to me [you] the most ( ... )

Re: Darwin? anonymous January 23 2005, 05:43:39 UTC

You call those Philosophy books? Those are no more philosophy books than Crowley a philosopher. You appear to like George Orwell. Congratulations. Read some fucking Richard Dawkins or Edward O. Wilson. And despite what you say, you are dick-measuring here. Thomas Moore and Orwell are out-dated ( ... )

Unoriginal Bullshit anonymous February 2 2005, 05:46:43 UTC

Websites, whether they are Live Journals or some random guy writing shit are meant for original thoughts. I bet everything you just mentioned you learned in a class most colleges call Philosophy 101! Ok first of all Darwin NEVER talked about WAR. Second of all you are bashing sloth for using big words. At least all of his are real, "incompatibilist" its not even a word. Also if you are going to post something check your spelling and grammar [looks like someone slept through 6th grade english and never bothered to catch up]. My cousin in sixth grade could write something more intelligible than this crap. This post was barely better than the first. Also, Orwell and Moore are not outdated, both of them were political/historical satirists. Aristotles theories on the other hand have been time and again disproved [that makes him outdated if you didn't catch that hint]. Also sloth never said that nilhilism was true he was only refering to it because you talked about it in the first place. Another thing why are you stuck on the whole Darwin ( ... )

P.S. anonymous February 2 2005, 05:51:13 UTC

Also next time leave a fucking name coward!

-Indy

Back to all threads