|
Post by Deimos Tokarev on Jun 17, 2008 20:49:27 GMT -8
currently im reading A Nietzsche Reader, a book with a collection of Nietzches views
We are constantly at war becuase we have countries like America dominating the world, their the prime example of The Modernized Caveman theory
|
|
|
Post by siony on Jun 17, 2008 20:52:39 GMT -8
Then how do you explain wars in Africa where even before colonialism there were tribal wars? Or wars inside one country or geographic area? I think that society simply hasn't evolved to a state where we can be content, yet and maybe we never will.
|
|
|
Post by Deimos Tokarev on Jun 18, 2008 15:40:42 GMT -8
Cave man theory again, I will explain it in my writing board later
Why cant countries just stop killing each other, if each ocuntry had an equal amount of money in proportion to its population, there would be no problems.
But noooo, we gotta kill people for no apparent logical reason
|
|
|
Post by siony on Jun 18, 2008 20:04:38 GMT -8
Generally, wars are over some kind of resource. Because it's impossible for every single country to have exactly the same resources in exactly the same amounts. So whether it's land, gold, water, oil, fertile soil, etc. etc. etc., that's usually the reason for a war.
|
|
|
Post by Deimos Tokarev on Jul 20, 2008 20:01:05 GMT -8
we could just as easily split resources between countries that need them most, but noooo, gotta have it all
|
|
|
Post by siony on Jul 20, 2008 20:10:43 GMT -8
Yeah, but from a totally amoral standpoint, what would be the point of that? Having it all benefits you. Giving ressources away that you may need in the future if catastrophe happens is a bad idea. Getting more to be able to have a better standard of living and to be able to withstand catastrophe is a good idea. Therefore wars to acquire materials which may ensure survival later on is a good idea.
Sharing is an activity which requires compassion and morality, unless you're only sharing to gain something. Be logical in your train of thought, here. If you truly want to be amoral, war isn't a bad thing, as long as you aren't a solider or an inhabitant of the affected region.
|
|
|
Post by Deimos Tokarev on Jul 20, 2008 20:22:25 GMT -8
your taking on a different type of amoral, my type of amorality is based on total beneficience for as many parties involved as possible, with as little detrimental effects as possible
|
|
|
Post by siony on Jul 20, 2008 20:28:03 GMT -8
Total beneficence still requires a certain amount of morality, because you need enough to not only recognize right from wrong but also want right for someone else.
|
|
|
Post by Deimos Tokarev on Jul 20, 2008 20:47:55 GMT -8
i do recognize right from wrong, i just do what benefits me most to a certain extent, if it requires benefiting others to get for my benefit, then so be it.
|
|