OT: Entitlements [was Re: Python usage numbers]

[Rick Johnson]

On Feb 14, 6:44 pm, Chris Angelico <ros... at gmail.com> wrote:

> If you truly believe that only the best should be allowed to survive
> and that you are not of the best, then the logical thing to do is to
> immediately destroy yourself. Oddly enough, though, I don't see many
> eugenics proponents committing mass suicide for the benefit of the
> gene pool.

I don't need to destroy myself Chris. Likewise i don't need to destroy
anyone else. You are trying to cast me as an evil blood thirsty
person, and i can assure you, i am not.

All i need to do is NOT reproduce and i've done my part. Likewise all
WE need to do is keep the rest "of us" from reproducing.

I am not a degenerate, but my genes are flawed. All i can hope to do
is make an intellectual contribution to our evolution as a species.
Just because you're flawed in one area, does not mean you cannot make
contributions in other areas. You can still be part of the whole -- AS
LONG AS YOU UNDERSTAND YOUR PLACE!

> > There is nothing wrong with denying degenerates the right to
> > reproduce.
>
> Actually there is; I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't have been born if
> such policies had been in place, and I strongly suspect that you
> wouldn't have either.

So what's the problem with that?

> There was a country in the 20th century that
> adopted a lot of the sorts of policies you're talking about, and it's
> such a sensitive topic with MANY people that I'm not going to touch
> it. Suffice it to say that the world does not appreciate such things.

Of course people don't want to admit that they don't belong, or that
they are flawed, or that they are inferior. We are "wired" with egos
so that we don't purposely destroy ourselves; which is vital to our
"collective" evolution, but NOT our individual evolution.

However, like all software, the definitions don't always cover the
corner cases. Only WE, as intelligent beings, can compensate for the
missing code in our own software. Evolution is just a system. A very
dumb system. We are the only hope for evolution beyond what this base
system can create. We must take the reigns and drive our own
evolution.

> >> If some featureless fungus, toxic to all other living things, engulfed the
> >> globe, would that make it "superior"? Of course, not, it merely survived.
>
> > I love when people contradict themselves in the same sentence -- makes
> > my job much easier!
>
> No, he did not contradict himself - he drew a distinction between
> "superior" and "survived". You might argue that your definition of
> "superior" *is* the ability to survive, but that's a matter for
> logical argument, not for pointing and laughing.

"If" a fungus did in fact "engulf the earth", THEN it MUST be
superior!

> > It is our destiny to use our intelligence to
> > drive our own evolution at an ever accelerating rate. To NOT use that
> > power would be to spit in the face of evolution itself!
>
> Evolution is driven by the survival of the fittest, not by us using
> our intelligence to influence it.

But WE are the fittest! Because we are INTELLIGENT!

> God created us, roughly 6000-10000 years ago, and since then, many
> things have happened (both good and bad), but never has there been the
> emergence of any form of "next-species human". Look at history (just
> recent history if you like - the last few hundred years) and find the
> times when one group of people deemed themselves "more evolved" than
> another group. Why were Negros treated as slaves in the US?

Because they allowed themselves to be subjected. Sad, but true.

> Why were
> Australian Aboriginals treated like animals?

Because they allowed them selves to be subjected. Sad, but true.

> And the one I hinted at
> above.

Because the Jews allowed themselves to be subjected. Sad, but true.

Slaves only exist because they allow themselves to exist. When people
fight back against tyranny, tyranny fails. When people subject
themselves to tyranny, tyranny prospers. There have been many
instances in history where people did not allow themselves to be
subjected; William Wallace comes to mind.

"Freeeeeedoooooooommmmmmm!"
"Live free, or die!"
"From my cold dead hand!"
"Over my dead body!"
"Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be
demanded by the oppressed."
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be."
"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will
not have, nor do they deserve, either one."