I still don’t understand this guy’s motive tbh. He wants to escape the imminent collapse of civilization. And for what? So he can eat berries in the wild by himself?
Where does this immutable zeal for living come from?
- Where does this immutable zeal for living come from?
Most likely: Mental illness.
I’m still waiting for you to demonstrate that every other civ has collapsed.
Sumer, Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, Mayans, Aztecs, Greenland, Easter Island, Mali and Anazasi all collapsed.
http://www.learner.org/interactives/collapse/
Suggested reading: Jared Diamond, Joseph Tainter, Daniel Quinn and John Zerzan.
And you still haven’t refuted the fact that practically everyone who ever lived has been enriched by civilization, including yourself. I also find it amusing how you point to the fact that modern foods are unhealthy for you, when people live longer now than they ever have before.
False. Civ does not “enrich” us. It imprisons us either by statism or just sheer-blown collectivism.
China, Japan, France, England, Egypt
Which were all incredibly violent. You just proved my point.
Sumer, Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, Mayans, Aztecs, Greenland, Easter Island, Mali and Anazasi all collapsed.
Are you reading anything that is being said? I don’t really think you’ve addressed anything in any comprehensible fashion
We may have to come up with “quizes” or something to our posts to see if you are comprehending anything that is being written to you.
“Which were all incredibly violent. You just proved my point.”
They weren’t half as violent as some of the civilizations which you listed above as examples of collapsing civilizations. Furthermore plenty of long standing states, most of those in Europe, have been comparatively free, while many of the more forceful states have collapsed. With this said you haven’t given me a good example of a CIVILIZATION and not STATES collapsing. Above you listed
“Sumer, Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, Mayans, Aztecs, Greenland, Easter Island, Mali and Anazasi all collapsed.”
All of which, even during their time accounted for a very small percentage of those within civilization during their time. With this said Sumer, Mesopotamia, Mali, Anasazi, and I believe the Indus River Valley all survived, that is the people were still fairly well off and the civilizations carried on. The STATES, the GOVERNMENTS, which formed them were destroyed, not the civilizations as such. The Mayans and Aztecs were destroyed by the onslaught of encroaching imperialism and mass disease, but you aren’t worried about mass alien invaders, and furthermore you’d be likely to be afflicted by one of those things if you were an ancient Native American living outside of civilization.
At any rate, you realize that those would be extremely weak examples even if they were relevant right? Like you’re claiming that every civilization is inherently unstable and that collapses are bound to happen all the time. We’ve had 5,000 years of near global civilization and you can only list of a handful? We should be the ones on the brutal defense here if your claims are true, but even if one argues that we are wrong you are certainly not having an easy time here. With such an overarching claim you should be able to give us several dozen cases of states which have collapsed with exact reasons why, we shouldn’t be able to think of a long lasting state which has survived. Instead, you give examples which obviously misconstrue state and society, something which should cast shame onto anyone who claims to be an Austrian.
“False. Civ does not “enrich” us. It imprisons us either by statism or just sheer-blown collectivism.”
Things that civilization has given me which I oftentimes take part of:
- Movies
- Shows
- Music
- Plays
- Fellow human beings who I can interact with and talk to
- Art
- Games
- An amazingly large amount of information, both trivial and scholarly
- Comfortable living conditions
- Ideas from other people surrounding myself and my individuality, without which I would have never developed a sense of purpose or of individuality
- Great food which I like to eat
- The ability to enjoy nature when I want to, and leave it when I want to
- Books, both audio and textual
- Ability to live much longer than I would in a primtive state
So basically constant entertainment and intellectual stimulation and a million positive experiences. But no, civilization doesn’t enrich me at all. Also, your actions in replying to me upon a highly technical computer would seem to indicate that civilization is enriching or at least positive.
Why can’t you seem to grasp this? THE STATE DOESN’T INTERACT WITH PEOPLE ALL THAT MUCH. People are mostly free to interact with others and pursue their own happiness. They often fail in doing so, but these people would have a higher chance of failure in a state of primitivism where there are fewer ideas running around.
Let me turn this around. Practically all primitive societies, groups, and people have ended/been disbanded/died off/assimilated themselves into civilization/been assimilated into civilization. How can you advocate primitivism when primitive culture is inherently unstable? I’m leaving the wild to go to civilization where I will be safe.
Since we’re making random lists of countries:
Monaco, Zanzibar, Tuvalu, Barbuda, Uzbekistan, Seychelles, Moldova, Eritrea
Monaco, Zanzibar, Tuvalu, Barbuda, Uzbekistan, Seychelles, Moldova, Eritrea
That’s incorrect, you forgot The UAE and Cambodia while Monaco is much to grand a country to be put on any list
Dang it! I always forget those. Gosh!
You guys are focusing on on cyclic appearance and mistaking it for reality. Simply because something has happened 99 times does not guarantee that it will happen the 100th time. In essence, you are confusing induction for deduction.
Nevertheless, the closest thing we have to epistemic efficiency is induction, which has its basis in empiricism. Things most certainly exist, and we experience them, but free will determines what happens with the objects, and free will is free, not pre-determined. So to sit there and say that civilization is evil, one, how do you define evil? Two, are you saying that thus far it has always led to evil, or that it is iherently evil by definition?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risks_to_civilization,_humans,_and_planet_Earth
So to sit there and say that civilization is evil, one, how do you define evil?
Simple: evil is aggression. Destruction of individual rights. This is what civ does.
Two, are you saying that thus far it has always led to evil, or that it is iherently evil by definition?
Every single civ has been aggressive. The ones which weren’t died out.
I would like to direct you to the fallacy of composition. It is true that there are people within society/civilization that are aggressive. But the claim that an entire society is evil because of some people is a fallacious argument, nevermind the claim that all societies are evil.
How do you like them apples?
See above. Also, I should be quite surprised that you, as someone who claims to follow Austrian economics rigorously, would make the mistake of equating the metaphor of civilization with that of an acting being. Like I said, I should be surprised, but I am not.
Could you define what you mean by aggressive in the sentence “every civ has been aggressive*”?
F4M, are you afraid to be evil?
I would like to direct you to the fallacy of composition. It is true that there are people within society/civilization that are aggressive. But the claim that an entire society is evil because of some people is a fallacious argument, nevermind the claim that all societies are evil.
Bullshit. As an austrian I don’t believe in that nonsense. “Emergence” is fake.
Are you denying the principles of logic?
“Logic” says civ is not sustainable.
Prepare for collapse.
I’m sure more videos and less sound argument will prove your point.