What about Cultural Degenerates?

Greetings,

I lost my account info. for "ChineseAmerican," so I have started a new account. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused you.

Do you believe that all genetic and/or cultural degenerates should be enslaved or killed by the American Federal Government?

Of course, we first would have to define "cultural degenerate" and "genetic degenerate." Everyone will have a different view. But let's say that we define "desirable" as possessing an equilibrium between IQ, certain personality traits, and enculturation that results in an individual that strives hard all day to be rational, scientific, objective, and technophilic/futuristic/transhumanistic. Notice that by defining "desirable" as above, I don't oppress those that were not "given high IQ genes on a silver plate" at birth, but rather give recognition to those who strive for ideals I value, even though they themselves may not have the best IQs.

Another member on this forum claimed that he believes that altruism should be bestowed upon those that lie outside the above category. But, I ask, how many of you actually directly interact with "degenerates" on a daily basis to see what they really are like? My life requires me to deal with these organic conglomerates on a daily basis. They all believe in the After-Life (in my view, anyone that believes in "God" should be left in the hands of their "God," meaning that we should not interfere with their well-being/welfare because they will wait for their "God" to help them). These "degenerates" also don't ever read any academic books and just prefer to watch TV, play sports, get drunk, and engage in hours of daily wasteful activities. They are too lazy to do anything intellectual, and just expect us, the "non-degenerate" to do everything for them. When I talk to these common folk and suggest books and websites to them to learn about things, they ignore my suggestion and just go home and watch 4 hours of TV after work. They then in an uninformed way go out and vote for corrupt politicians that make things worse for us "Enlightened" people. We at the Immortality Institute forum suffer because of the stupid and lazy masses. And yet, a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

These lazy and stupid masses mock our type of people, they beat us up in school, they call us nerds, geeks, dorks, wackos, freaks, infidels, heathens, unpatriotic, evil, tin-hat wearers, etc. They despise us and wish us harm and death, yet a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

I say, the biological function of these masses is to be the servants/slaves of us "Enlightened" people. So, our goal should be to try to become part of the economic/political/academic elite and make our lives better using the masses as servants. One organization already is attempting to do this, they are http://www.transtopia.org/ Another organization like this is Skulls and Bones, but one would have to have something very beneficial to offer them to get accepted. I would have no chance.

Thoughts?

Edited by Mind, 26 December 2007 - 02:12 AM.

Greetings,

I lost my account info. for "ChineseAmerican," so I have started a new account. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused you.

Do you believe that all genetic and/or cultural degenerates should be enslaved or killed by the American Federal Government?

Of course, we first would have to define "cultural degenerate" and "genetic degenerate." Everyone will have a different view. But let's say that we define "desirable" as possessing an equilibrium between IQ, certain personality traits, and enculturation that results in an individual that strives hard all day to be rational, scientific, objective, and technophilic/futuristic/transhumanistic. Notice that by defining "desirable" as above, I don't oppress those that were not "given high IQ genes on a silver plate" at birth, but rather give recognition to those who strive for ideals I value, even though they themselves may not have the best IQs.

Another member on this forum claimed that he believes that altruism should be bestowed upon those that lie outside the above category. But, I ask, how many of you actually directly interact with "degenerates" on a daily basis to see what they really are like? My life requires me to deal with these organic conglomerates on a daily basis. They all believe in the After-Life (in my view, anyone that believes in "God" should be left in the hands of their "God," meaning that we should not interfere with their well-being/welfare because they will wait for their "God" to help them). These "degenerates" also don't ever read any academic books and just prefer to watch TV, play sports, get drunk, and engage in hours of daily wasteful activities. They are too lazy to do anything intellectual, and just expect us, the "non-degenerate" to do everything for them. When I talk to these common folk and suggest books and websites to them to learn about things, they ignore my suggestion and just go home and watch 4 hours of TV after work. They then in an uninformed way go out and vote for corrupt politicians that make things worse for us "Enlightened" people. We at the Immortality Institute forum suffer because of the stupid and lazy masses. And yet, a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

These lazy and stupid masses mock our type of people, they beat us up in school, they call us nerds, geeks, dorks, wackos, freaks, infidels, heathens, unpatriotic, evil, tin-hat wearers, etc. They despise us and wish us harm and death, yet a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

I say, the biological function of these masses is to be the servants/slaves of us "Enlightened" people. So, our goal should be to try to become part of the economic/political/academic elite and make our lives better using the masses as servants. One organization already is attempting to do this, they are http://www.transtopia.org/ Another organization like this is Skulls and Bones, but one would have to have something very beneficial to offer them to get accepted. I would have no chance.

Thoughts?

Why the fuck does "eugenics" has to involve enslavement, sterilization, and killing?

Are you referring to me? Yes, I want to extend and even endow altruism among the "degenerates."

I do not know if I support "eugenics," although I think the word has an unmerited negative connotation, perhaps, because of people like you. Ethical eugenics is the answer to these "degenerates" although we do not have the means the implement such a program. However, "ethical eugenics" will not be universally admired because it will involve unprecedented charity and sacrifice of many people. BTW, have you read the work of James Hughes? Do you consider him a "eugenicist?"

You can despise some attributes of some people and still sincerely fight for their well being. For example, John Stuart Mill, a British champion of social justice, called the working class "habitual liars."

http://www.newstates...om/200712060047

Edited by HellKaiserRyo, 24 December 2007 - 11:38 PM.

Why the fuck does "eugenics" has to involve enslavement, sterilization, and killing?

"Eugenics" simply means "bettering of genes." How to accomplish this is a different matter. "Health care" means "bettering of health," but this can be brought about by providing better nutrition for all, or killing all unhealthy people. Similarly, eugenics can be accomplished by the "hyper-altruistic" method you support, or by mass sterilization or euthanization. I am aware of your concern about "eugenics" automatically implying "killing," which is not the case. But then, I am not nearly as universally altruistic as you are. I am more like Ghengas Khan, while you are like Ghandi.

Are you referring to me? Yes, I want to extend and even endow altruism among the "degenerates."

Yes.

I do not wish to help those that "spit on me." The common folk "spit" on me and my ideals. I wish them ill-will.

Edited by Chinese Power, 24 December 2007 - 11:42 PM.

Let's say there are two individuals: one is a high IQ doctor who after starting his practice, used all his wealth to live a frivelous life by buying an expensive Mercedes to show off to people, a massive house, spends all his spare time in expensive golf clubs and restaurants and takes expensive vacations. He does nothing to advance "humanitarian" science and simply takes "bribes" from drug companies to push their products on patients. He does no community service, cares for no-one except himself, and his only passion in life is money. This type of rich person accounts for 99.99% or so of rich people.

Now, consider a person with an average IQ of 100 who is a computer technician or mechanic or whatever. He is agnostic, supports science/technology/futurism. He cannot really comprehend advanced mathematics or algorithms which requires a high IQ, but he tries his best to understand it, reads as much science as he can, and would right away augment his brain if the opportunity arrises. He helps out with public activism and avoids a pure hedonistic life.

So, which one of the above two individuals would I embrace, and which one would I desire to enslave? I would welcome the average IQ person into my futurist community, while chooseing the doctor to be the slave of my community.

Edited by Chinese Power, 24 December 2007 - 11:58 PM.

This thread is wrong on a fundamental level. How can we decide who is good and who is bad?

There are poor people that live for pure hedonism and what's wrong with hedonism anyway?

Edited by caston, 25 December 2007 - 12:48 AM.

How can we decide who is good and who is bad?

It's a subjective matter: values vary by individual and group. It's in my best interest to promote my personal values, and so I have.

There are poor people that live for pure hedonism and what's wrong with hedonism anyway?

I am okey with hedonism, as long as it's coupled with intellectual/transhuman behavior as well. For example, I masturbate everyday both for prostate/physical health and hedonistic pleasure. But this just takes up 5 minutes a day of my time: the rest of the time I'm at work or reading academic literature and engaging in activism.

Isn't that a sin though? ;-p

I personally though think sex is a very wasteful way of getting a dopamine high. But for the time being, masturbation replaces my need for alcohol: after a stressful day of work, I can either drink alcohol or masturbate to relax my brain: I choose the masturbation since it's much healthier. but, if one day, we can reprogramm our brains to be on a dopamine high all day long so we always feel good, I would choose that, while re-programming our brains to no longer desire sexual pleasure. for example, what if our brains were re-programmed so that reading a very informative science book gives us an organism, instead of actual "dirty/messy/unsanitary" sex? Think about it: sex involves bacteria and food particle filled mouths, anuses with fecal matter on it and just under the skin and the oderous smell of the anus, penis/vaginas that are smelly and have urine coming out of it, breasts that secrete milk, etc. Pretty "disgusting," no? Yet, my reptilian-level brain still makes me extremely enjoy females in the sexual sense.

What is "life"? One member of this forum considers all the stupid and lazy common folk to be "life." But, what if the requirements for "life" was set higher? Then, the welfare of the masses would no longer be an issue: it would be as if they were no different from trees, to be used in whatever fashion we chose. think about it: the masses are so stupid that they are simply unintelligent automations, like a simple computer program. They believe in the supernatural, can't think for themselves, can't be rational and objective, etc. A space-alien may just see the masses as a species of plant. So, why even call them "life"? Again, to get an example of just how "lifeless" the masses are, just go to Wal-Mart and observe the behavior of the customers.

I personally though think sex is a very wasteful way of getting a dopamine high. But for the time being, masturbation replaces my need for alcohol: after a stressful day of work, I can either drink alcohol or masturbate to relax my brain: I choose the masturbation since it's much healthier. but, if one day, we can reprogramm our brains to be on a dopamine high all day long so we always feel good, I would choose that, while re-programming our brains to no longer desire sexual pleasure. for example, what if our brains were re-programmed so that reading a very informative science book gives us an organism, instead of actual "dirty/messy/unsanitary" sex? Think about it: sex involves bacteria and food particle filled mouths, anuses with fecal matter on it and just under the skin and the oderous smell of the anus, penis/vaginas that are smelly and have urine coming out of it, breasts that secrete milk, etc. Pretty "disgusting," no? Yet, my reptilian-level brain still makes me extremely enjoy females in the sexual sense.

I am only saying this factuously; I think it would be disgusting to change my underwear about every hour. I do not want to get an organism reading science books if it involves ejaculation.

I am only saying this factuously; I think it would be disgusting to change my underwear about every hour. I do not want to get an organism reading science books if it involves ejaculation.

We can be programmed so that ejaculation does not occur: just a mental orgasm.

What is "life"? One member of this forum considers all the stupid and lazy common folk to be "life." But, what if the requirements for "life" was set higher? Then, the welfare of the masses would no longer be an issue: it would be as if they were no different from trees, to be used in whatever fashion we chose. think about it: the masses are so stupid that they are simply unintelligent automations, like a simple computer program. They believe in the supernatural, can't think for themselves, can't be rational and objective, etc. A space-alien may just see the masses as a species of plant. So, why even call them "life"? Again, to get an example of just how "lifeless" the masses are, just go to Wal-Mart and observe the behavior of the customers.

Trees don't warrent moral concern because they don't have conscious minds; a tree doesn't care if you cut it down. People, however, have a will to live and a desire for freedom. Therefore, you do not have the right to enslave or kill them just because they make you angry.

Trees don't warrent moral concern because they don't have conscious minds; a tree doesn't care if you cut it down.

Yes they do: plants don't want to be harmed by other "life," which is why they have evolved defense mechanisms like polyphenols, anti-biotics (resveratrol is an antibiotic to protect against fungus), poisons, thorns, etc.

Therefore, you do not have the right to enslave or kill them

Use the scientific method to prove that they have the "right" to live.

But, the common folk have enslaved me by voting for politicians that take away many "rights" I would like to have, like using any medical substance I want without a prescription, or cloning my kids, etc.

Animals don't want to be killed either, yet we quite willingly eat them, use them in experiments, in zoos, for labor, etc.

Edited by Chinese Power, 25 December 2007 - 04:15 AM.

Trees don't warrent moral concern because they don't have conscious minds; a tree doesn't care if you cut it down.

Yes they do: plants don't want to be harmed by other "life," which is why they have evolved defense mechanisms like polyphenols, anti-biotics (resveratrol is an antibiotic to protect against fungus), poisons, thorns, etc.

There is a big difference between evolutionary defense mechanisms and a conscious mind with a desire to live.

Therefore, you do not have the right to enslave or kill them

Use the scientific method to prove that they have the "right" to live.

The scientific method is a tool to help humanity determine the structure of the universe. It doesn't really apply here. You don't need the scientific method to know that suffering is bad; it is inherently obvious. I don't see how it matters whether that suffering is happening to you, me, or one of these 'common people' you speak of.

But, the common folk have enslaved me by voting for politicians that take away many "rights" I would like to have, like using any medical substance I want without a prescription, or cloning my kids, etc.

I agree that they were wrong to do that and I'd have no problem with it if you took back those rights in a humane way. However, it is better to live with a minor violation of your own rights then to drastically violate someone else's.

Animals don't want to be killed either, you we quite willingly eat them, use them in experiments, in zoos, for labor, etc

It's hard to determine the depth of an animal's experiance. We can see that animals naturally fear the things that might kill them but we don't know whether they fear death itself. And if they do, it's probably not on the same level as the human will to live. Therefore, killing an animal to save or sufficiently improve a human life is the lesser of two evils.

Edited by cyborgdreamer, 25 December 2007 - 03:22 AM.

There is a big difference between evolutionary defense mechanisms and a conscious mind with a desire to live.

"Relative Consciousness": there is a gradient of increasing algorithmic thought process between species and within species. We take the anthropomorphic view that only human mental processes are "conscious thought processes." The human brain is simply a collection of contingency plans to direct our behavior in reproductively advantageous ways. Plant consciousness is algorithmically simple, relatively speaking: their contingency plans are not localized to a "brain" but are distributed all around in their tissue.

Regarding the rest of your argument, I cannot have a rational debate with one who claims moral absolutism. You are saying that your moral views on life is absolute, like a religious view, that cannot be questioned or scientifically analyzed: it is just so because you say so.

There is a big difference between evolutionary defense mechanisms and a conscious mind with a desire to live.

"Relative Consciousness": there is a gradient of increasing algorithmic thought process between species and within species. We take the anthropomorphic view that only human mental processes are "conscious thought processes." The human brain is simply a collection of contingency plans to direct our behavior in reproductively advantageous ways. Plant consciousness is algorithmically simple, relatively speaking: their contingency plans are not localized to a "brain" but are distributed all around in their tissue.

Regarding the rest of your argument, I cannot have a rational debate with one who claims moral absolutism. You are saying that your moral views on life is absolute, like a religious view, that cannot be questioned or scientifically analyzed: it is just so because you say so.

I do not know what you define as a "moral absolutist." I count myself as a consequentialist (my ethics are a synthesis of rule, negative, and preference utilitarianism).

Greetings,

I lost my account info. for "ChineseAmerican," so I have started a new account. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused you.

Do you believe that all genetic and/or cultural degenerates should be enslaved or killed by the American Federal Government?

Of course, we first would have to define "cultural degenerate" and "genetic degenerate." Everyone will have a different view. But let's say that we define "desirable" as possessing an equilibrium between IQ, certain personality traits, and enculturation that results in an individual that strives hard all day to be rational, scientific, objective, and technophilic/futuristic/transhumanistic. Notice that by defining "desirable" as above, I don't oppress those that were not "given high IQ genes on a silver plate" at birth, but rather give recognition to those who strive for ideals I value, even though they themselves may not have the best IQs.

Another member on this forum claimed that he believes that altruism should be bestowed upon those that lie outside the above category. But, I ask, how many of you actually directly interact with "degenerates" on a daily basis to see what they really are like? My life requires me to deal with these organic conglomerates on a daily basis. They all believe in the After-Life (in my view, anyone that believes in "God" should be left in the hands of their "God," meaning that we should not interfere with their well-being/welfare because they will wait for their "God" to help them). These "degenerates" also don't ever read any academic books and just prefer to watch TV, play sports, get drunk, and engage in hours of daily wasteful activities. They are too lazy to do anything intellectual, and just expect us, the "non-degenerate" to do everything for them. When I talk to these common folk and suggest books and websites to them to learn about things, they ignore my suggestion and just go home and watch 4 hours of TV after work. They then in an uninformed way go out and vote for corrupt politicians that make things worse for us "Enlightened" people. We at the Immortality Institute forum suffer because of the stupid and lazy masses. And yet, a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

These lazy and stupid masses mock our type of people, they beat us up in school, they call us nerds, geeks, dorks, wackos, freaks, infidels, heathens, unpatriotic, evil, tin-hat wearers, etc. They despise us and wish us harm and death, yet a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

I say, the biological function of these masses is to be the servants/slaves of us "Enlightened" people. So, our goal should be to try to become part of the economic/political/academic elite and make our lives better using the masses as servants. One organization already is attempting to do this, they are http://www.transtopia.org/ Another organization like this is Skulls and Bones, but one would have to have something very beneficial to offer them to get accepted. I would have no chance.

Thoughts?

Wow. You were picked on bad in school, weren't you? Or are you an arrogant prick? Or both?

Why is watching tv after work bad? Many people work long hard hours, and need to relax after work, to recuperate-and tv does that for many people. Same with drinking. Who the fuck cares if someone drinks or not? It can be quite fun. You also blast sports in your post. I'm not the best at sports, but they are fun. It is always good to excercise, and the competition is fun. There is nothing wrong with sports, or excersicing the body.

How do you like this:

I say the biological function of dorks, loser, nerds, wackos, weaklings, wimps, is to be pushed around and mocked by strong members of society, to be ridiculed mercilessly at all times.

You like that? Huh? I thought not.

Your 'desirable' traits list is completely wrong, in my opinion. I guess I'd get killed in your mastuburtary fantasy world filled with gadgests and gizmos.

So basically, I disagree with your post entirely. I really don't believe in slavery or genocide. I also urge you to seek a therapist, as you seem to have major issues with athletic type people stemming from bullying in school. Get some help man, please. Slavery and genocide are bad. Don't advocate them.

Greetings,

I lost my account info. for "ChineseAmerican," so I have started a new account. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused you.

Do you believe that all genetic and/or cultural degenerates should be enslaved or killed by the American Federal Government?

Of course, we first would have to define "cultural degenerate" and "genetic degenerate." Everyone will have a different view. But let's say that we define "desirable" as possessing an equilibrium between IQ, certain personality traits, and enculturation that results in an individual that strives hard all day to be rational, scientific, objective, and technophilic/futuristic/transhumanistic. Notice that by defining "desirable" as above, I don't oppress those that were not "given high IQ genes on a silver plate" at birth, but rather give recognition to those who strive for ideals I value, even though they themselves may not have the best IQs.

Another member on this forum claimed that he believes that altruism should be bestowed upon those that lie outside the above category. But, I ask, how many of you actually directly interact with "degenerates" on a daily basis to see what they really are like? My life requires me to deal with these organic conglomerates on a daily basis. They all believe in the After-Life (in my view, anyone that believes in "God" should be left in the hands of their "God," meaning that we should not interfere with their well-being/welfare because they will wait for their "God" to help them). These "degenerates" also don't ever read any academic books and just prefer to watch TV, play sports, get drunk, and engage in hours of daily wasteful activities. They are too lazy to do anything intellectual, and just expect us, the "non-degenerate" to do everything for them. When I talk to these common folk and suggest books and websites to them to learn about things, they ignore my suggestion and just go home and watch 4 hours of TV after work. They then in an uninformed way go out and vote for corrupt politicians that make things worse for us "Enlightened" people. We at the Immortality Institute forum suffer because of the stupid and lazy masses. And yet, a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

These lazy and stupid masses mock our type of people, they beat us up in school, they call us nerds, geeks, dorks, wackos, freaks, infidels, heathens, unpatriotic, evil, tin-hat wearers, etc. They despise us and wish us harm and death, yet a certain member of this forum wishes to bestow altruism upon these masses.

I say, the biological function of these masses is to be the servants/slaves of us "Enlightened" people. So, our goal should be to try to become part of the economic/political/academic elite and make our lives better using the masses as servants. One organization already is attempting to do this, they are http://www.transtopia.org/ Another organization like this is Skulls and Bones, but one would have to have something very beneficial to offer them to get accepted. I would have no chance.

Thoughts?

Wow. You were picked on bad in school, weren't you? Or are you an arrogant prick? Or both?

Why is watching tv after work bad? Many people work long hard hours, and need to relax after work, to recuperate-and tv does that for many people. Same with drinking. Who the fuck cares if someone drinks or not? It can be quite fun. You also blast sports in your post. I'm not the best at sports, but they are fun. It is always good to excercise, and the competition is fun. There is nothing wrong with sports, or excersicing the body.

How do you like this:

I say the biological function of dorks, loser, nerds, wackos, weaklings, wimps, is to be pushed around and mocked by strong members of society, to be ridiculed mercilessly at all times.

You like that? Huh? I thought not.

Your 'desirable' traits list is completely wrong, in my opinion. I guess I'd get killed in your mastuburtary fantasy world filled with gadgests and gizmos.

So basically, I disagree with your post entirely. I really don't believe in slavery or genocide. I also urge you to seek a therapist, as you seem to have major issues with athletic type people stemming from bullying in school. Get some help man, please. Slavery and genocide are bad. Don't advocate them.

Well said! I had the same thoughts running through my head about them while reading their post.

There is a big difference between evolutionary defense mechanisms and a conscious mind with a desire to live.

"Relative Consciousness": there is a gradient of increasing algorithmic thought process between species and within species.

What scientific evidence do you have for this?

Regarding the rest of your argument, I cannot have a rational debate with one who claims moral absolutism. You are saying that your moral views on life is absolute, like a religious view, that cannot be questioned or scientifically analyzed: it is just so because you say so.

Of course my moral views are open to question. I'm just saying that the scientific method is not the proper tool for the job. You can't perform experiments on a morality; you can, however, use logic and reason to determine which actions help the most people get what they want (preference utilitarianism). Obviously, enslaving people who crave freedom doesn't satisfy that principle.

So basically, I disagree with your post entirely. I really don't believe in slavery or genocide. I also urge you to seek a therapist, as you seem to have major issues with athletic type people stemming from bullying in school. Get some help man, please. Slavery and genocide are bad. Don't advocate them.

I agree. Chinese Power, I honestly think you may have Antisocial Personality Disorder. I would suggest you talk to a therapist.

By the way, are you the same person as gashinshotan?

Ahh, a Christmas Eve post! I should be in bed sleeping so Santa will come, but instead I'm trying to make up my mind... Enslave or Kill?.... Enslave or Kill?.... And where the hell did I put my DSM IV?

Ahh, a Christmas Eve post! I should be in bed sleeping so Santa will come, but instead I'm trying to make up my mind... Enslave or Kill?.... Enslave or Kill?.... And where the hell did I put my DSM IV?

Oh, that was great!

Wow. You were picked on bad in school, weren't you? Or are you an arrogant prick? Or both?

Why is watching tv after work bad? Many people work long hard hours, and need to relax after work, to recuperate-and tv does that for many people. Same with drinking. Who the fuck cares if someone drinks or not? It can be quite fun. You also blast sports in your post. I'm not the best at sports, but they are fun. It is always good to excercise, and the competition is fun. There is nothing wrong with sports, or excersicing the body.

How do you like this:

I say the biological function of dorks, loser, nerds, wackos, weaklings, wimps, is to be pushed around and mocked by strong members of society, to be ridiculed mercilessly at all times.

You like that? Huh? I thought not.

Your 'desirable' traits list is completely wrong, in my opinion. I guess I'd get killed in your mastuburtary fantasy world filled with gadgests and gizmos.

So basically, I disagree with your post entirely. I really don't believe in slavery or genocide. I also urge you to seek a therapist, as you seem to have major issues with athletic type people stemming from bullying in school. Get some help man, please. Slavery and genocide are bad. Don't advocate them.

Argumentum Ad Hominem.

Of course my moral views are open to question. I'm just saying that the scientific method is not the proper tool for the job. You can't perform experiments on a morality; you can, however, use logic and reason to determine which actions help the most people get what they want (preference utilitarianism). Obviously, enslaving people who crave freedom doesn't satisfy that principle.

My point is that morality is simply based on personal feelings, not science. So, you cannot claim that anything is moral or immoral in the absolute sense; you can only claim that your personal feelings are that so and so is moral or immoral. Morality is in the eye of the beholder, like beauty.

I agree. Chinese Power, I honestly think you may have Antisocial Personality Disorder. I would suggest you talk to a therapist.

By the way, are you the same person as gashinshotan?

Argumentum Ad Hominem.

Edited by Chinese Power, 25 December 2007 - 07:30 AM.

Ahh, a Christmas Eve post! I should be in bed sleeping so Santa will come, but instead I'm trying to make up my mind... Enslave or Kill?.... Enslave or Kill?.... And where the hell did I put my DSM IV?

Argumentum Red Herring.

Wow. You were picked on bad in school, weren't you? Or are you an arrogant prick? Or both?

Why is watching tv after work bad? Many people work long hard hours, and need to relax after work, to recuperate-and tv does that for many people. Same with drinking. Who the fuck cares if someone drinks or not? It can be quite fun. You also blast sports in your post. I'm not the best at sports, but they are fun. It is always good to excercise, and the competition is fun. There is nothing wrong with sports, or excersicing the body.

How do you like this:

I say the biological function of dorks, loser, nerds, wackos, weaklings, wimps, is to be pushed around and mocked by strong members of society, to be ridiculed mercilessly at all times.

You like that? Huh? I thought not.

Your 'desirable' traits list is completely wrong, in my opinion. I guess I'd get killed in your mastuburtary fantasy world filled with gadgests and gizmos.

So basically, I disagree with your post entirely. I really don't believe in slavery or genocide. I also urge you to seek a therapist, as you seem to have major issues with athletic type people stemming from bullying in school. Get some help man, please. Slavery and genocide are bad. Don't advocate them.

Argumentum Ad Hominem.

LMFAO.

What a lame excuse to not try and defend your opinions!

You want to enslave average people who enjoy physical activity because sometimes smart people get picked on. You claim they are useless, but the world runs on the backs of average people working day in and day out. Why should someone be a slave, or killed, because they want to watch a comedy show instead of research...physics or read Plato, for example?

Defend your opinions, sir. They are very obnoxious, with all that slavery and genocide nonsense. Please explain why average people deserve this, and how it would be desirable and eithical, please.

Edited by Grimm, 25 December 2007 - 07:45 AM.

I was reading some literature right now on androstenedione and how the unintelligent masses were easily duped by the FDA into supporting its ban. All of us are being physically harmed by the stupid masses who vote for corrupt politicians who ban technology that can give us "transhuman" abilities. As such, I have no altruistic sentiments towards the masses, but rather view them as a fatal virus.

I was reading some literature right now on androstenedione and how the unintelligent masses were easily duped by the FDA into supporting its ban. All of us are being physically harmed by the stupid masses who vote for corrupt politicians who ban technology that can give us "transhuman" abilities. As such, I have no altruistic sentiments towards the masses, but rather view them as a fatal virus.

Where's your evidence that androstenedione is an innocuous substance? Well, if it isn't innocuous, you can still argue against the FDA ban by invoking the harm principle elaborated by John Stuart Mill in On Liberty.

I really do not know who to blame exactly... yes, the masses do indeed support anti-intellectual agendas such as the ban on embryonic stem cell research. However, do have to remember that this is a flaw of democracy which was elaborated about two centuries ago in "Federalist No. 10." One solution might be a benevolent dictator, but I do not see any candidates for a benevolent dictator. Wait, Helios would make an excellent dictator.

Edited by HellKaiserRyo, 25 December 2007 - 12:42 PM.