Lot's of Answers ,No Solutions

[Wasillaguy]

Chas implying he has the bigger brain is no more absurd than your assumption that humans have big brains. It's entirely possible that other entities exist with intellect that dwarfs ours.
It could also be argued that a big brain (by our measure) is the problem, not the solution. Note that we are the smartest species on the planet, yet do the most damage by far.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

Chas implying he has the bigger brain is no more absurd than your assumption that humans have big brains. It's entirely possible that other entities exist with intellect that dwarfs ours.
It could also be argued that a big brain (by our measure) is the problem, not the solution. Note that we are the smartest species on the planet, yet do the most damage by far.

While I agree that the universe likely contains others with superior intelligence, I doubt that homo sapiens need to take a back seat to anyone or anything whenever it comes to arrogance.

Chas

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

Chas implying he has the bigger brain is no more absurd than your assumption that humans have big brains. It's entirely possible that other entities exist with intellect that dwarfs ours.
It could also be argued that a big brain (by our measure) is the problem, not the solution. Note that we are the smartest species on the planet, yet do the most damage by far.

It is not a bit absurd to note that we have the the biggest brains known to actually exist. Your super-entities are totally hypothetical. And even if they were to exist, it remains true that we are the only species on this planet evolved enough to appreciate beauty, to be motivated to modify our behavior in accordance with beliefs in the desirability of 'undamaged' natural systems.

So we are the problem not only because we 'damage nature,' but because we are the only entities around here that see anything wrong with 'damaging nature.' A paradox, no?

[Charles]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

It is not a bit absurd to note that we have the the biggest brains known to actually exist. Your super-entities are totally hypothetical. And even if they were to exist, it remains true that we are the only species on this planet evolved enough to appreciate beauty, to be motivated to modify our behavior in accordance with beliefs in the desirability of 'undamaged' natural systems.

So we are the problem not only because we 'damage nature,' but because we are the only entities around here that see anything wrong with 'damaging nature.' A paradox, no?

Well, we are way smarter than a slug.

Don't know that we're any more important than a slug, and I imagine that if slugs were capable of rational thought they would figure we are more trouble than we're worth.

Chas

[mpholland]

Originally Posted by Charles

Well, we are way smarter than a slug.

Chas

I have met a few folk that might make you ponder that statement a bit.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by mpholland

I have met a few folk that might make you ponder that statement a bit.

You DO have a point.

Chas

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Charles

Well, we are way smarter than a slug.

Don't know that we're any more important than a slug, and I imagine that if slugs were capable of rational thought they would figure we are more trouble than we're worth.

Chas

Ever read Kurt Vonnegut's "Galapagos?" It's sort of up your alley.

I'm more important than a slug. I regard this as self-evident and inarguable. You may not agree of course, and i can't prove it to you. But I consider you much more important than a slug, too. Can't chat with a slug.

Happiness is other people. (Sartre was only half-right).

[Charles]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Ever read Kurt Vonnegut's "Galapagos?" It's sort of up your alley.

I'm more important than a slug. I regard this as self-evident and inarguable. You may not agree of course, and i can't prove it to you. But I consider you much more important than a slug, too. Can't chat with a slug.

Happiness is other people. (Sartre was only half-right).

I've never read it, although it sounds interesting.

And as far as I'm concerned, I'm no better than a slug...although I live in a nicer house and have a better line of bullshit.

If anything, the slug is better off than I, as he has no need or desire for either.

And personally, I think Sartre was more than half right. He just offered a dialectical theory which appeals more to introverts such as myself.

Chas

[CarlV]

I can go with nature's global warming thought to a degree but that does not dismiss the fact that we humans are "pouring gas on the fire".

Carl

[Charles]

Originally Posted by CarlV

I can go with nature's global warming thought to a degree but that does not dismiss the fact that we humans are "pouring gas on the fire".

Carl

Don't worry, if we don't kill ourselves off, the planet will do it for us.

Chas