Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Big Think" channel.

  1.  @johnbrown4627  If you follow the simplicity of Sarah Izzo's comment, you have morality broken down to its most clarified form. It's no different than the Christian way of breaking down the law. Love God (truth as a living metaphor) and thy neighbour as thyself. Do that and all morality falls into place, no matter what the ideological affiliation.
    12
  2.  @eoin8450  Instead, you'd have no money Marxism to ensure that no one has power.....except those who must ensure that no one has power. Someone has to do the dirty work. Then everyone reports to that elite, who are the keepers of "no power" the neighbour, who is accumulating more than his fair share, or even showing the perception of accumulated inequality. That neighbour will now be dealt with by that elite overseer of "no power" and inequality. Hobble the thoroughbred so he can't outrun the Shetland pony.
    6
  3.  @eoin8450  China started out communist. Communism cannot exist without authoritarianism. However, central planning of an economy, is just too complicated for a small elitist authority. So, they allowed a decentralisation of small businesses and small market gardens. It seemed to work but it was still at the behest of the central planning authority. Since it did work, they allowed it to expand but the key word is "ALLOWED". It's expanded to the point that it is now, but it's still only allowed.....it's at the permission of centrally planned government. It's why Huawei is involved in all kinds of espionage. They exist at the behest of the central authoritarian government. If Huawei refuses, that could spell the end of the top executives of that company. That's illegal in a free capitalist country. The government cannot force you to do something you don't want to do. That's an infringement of their rights. China is somewhere between a free capitalist society and communism and it's a lot closer to communism than it is to a western style government and economy. That's why early 20th century economic pundits called Fascism, National Socialism. It's somewhere between our western style government and economy and communism.....Fascism to be precise. I came to this conclusion after reading memoirs of Soviet and Nazi era writers and realised that the only difference between the 2 was that the communist Soviets micro managed and the socialist Nazis allowed the companies to micro manage. However, both were in full control of the big picture.
    6
  4. It's because those satellites are too close to the earth for them to be able to take a full shot of the planet. Stand 5 feet away from your house and try and take a picture that shows the entire house and good luck with that. The earth is too large for a video or picture from a satellite to show the entire planet. The video in 72 was taken from a greater distance. It was not a satellite, an object orbiting the earth. It was a space ship travelling away from and then returning to the earth. Therefore, just like us taking a picture of the moon, they could take a picture of the earth. Simple really. When they say it's oblate, they don't meant that it's shape is so far from a perfect circle that you'd automatically notice it. It's only noticeable if you look closely. This is a known fact.
    5
  5.  @eoin8450  It's privatised but the owners of the company had better support the regime or they'll face all kinds of federal discrimination. It's how the Nazis operated. The owner had better be a Nazi and allow Party officials in his establishments to monitor work ethics and loyalty to the Party. When told to make military shirts, you made military shirts. You owned the company but the state ultimately controls you. That's what used to be called National Socialism. Capitalism believes in a free market system with as little government input as possible, if any. Government only gets involved when laws are broken or in a state of national emergency. That's not China. In fact, intellectuals in the thirties and forties quite often said that communism is unworkable and will inevitably evolve into fascism. I think I read that in a book by Friedrich Hayek, written during WW2.
    5
  6. You can take a vacation to the Antarctic and even fly to the South Pole. Just google it. It can and is being done.
    4
  7. I'd like to hear an explanation that shows why the days are getting longer as we approach summer. Why in northern Canada, in Alert, the sun does not set at all and it is daylight for 24 hours at this time of year, but at Christmas, the sun never comes up, darkness for 24 hours. How can you explain that with a flat earth?
    4
  8. Explain to me what's so hard about building a pyramid. All your doing is piling blocks. There are lots of cranes that can pick up the 10 tons that the largest blocks weigh at the pyramid at Giza. An average American car weighs 2 tons and the average crane at a scrapyard can pick one up without any problems. Even a bad engineer could build a pyramid.
    4
  9.  @eoin8450  A lot of this is semantics. If the definition of socialism is control of the economy by the state, then fascism is a form of socialism. It's all a matter of control of the economy. Capitalism is free market, no control, except rule of law, the law which even the state must adhere to. State capitalism would be an oxymoron. It's freedom with control by the state by decree of the state with the law put down by the state. You can't have both, a free market and a state run economy. To me, it's the left/right culture description that doesn't make sense. I see freedom, in it's purest form, on the far right, total anarchy. However, that kind of freedom imposes a tyranny of its own. So, we introduce the rule of law, overseen by the state but a state subject to that rule of law. As you move further left, the rule of law loses its power and the state gathers more power and starts to control the economy, gathering each corporate board under its power until power is completely gained under a state run economy. The journey finally ends in total macro and micro control of the economy and society and we're at a communist state. To me, that makes more sense than the state in control at both ends of the left/right paradigm. No control at one end and total control at the other.
    4
  10. + Jake Woolard How do you think those scientists were found to be mistaken in their thinking? Science...that's how. Other scientists, checking his research and continuing to try and understand the subject matter that that mistaken scientist has been studying. If wrong conclusions are being made, it will be science that will find it out. Science doesn't believe in absolutes....ever. If evidence is presented that contradict long held conclusions, those conclusions are dropped and new models are drawn. Science is not dogmatic. It changes as new discoveries are made. You even said so, yourself.
    3
  11. Of course, we can build a pyramid. All it takes is to stack blocks on top of one another. The making of the circuitry of your computer is much more sophisticated than a pyramid. Why would anyone go through all the expense of building a structure that you can't enter. It's a huge project, and completely pointless, except to an ancient people with a king that has an overblown opinion of his own importance, a God complex. No point to building one of those monstrosities.
    3
  12.  @eoin8450  No....it's not state capitalism. It's national socialism or Fascism.
    3
  13. Well, it wasn't electromagnetism. Every scientist on the planet gets gravity and laughs at the idea of levitation. You really don't want to be laughed at do you? Next, you'll be telling us 2 plus 2 equals 5.
    2
  14. Welcome to the Bronze Age. Actually, the Stone Age may better describe it. Scholars in the Bronze age knew the rudiments of geometry, astronomy, and the other branches of mathematics and science. This guy rejects every gain in our knowledge base in favour of superstition, paranoia and self serving delusions. It's pointless to reason with him. He doesn't want to know. He may well be a troll, saying the things he does because it's the only companionship available to him. Negative acknowledgement is better than no acknowledgement.
    2
  15. What you're referring to is the fallibility of human nature. People are imperfect. They make mistakes, are given to ego, greed and pettiness. Studying science doesn't impart an immunity to the vices that all people are susceptible to. However, your reference show that there is an awareness of this problem in the scientific community and there are those who're trying to address those problems. That still does not address the assertion that has been made that a false scientific idea will not eventually be found out. Sometimes it takes a little longer than it should but it will happen. Even the problems you're talking about will be addressed with the hope of greater accuracy in drawing new scientific ideas. No methodology will ever be perfect. The scientific method is, by far, the best way to understand the natural world. The BEST way....not the perfect way.
    2
  16. Sir Bentington "Cleaning your room" is a metaphor for your life. Peterson is bluntly saying that if one cannot understand and deal with the issues that plague their own life, how could that person possibly skip the small issues around him and tackle the big ones first. It would be presumptuous of me to give marriage advice to the masses if all my marriages have ended in shambles. Peterson is saying that before you do that you should be sure that you can set the example of your personal circle of life as a model for the larger societal model that you'd hope to achieve. It has absolutely nothing to do with individual pampering. A society in which the majority of individuals are well adjusted and ethically sound will invariably find a society that is, as a whole, the same. A society of morally bankrupt and psychologically troubled individuals are not going to have any rational basis to shape the type of society that is of any benefit to anyone.
    2
  17. Bartleby Oregon How does it benefit the team to share the ball with me if I refuse to develop my individual skills to be of any help to the teams. A team of individuals who do not hone their individual skills will be a losing team, no matter how much they're willing to share the ball. I am of no use to the basketball team if I do not, first and foremost, develop my ability to play the game. The team is only as good as the total of the abilities of each individual. Peterson is not telling you not to share. He is saying that if you're of little value to yourself, you'll never be of value to anyone else or society in general. When one builds a house, quite often that person brings in a team of people with specialised skills to complete the job. An architect, concrete finishers, block layers and brick layers, carpenters, electricians, drywallers, roofers and decorators. They each use their skills to form a team that will complete the building of the house. However, if the block layer lacks the skill and the foundation that he builds starts to crack and the foundation is in danger of crumbling, the best carpenters and electricians in the world cannot prevent the house from deteriorating long before its time. To build a decent house, each individual must be develop their personal skills to do their part in the construction. A poor tradesman drags down the entire team of builders. That's the emphasis on the individual that Peterson is advocating. A socially and poorly developed individual is a handicap, not an asset, to society as a whole.
    2
  18.  @eoin8450  Socialism has never been owned by the workers. It's something they say but every socialist system has been a top down system. The state, who CLAIM that they represent the workers, or that they are in fact the workers (never true, though) controls it all. The only difference, I've said it before, between the communist state and the fascist state is that communism tries to manage it all, from the macro to the micro. Fascism controls the macro, each industry and lets them deal with the micro management, the day to day stuff. Fascism realises that the details are too complex to deal with it all so they give a little more freedom to make the micro decisions but they still control it all, in the name of the state, which is the people. That's why it's National Socialism, state Socialism or, as in Germany, National Socialist German Workers' Party. They still claim to be representing the Workers. The workers are the backbone of the Fascist state. Unions are disbanded and replaced by party representatives who monitor productivity, loyalty and worker grievances. No one, from the owners, top management to the guy pushing a broom is safe from that Party rep. It's the same in the Soviet state, except their is no ownership, just top management, but they are just as much beholden to the Party reps as their counterparts, the ownership and management, as Fascist workplaces. Fascist owners are allowed more leeway in market place markets, as long as it doesn't interfere with national goals.
    2
  19.  @miskatonicalumni5612  You've just demonstrated exactly the point that Killdozer667 was trying to make. You're the shouter, calling people names and throwing out accusations. It's as if he created a second account to display the type of person he was referring to. Your lack of self awareness is almost comical.
    2
  20.  @roxyaya2  Sorry....I really thought that you were claiming that "love the neighbour" was a call to force your neighbour to live as you do. That this was YOUR perception of Christianity and that famous verse. I'm assuming that this is NOT the case. To clarify, I don't believe, for one minute, that this is telling you to force your neighbour to live as you do. If that's what you read into it, it definitely was not my intent.
    2
  21.  @roxyaya2  That's great. You have wonderful day.
    2
  22.  @Manolara1  You don't have to read the Communist Manifesto to see what the Communists, or better the Marxists, did, to see that their blueprint led them to commit horrific crimes against humanity. You don't have to read it to see that what they were attempting to accomplish would lead to results that are logical and predictable.
    2
  23. Floating balls? I'm not quite getting what you mean. What's so unbelievable about a round earth. The vast majority of educated people believe it is round, so it can't be that unbelievable.
    1
  24. I watched that flat earth seasons thing and it makes no sense. If the world is flat and the sun is above the flat earth, why does it get dark? How can it get dark on one side of the earth and not the other? This is something you can do yourself. Take a small light in a room and suspend it in the air in a corner. Then you go to the opposite corner, actually anywhere in the room. You can still see the light, even if it's just a few inches off the ground. The only way it can fully disappear is if it goes below floor level. If that happens, the entire floor can't see it. That would be no different than a flat earth. It has to be either completely dark all over the world or completely light. It makes no sense and if it does, explain it to me. Just to make his scenario work, he had to make the sun speed up and slow down. Why would the sun do that? I don't see how this would cause almost 3 months of complete darkness in the winter and 3 months of continuous sunshine in the summer in Alert. The whole thing is illogical.
    1
  25. Of course those images showing an oblate earth are images and not the real thing. They're done that way as an exaggeration to show how the earth is not a perfect sphere. In reality, those difference only amount to 42 miles out of 25,000 miles, a difference so small in its relationship that it's not detectable with the naked eye when looking at the composite images of the earth or the pictures taken during the moon landings. It isn't nearly as oblate as depicted in those images. It's done that way for educational purposes to show exactly where the shapes are actually different. The reality isn't nearly as exaggerated. I've already explained that to you once. It's not that hard a concept to understand. I watched that video, or most of it, that you recommended. It's full of inaccuracies and fallacies. He has no idea on the properties of gravity and how it works on falling objects or a plane. A carpenter's level always works to the gravitational centre of the earth and that's exactly how a plane works. It's engines maintain a constant speed to maintain altitude because gravity will keep it at the exact same distance to the gravitational centre. Decrease that speed an gravity will pull it down and the flaps will have to be moved to maintain altitude. A plane does not have to correct itself to follow the curve of the earth. Gravity does that for the plane as long as it maintains a certain speed and no steering mechanisms are changed. I do not see the sun getting smaller until it reaches a vanishing point in the far north. What the sun does is reach its highest point a little lower every day until it is so low it no longer clears the horizon. Everyone of us that has ever been to the Arctic will tell you that's what happens. The sun does not get to the size of a star before vanishing completely. That has never been observed. There are a lot of good Christians that know the earth is round. Believing in God and a round earth isn't mutually exclusive and saying that denying a flat earth is an attempt to discredit a God is ridiculous. You can get a decent telescope and point it at Jupiter and watch that planet rotate on its' axis and see moons orbiting around it. Why is this planet different than the earth. The crescent moon doesn't work if the moon is flat either. Also, it seems a little disingenuous to call all evidence of a round earth lies and CGIs and accept any prove of a flat earth as fact. That's a little self serving and no way to prove a point.
    1
  26. Are you really that thick that you can't understand the difference between a perfect sphere and one that's just a little imperfect? 42 miles difference out of 25,000 miles. That's 0.168 percent of the size. Not a big deal. That's all they're saying. It's not quite a perfect sphere. So to demonstrate the imperfection they sometimes have an exaggerated illustration to show where that imperfection lies. However, when looking at a composite image of the earth, that slight difference is undetectable. They're making a statement of accuracy. Wow....how can this seem so baffling? Once again, I'm going to have to explain this to you. The satellites, in spite of being in space, are too close to take a full shot of the earth. Remember my example of taking a single complete picture of a house standing 5 feet away from it? Have you even tried to visualize what this entails? It cannot be done because you're to close to the house. A satellite in space cannot take a full picture of the earth because the earth is too close. The only way they can show a picture is a composite, a CGI. You're being deliberately obtuse in repeating this "how come it's a CGI image?" question. There is no satellite far enough away to take a full picture of the earth. You don't have to believe it but at least quit pretending that you don't get this simple concept. No one was around to see how the moon was formed. Maybe God did create it. Who really knows? However, they have designed computer simulations and found a scenario that works and can explain how it could have happened. Science knows that it may not be that way but thus far, it has been the most likely scenario to explain its existence. They will leave this as the most likely explanation unless someone can show, using math and science, a more likely explanation. Once again, you don't have to believe it but your incredulity isn't enough to refute it and you must be intelligent enough to understand how and why this theory is being presented. They have observed all the planets in our solar system along with their moons and they're all basically spherical. They have discovered 715 exoplanets, planets outside our solar system, and they're also round. Yet, for some inexplicable reason, earth, isn't a sphere. It's flat. Every other celestial body observed is a sphere but not earth. Well, isn't that odd. A flat earth doesn't explain gravity or any of its properties. It doesn't explain why all those moons keep going around Saturn, Jupiter, Mars Neptune or Uranus. You don't have to believe that it happens but a half decent telescope in your back yard and you can watch it happen for yourself. But of course, the natural rules of nature don't apply to earth, just everything else cause the earth is so special. Of course, the government and NASA and the Illuminati and the elite don't want us to know that the earth is flat because if we knew that we'd all revolt and worship God and quit our jobs and refuse to pay our bills and....I'm not really sure why it's so important that we believe the earth to be round. It's all some kind of ruse for some nefarious purpose. Satan has to be behind it all. Another question I have is about my TV satellite dish. Why is it I have to make sure it's pointed to an exact location in the sky to pick up a TV image? My neighbour has to have his pointed at the exact same location. One of those imaginary satellites that NASA is lying about putting up there? Is that what I'm trying to locate when I'm zeroing in on that exact spot in the sky? I'm going to have to reiterate my explanation of why all images from NASA, the European space agency, the Russian space program, the Chinese,Indian and Japanese space satellites can't show a complete picture of the earth. All those satellites, from all those countries are too close to the earth to take a full picture of the earth. The only way they can show the entire planet is to form a composite picture, a CGI. It's either that or every country that has a satellite and every university in the world, every book, science magazine in every library have all conspired to fool us because they all worship Satan or the lizard people or something. All pilots and co-pilots, shipping companies, surveyors....all in on it. And you, the smart guy that you are, can spot how they are lying. I'm still not sure why they would do all this lying. Perhaps you could explain it to me. How is it to their advantage that some dumb factory worker, like me, believes that the earth is round? How does that benefit anyone? If nothing else, explain that to me.
    1
  27. A solid electromagnetic engineer? Why don't you become one. Get a doctorate in engineering and then show us all the wondrous inventions and innovations that would be available to us if we only stopped believing in Einstein...and his idiots. Was Newton one of those idiots? Couldn't have been. He lived a couple of centuries before Einstein. Same as Copernicus and Galileo. Idiots that brought out ideas based on the ideas of gravity that Newton formulated. All those idiot scientists working in every university in every country around the world, yet you know more than them because you've got the education to understand gravity and electromagnetism. You're a little boy trying to join the "big people" and the only way you could even possibly sit at the same table is to call them names. Show me one credible scientific paper that refutes the laws of gravity. That paper doesn't exist and you can't prove to us or yourself that you possess a higher level of intelligence by the school boy tactic of calling people idiots. That may have worked in grade 5, maybe, but in the grown up world it is a joke.
    1
  28. Science can measure the effects of gravity, make predictions using the laws of motion and gravity and have developed technology using gravity. As a matter of fact, almost everything we do uses gravity or involves the effects of gravity to some extent. It is one of the most important, if not the most important forces in the universe. The one thing that is difficult to understand is just what exactly gravity it and how and why it works. That doesn't negate its existence, no more than not understanding cancer negates the existence of cancer. What the hell does being a Jew have to do with anything??? Racial ethnicity has nothing to do with understanding natural law. If a Jew says 2 plus 2 equals 4, I'm not about to call him a liar and say all the concepts of mathematics are bogus. You're entire line of reasoning is based on incredulity which is fuelled by bigotry. Not exactly what I'd call an enlightened or professional means to use the scientific method. I'll warrant you have next to no education in the sciences or mathematics. I'll also warrant that you can't even show me one highly credentialled individual who thinks that gravity is a stupid concept. Memes on a youtube video isn't exactly science. Anyone who thinks that these memes lend credibility hasn't a clue on how information is examined or processed to a logical conclusion.
    1
  29. I'm still not seeing any credible source for your ideas. There's so much junk on the internet and I'm not about to wade through every crackpot idea that's been posted. If you have good sources and information, share. You're the one that's bucking the system. Tell us why. if you won't or can't, I'm not about to take you seriously. Why should I? You're just a faceless, unknown guy posting stuff on a youtube comment section. To be credulous, you have to have to be credible and that means backing up your unusual claims. Like it or not, gravity is the accepted idea that explains the forces of the universe. If it's wrong, do us a favour and prove it. You've not even come close yet.
    1
  30. Now it's an atheist conspiracy. Millions of scientists, around the world, from all disciplines and religions agree that gravity explains the motions on the heavens but you know better and the best you can come up with is that it's an atheist plot to make money. You have no idea what the term "rules of evidence" means...not a clue. Still no evidence of how your concept of earth can be proven. Nothing. Right back to accusations and claims that you can't or won't back up. Do you even understand what I mean by that. I'm still thinking that you've very little education. I'm also seeing someone who's had difficulty understanding basic science and is now compensating by embracing a world view that shows you're not as lacking in intelligence as your lack of education suggests. You've explained it to yourself and to those who you feel have questioned you IQ. You're not the dumb one....they're all liars...sent by Satan or atheists or the Jews or someone. You can now claim to have the brains, the insight to see through the lies, making you one of the smarter ones...just as you've always suspected. If you're so smart, give us the evidence to back up your claims. Real evidence with good references. No more about levitation and that rainbows can only happen on a flat earth. That doesn't say a thing.
    1
  31. You're right about a flat earth because I'm a zio pro atheistic beast marked troll? You're starting to sound more and more like a lunatic as we exchange comments. This isn't about me....or you. It's about demonstrable facts and observations. Show me the evidence for a flat earth and how gravity cannot exist. Bigoted rants about Zion and whacked out nonsense about the beast doesn't cut it when you're a scientist trying to get a nuclear reactor to work or peering through a telescope at a round Mars or Jupiter. Use science and the rules of evidence to prove your point. All you're doing is proving how uneducated you really are.
    1
  32. It's not about what you think or about what I think. It's about the mountains of evidence and formulas that support the modern scientific concept of the universe. Speed, motion, gravitational force, relativity, inertia, the seasons and more are all fully explained using the concepts of modern science. I've asked the other guy what evidence he has the proves the flat earth and all he does is call me an atheistic troll. Now, I'll ask you the same question. Show me the proof, in scientific terms on why you believe the earth is flat. You'd be better off taking a basic grade school science course and work your way up to university level. I know it's hard work but it's well worth it in the end. You'll be able to join the 21st century and take part in the wonders that science is uncovering every day instead of languishing in a medieval wasteland.
    1
  33. You don't even understand the basics of relativity. No one lives upside down on a spherical earth. The earth has no up or down, but it spins on an axis from pole to pole. Gravity pulls from the very centre of the earth and a person will always perceive himself to be upright, not matter where he lives on the earth. It's his own perspective that counts for him. What some one sees from outside that perspective is irrelevant to the person that's living inside the perspective. No matter where you are on the globe, you're being pulled by gravity to the centre of the earth. That central force does not recognize up or down. It just pulls everything around it towards its centre. Get a basic education. That's all I can say to you.
    1
  34. Lights in the sky that move all over the place and go around the sun. Anyone with a fairly inexpensive telescope can see Mars and Jupiter move through the sky and follow their trajectory as they move. Lights in the sky. What are you....an eight year old? If you had an education you'd know just how ridiculous you sound.
    1
  35. What's laughable is that it took 2000 plus years for scholars to study the skies and develop the technology that has given humanity the insights to understand some of the workings of the earth and the one technology that could bring all that knowledge and hard work together for all to easily access is putting some of us back to the beginning. It's like all that study never happened. It's laughable and it's sad. I've asked and asked for evidence and I've got nothing. You're full of it, maybe even a troll. NO one could be that thick or that much of a Neanderthal. Pointless to even carry on any kind of mature conversation with one like you. You have no idea what it means to follow the rules of evidence or why a person in a discussion that makes a claim has the burden of proof. You fall for all logical fallacies possible and might even have chanced on some new ones. You know nothing about the scientific method or how to research, examine and process information or to present a case in logical coherent manner. It's all incredulity and a sneering dislike of anyone who spends a lifetime actually learning and trying to understand the universe. You're a child, destined to go nowhere and stuck in the stone age. I've always thought the chemtrailers were bad but you flat earthers take the cake.
    1
  36. It was Eratosthenes who calculated the circumference of the earth over 2200 years ago. Most scholars have known, since then, that the earth was round...not flat. Astronomers had always puzzled over why some of the stars seemed to wander while the rest were fairly fixed. This led to the discovery that they were planets, not stars, and that they even had moons orbiting them. You can see them with a decent telescope. The telescope also enabled Galileo to confirm what Copernicus had discovered about the sun being the centre of the solar system. So your flat earth theory was disproved over 2000 years ago and your brain is still in the bronze age.
    1
  37. What accounts of people being turned away? You'll have to do better than just making a claim. Guys like you claim something is a secret and then proceed to tell everyone what that secret is. How can you know if it's a secret? That's illogical.
    1
  38. In spite of so much of cancer research being flawed, cancer mortality rates has dropped by 13 percent in the ten years from 2004-13. That is still due to the use of the scientific method Improve the research methodology, don't abandon it. You seem to be throwing out the baby with the bath water.
    1
  39. There will never be an Islamic reformation until Muslims stop revering Mohammed almost to the extent of his being a God. He's a ordinary man and should be open to criticism, just like anyone else.
    1
  40. All different facets of the same ideology and thinking process. They're all just tweaked to fit the specific group the ideologically possessed throws their allegiance behind.
    1
  41. Batosai11489 LMAO....You must be absolutely terrified. LOL. That comment would put you right at the front of the genocide line up. Wow. I can't stop laughing at it. Are you really serious? LOL.
    1
  42. Batosai11489 Who says that logic and reason is the path to Paradise? I don't recall anyone ever saying that. I'm laughing at the idea that a "tribe" of people dedicated to the principles of logic and reason would arrive at the illogical conclusion that to rid the world of illogical and unreasonable people is to kill them all off. Logic dictates that this would be an illogical use of resources and humanity. It also goes against any logic that says that those who do not always use logic are of no use as humans to society. That these people cannot work, love, learn, achieve or contribute to the whole of humanity. That's illogical in itself. In other words, you're asserting that the "logical tribe" will abandon all logic and begin a genocide of the illogical. Everyone uses logic. We abandon logic when they allow emotions to dictate a belief system or a trauma in our lives and we all do it to a certain extent. What would be a logical response to sustained illogical thought is to cultivate a culture of thinking things through, to use the inherent logic we all possess to control our emotional responses in a positive manner. There is no such thing a "logical tribe". There is only logic and reason and how much we choose to use it and where we use it. What you're proposing is an Orwellian attempt to control thought. Logic and reason encourages thought in a free and expressive manner because logic dictates that mistakes are also an inherent human trait and a new train of thought could come from anyone or anywhere because we all think and our thoughts are always trying to assume some sort of order, which again implies logic. If logic and reason are an inherent part of individual human personality, inherently flawed but still present, then we'd be attempting to eliminate those with flawed logic, but it could only manifest itself on specific topics. A person could logically solve a difficult mathematical equation and then illogically stick a needle in his arm that evening with heroin in it. Logical and illogical are within us all. That's why I'm laughing. We'd be killing the entire human race and that's illogical.
    1
  43. First of all, there are areas of thought where logic and reason can arrive at different conclusions. In fact, you can bet that this will happen. It depends on information available and how much weight each individual puts on different bits of information. What logic does is give the BEST way to arrive at viable solutions. There is no guarantee for the perfect way. Mistakes are still made. Also, there will be countless solutions to complex problems. Some are better than others. There is no amount of logic that anyone can use to guarantee the best solution for every problem, 100 percent of the time. What we can do is hope that through careful assessment that we will arrive at a solution that will solve the problem to our satisfaction. Since humans are cognitive creatures, we all use logic to a certain degree. That's what human cognition is all about. Some of us are better are mathematical type problems. Others seem to excel at social problems and others at formulating artistic visions. We all use logic. It's who we are. It's because, like I said before, we're also emotional creatures. All of us. It's not whether we lack logic as individuals, it's whether we allow emotion to cloud our lives and whether we have the training and maturity to recognise when our emotions cloud our judgement. That's not easy and it's not tribal.
    1
  44. Chad Little That's a logical assessment. Logic is the best path to success but it's not a guarantee. We bring different experiences to the table which causes us to assess each variable to a problem differently, thereby adding or subtracting the affects of the individual variable to the overall problem. That could have a profound affect on the way we work out a final solution. It will be certain that no 2 people will reason out the same solution to the problems of life and a perfectly logical person could add one flawed variable and use that variable to a logically sound, yet flawed conclusion. It's why the idea that logical people could form a tribe makes no sense. If we're all using logical processes to a certain degree, then, we're all in that tribe. Logic can still give us an unwanted and unforeseen conclusion, what we would call a failure. Yet, failure can be extremely important as a learning tool and can ultimately be the vehicle to success.
    1
  45. Michael Newell Life is brutal.
    1
  46.  @miskatonicalumni5612  Read the comments in this thread. Everyone of them that disagree with Peterson is filled with name calling and nothing of intellectual value, whatsoever. What's more, the original comment points out something that Peterson detractors do and you back him up 100 percent by doing exactly what he said you'd do. Then you answer me by not acknowledging the truth of it in an active sense, but you still admit it by saying that conservatives do it, too. If it's childish for a conservative to behave in this way, it's childish for anyone to do it. You're validating the double standard you decry. An argument of "Oh yeah"s is schoolyard bickering. Defend yourself by being better than that.
    1
  47.  ihategoogle  Loving your neighbour does not include approving of what he does. Many parents will love a child even though they don't approve of their lifestyle or choices that they've made. Love or caring isn't about approval. That's where the "as thyself" comes in. You do what's best for you, including self sacrifice and setting standards for your life. Those standards must also apply to your "neighbour".
    1
  48.  @roxyaya2  It does not. That's just your interpretation of it. You can't force personal redemption. When a rich man came to Jesus to seek that redemption, he was allowed to walk away with his decision NOT to follow the conditions set by Jesus. Just like no one wants to be forced to do things against their will, they shouldn't force others to things against their will. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". That's also an admonishment from the Bible. Put that with "Love thy neighbour as thyself" and you would NEVER force people to live as you do. That's the product of the human condition and anyone FORCED to pray, to be a Christian, is NOT a Christian at all. You know nothing of Christianity except for your own perception and a cognitive dissonance that only allows you to accept information that validates that preconceived perception.
    1
  49.  @adriannahorschtetler1624  Where did I say that I wanted to change anyone? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I don't want others to force me to change so I would never do that to others. What I said was that I can love someone and not accept what they believe or how they live their lives. I have family members who are extremely abusive and I find that behaviour unacceptable. They're still family members and I care for them but that doesn't mean that if Joe (as an example) beats his kids, severely, that I have to accept that. One might even call the police to protect those kids, in the hopes that he'll change and no longer engage in that behaviour. Anyone would do that. You don't have to be Christian to hope that this behaviour stops and even take measures, like calling the police and applying the law, to stop it.
    1
  50.  Brexit Refugee  Your entire comment is an ad hominem attack and says absolutely nothing. It's schoolyard bullying and nothing more. Instead of the attacks, discuss where you think he may have gone wrong. Just one issue. Give examples on why he might be wrong on that issue and give references if required. Calling him a fool isn't an argument.
    1