Quote:
Originally Posted by NightbatŪ
-snip-
|
Hm, this is one of those occasions where I'm not sure what to say. Not that I don't have responses for each and every single one of your comments, but that you just seem angry and upset and that you feel emotionally about the topic vs. approaching it intellectually. I'm not sure why you feel angry, and it's unfortunate that you do, but you're entitled to feel what you do -- that's fine, that's your prerogative, but your emotions on the matter are not something that is likely to be "convincing" (feeling and passion is great for "inspiring" though)
Now, I will try not to offend, but what I wish to point out is this:
Your ability to have an intellectual debate with me from "across the world" wherever you are, is contingent on any number of factors that is due to our "society" and the "social contract" that we all adhere to certain degrees. You have a computer, internet, have gone to school and learned to write and read, you have "free time" to sit in front of the computer and you obviously have read books or watched shows to help form your opinion -- none of these things would exist without this society you decry.
Ultimately, you deny economic progress, and I'm not talking about money. I'm talking about increases in overall human productive capacity (proxy'd by GDP, but I'm talking about actual progress), the division of labour and the human ability to specialize. You can believe that if you wish, but unfortunately, the basis of your beliefs are based on a false premise. Our world isn't perfect, but it's intellectually dishonest to deny it's benefits. You deny society but fail to see that things would be so much worse without it.
@Sumeragi - What about the Dunning-Kruger effect?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect