The Paradox of Humanity

[Whiskers]

"Humane Humanity", i.e. the combination of 1 and 3 above, is an oxymoron.

Well, I guess that's it in a nutshell. Human(ity) is a (oxy)moron!

-ity. a suffix used to form abstract nouns expressing state or condition (of being human - Humanity)

Oxy- a prefix added to the start of a word. Indicates that "oxygen" or "additional oxygen" modifies the word.

::0

 

[Whiskers]

Well, I guess that's it in a nutshell. Human(ity) is a (oxy)moron!

-ity. a suffix used to form abstract nouns expressing state or condition (of being human - Humanity)

Oxy- a prefix added to the start of a word. Indicates that "oxygen" or "additional oxygen" modifies the word.

::0

Oh and also;

Oxy - sharp, pointed, acute, or acid.

Now, it's all summed up.

 

[wayneL]

I guess from an Eastern philosophical point of view, it is only by the presence of black that we can recognize white.
Only by dark that we know when it is light.
Only by ugliness can we define beauty.

Only by evil can we see what is good.

And it is true that the vast majority of actions to do with the quake are good, an amazing effort not only from New Zealanders, but worldwide... including Oz.

 

[Whiskers]

I guess from an Eastern philosophical point of view, it is only by the presence of black that we can recognize white.
Only by dark that we know when it is light.
Only by ugliness can we define beauty.

Only by evil can we see what is good.

And it is true that the vast majority of actions to do with the quake are good, an amazing effort not only from New Zealanders, but worldwide... including Oz.

Back on a more serious note... yes, that's true. We are fortunate in this part of the world to be in the leading end of the paradym shift of what is generally accepted as the best of human nature. We certainly saw a lot of that in all the recent disasters... with just enough of the 'bad' to arguably maintain our vigilance for the protection of the community, a major dynamic for our survival.

The communal nature of Humans sets implied as well as 'Government' rules of conduct for survival of the community to which the individual is usually dependant for survival. It's probably fair to say that generally the more a person is dependant upon or interacted in the community the more respect they will have for, and take care of the community.

Another aspect that you allude to is (the theory of) relativity as it involves and interacts with the theories and methodologies across all the physical sciences, since it's chemical reactions in the body that determine the physical actions of humans.

In the big picture, if you accept the evolutionary course of Human from Ape... it's seems obvious and 'natural' that Humans will and are in the process of evolving to (?)... and the 'Paradox' of Humanity is the struggle in that transition.

 

[Julia]

We are fortunate in this part of the world to be in the leading end of the paradym shift of what is generally accepted as the best of human nature.

Jeez, Whiskers, care to translate this into basic English?
What exactly is the 'leading end of the paradigm shift"?

We certainly saw a lot of that in all the recent disasters... with just enough of the 'bad' to arguably maintain our vigilance for the protection of the community, a major dynamic for our survival.

Again, I need a translation to ordinary speak. Are you suggesting that without the 'bad stuff' e.g. looting , we would be unable, as communities, to survive because we would lack vigilance?
If so, that makes no sense. If there were not looting or other bad behaviour we would not be required to stand on guard with vigilance.

The communal nature of Humans sets implied as well as 'Government' rules of conduct for survival of the community to which the individual is usually dependant for survival.

What on earth does this mean? I don't think I'm more than usually incapable of comprehending basic information, but I'm damned if I can understand what you're trying to say here.

It's probably fair to say that generally the more a person is dependant upon or interacted in the community the more respect they will have for, and take care of the community.

Ah, excellent. I can pretty much get what you are saying here. However, I've never seen any evidence to prove this. Rather, my own observations have been that those who are the natural leaders in any community are those who keep it functional.
Those who are most dependent on community support, on the other hand, usually have the least capacity to contribute to whether or not it's functional.

Another aspect that you allude to is (the theory of) relativity as it involves and interacts with the theories and methodologies across all the physical sciences, since it's chemical reactions in the body that determine the physical actions of humans.

What? If you are suggesting that only 'chemical reactions in the body' determine actions, where do you get this notion from?
I'd suggest that much human behaviour stems from carefully thought out rational thinking.
Certainly the 'fight or flight' response is instinctive, but that is not an everyday response for most people.

And what does "the theory of relativity as it involves and interacts with the theories and methodologies across the physical sciences" actually mean, fergawdsake????

What is going on here, Whiskers?

I'm reminded of your thread a while ago about 'gobbledygook'.

 

[Whiskers]

Jeez, Whiskers, care to translate this into basic English?
What exactly is the 'leading end of the paradigm shift"?

Broadly: a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm

Essentially, a shift in common wisdom/practice/belief. Take human rights for example... people who worked to abolish the slave trade were in the leading edge of the paradym of the time, that believed Slavery was inhumane and ought to be abolished... simillarly with female rights and equal vote for blacks and women. The 'shift' recognises that the paradym is always changing/evolving.

Again, I need a translation to ordinary speak. Are you suggesting that without the 'bad stuff' e.g. looting , we would be unable, as communities, to survive because we would lack vigilance?

Not that we, or at least most of us would not be able to survive, but history shows that somewhere in the world someone (for numerous reasons) is always contemplating or engaging in agressively and or violently taking over someone or their community.

If so, that makes no sense. If there were not looting or other bad behaviour we would not be required to stand on guard with vigilance.

If you assume that the rest of the world has accepted your standards of better behaviour then you would drop your guard and vigilance.

Take Genghis Khan and Hitler for example. Both were exceptionally agressive and violent and caught the rest of the world off guard.

What on earth does this mean? I don't think I'm more than usually incapable of comprehending basic information, but I'm damned if I can understand what you're trying to say here.

Long before written rules and government, there was the family structure of animals including humans. There was an implied heirachy and rules understood by the 'Family' for survival and protection of the Family that has evolved to larger families, communities (through Humanity).

Ah, excellent. I can pretty much get what you are saying here. However, I've never seen any evidence to prove this. Rather, my own observations have been that those who are the natural leaders in any community are those who keep it functional.
Those who are most dependent on community support, on the other hand, usually have the least capacity to contribute to whether or not it's functional.

What? If you are suggesting that only 'chemical reactions in the body' determine actions, where do you get this notion from?
I'd suggest that much human behaviour stems from carefully thought out rational thinking.

It does, but that thought and our 'rational' (or not) thinking is performed by electochemical functions in the brain.

Certainly the 'fight or flight' response is instinctive, but that is not an everyday response for most people.

True, this is an extreme response, but usually triggered in an exceptional circumstances like a natural disaster like earthquakes, floods etc.

And what does "the theory of relativity as it involves and interacts with the theories and methodologies across the physical sciences" actually mean, fergawdsake????

What is going on here, Whiskers?

Yeah, that might have been a bit heavy. But essentially think 'relativity' generally and work up to Einsteins theory of relativity and all the interrelationships and implications on the thinking in all the sciences. Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity for a better overview.

I'm reminded of your thread a while ago about 'gobbledygook'.

:nono: Nah... weren't me... T'was our old mate, the late Explod.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20595&highlight=gobbledygook

 

[Whiskers]

:nono: Nah... weren't me... T'was our old mate, the late Explod.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20595&highlight=gobbledygook

Oops, sorry, I believe Explod is still with us. I was momentarily thinking of that other very talkative fella, the late 2020hindsight.