User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 46

  1. #11
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Well i dont see whats happening in small scale is a problem, its just the normal course of life and most imporant the balance is restored without there being any significant problems occuring outside the small scale changes since other animals only has an effect on one of few species. Also other animals dont really cause other species to get extincted, unless they are introduced to totally new environment, like people taking cats to new zealand to freely much on stupid slow animals amd having no natural enemies. But even in that case it doesent destroy the whole system and damage remains in micro-scale. Humans on the other hand destroy so many micro-scale systems that they start to have effect on larger scale. But humans dont only stop to that, they also destroy habitat from multiple species, destroy ozone layer that destroys habitat from many species etc etc. This is what i consider a problem. You disagreed with op because you saw an alteration of a single micro-scale system as a problem?
    Well I do agree that it's a problem for the planet earth, but I think that humans are subject to the same kind of negative feedback loop cycles...I'm not sure if we actually disagree?
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  2. #12
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Absolutely untrue. Any animal, if allowed, would exploit its environment to the largest available degree. Of course, for animals whose technology isn't as advanced as ours, the available degree is much lower, and thus negative feedback cycles are easier for us to see at a micro-scale. However, we're subject to exactly the same laws i.e. when one kind of resource becomes depleted, we cannot afford its extraction and usage, eventually famies spread and millions of humans die etc.
    +1. Didn't you take ecology in school? You know the classic problem of deer and wolves with oscilllating populations that are only relatively stable due to the predator/prey relationship? Without the wolves killing them, the deer literally eat everything in the forest and starve to death....and that actually happened, it wasn't just a theory, unless they lied to me in school.

    The real problem is not that we're "selfish" or whatever, it's that we don't have predators or anything else to keep our population in check.
    -end of thread-

  3. #13
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Well I do agree that it's a problem for the planet earth, but I think that humans are subject to the same kind of negative feedback loop cycles...I'm not sure if we actually disagree?
    Well i thinks its just that we have different definition on whats problem with this case.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  4. #14
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Or maybe you just feel like disagreeing
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  5. #15
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Or maybe @INTP is an idiot, considering that's the conclusion after reading nearly every single one of his posts.



  6. #16
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    +1. Didn't you take ecology in school? You know the classic problem of deer and wolves with oscilllating populations that are only relatively stable due to the predator/prey relationship? Without the wolves killing them, the deer literally eat everything in the forest and starve to death....and that actually happened, it wasn't just a theory, unless they lied to me in school.

    The real problem is not that we're "selfish" or whatever, it's that we don't have predators or anything else to keep our population in check.
    I didnt take ecology in school, but i have watched quite alot of documentaries on wild life. Also its pretty obvious that nature needs both predators and pray to maintain the balance.

    What comes to predators and humans. Its true that we dont have any animals that hunt us, but there are other stuff.
    First of all bacteria and viruses keep evolving as we try to find cures for them and i dont really see some major epidemies that would kill big part of the population as impossible, since we are kinda making the viruses and bacteria stronger by misusing antibiotics and what ever the virus medicines are called, making them immune to drugs.
    Then there is the weakening of our genes which comes with us being now able to pass on malfunctioning genes, this rarerily happen with other animals(except with some diseases).
    Also plenty of other stuff, like us recycling water that has estrogen from birth control pills, which raises the estrogen in males, making them to produce malcunctioning sperm, thus infertile(or lowering the chances of being able to make babies). Eating fatty and other foods that are unhealthy too much, which causes heart problems and obesiety(which makes those obese males and females less attractive to opposite sex, thus making it harder for them to reproduce). Computers create nerds that have harder time finding a partner and make babies and possibly die sooner due to health problems that come with lack of physical excercise. Etc etc, could go on all day.
    But still human population keeps growing, at least for now, dunno if we manage to create more problems on reproducing in the future that would make the population go down before we destroy the whole place and the population goes down due to lack of food.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #17
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Or maybe you just feel like disagreeing
    I dont disagree with you on this, we just work with different definitions. By your definition of what counts as a problem you are right.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #18
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    Or maybe @INTP is an idiot, considering that's the conclusion after reading nearly every single one of his posts.
    Or maybe you are just projecting :---DDDD
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #19
    sophiloist Kaizer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquarelle View Post
    Yeah, probably true, because we have the higher cognitive function to question our own existence.

    But, we're also the only animal that drinks milk beyond infancy, and from another species at that, so there you go.
    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Absolutely untrue. Any animal, if allowed, would exploit its environment to the largest available degree. Of course, for animals whose technology isn't as advanced as ours, the available degree is much lower, and thus negative feedback cycles are easier for us to see at a micro-scale. However, we're subject to exactly the same laws i.e. when one kind of resource becomes depleted, we cannot afford its extraction and usage, eventually famies spread and millions of humans die etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Well i dont see whats happening in small scale is a problem, its just the normal course of life and most imporant the balance is restored without there being any significant problems occuring outside the small scale changes since other animals only has an effect on one of few species. Also other animals dont really cause other species to get extincted, unless they are introduced to totally new environment, like people taking cats to new zealand to freely much on stupid slow animals amd having no natural enemies. But even in that case it doesent destroy the whole system and damage remains in micro-scale. Humans on the other hand destroy so many micro-scale systems that they start to have effect on larger scale. But humans dont only stop to that, they also destroy habitat from multiple species, destroy ozone layer that destroys habitat from many species etc etc. This is what i consider a problem. You disagreed with op because you saw an alteration of a single micro-scale system as a problem?
    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    Agreed.

    OP, I interpreted your post as more metaphysical than naturalistic. So in that vein I'd agree with @Aquarelle.
    agree with all of the above
    & was going to state something similar...

    the proverbial lion's share has a limit
    the greed in humanity means and manifests itself with larger claws & jaws accompanied by the insatiable appetite seemingly limited to human beings
    on the political structures & systems level, the same gets manifested where its a pyramid
    and on a global scale, the same thing gets manifested again where its a perpetuation of it and it looks like history has had pretty much the same thing happen even when there was a, relatively at least, extreme level of isolation of regions

    EDIT: Page 2 seemed to have appeared out of nowhere
    Last edited by Kaizer; 02-01-2012 at 09:55 AM. Reason: added comment
    The answer must be in the attempt
    avy url : natgeocreative Photo

  10. #20
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    I interpreted the statement to mean that mankind has an awareness of their own existence and thus can question the point of their existence and can experience existential anxiety (why do I exist? Does my existence really matter in the whole scheme of things?). Tied into this, I think is being aware of your own mortality and thus the termination of your existence.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




Similar Threads

  1. Which is the best pet for each type?
    By CitizenErased in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-23-2016, 04:47 PM
  2. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-13-2014, 12:46 AM
  3. The only way to defeat Terrorism is to ignore it
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 05-24-2010, 10:09 AM
  4. If you can increase the strength of only one letter, which letter would it be?
    By yenom in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 01-07-2010, 06:10 PM
  5. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-27-2007, 08:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO