What kind of needs?

Like everyone has food, water, a roof above one’s head and receives the needed love?

> How do we make sense of a party that simultaneously proclaims itself pro-life, yet wants to remove roadblocks to capital punishment AND wants to flood the streets with guns?

Ontology, logic, epistemology, psychology, mindfulness/meditation, at least (these are more than enough to improve things substantially, were we to actually use them).

For example: here you are discussing several predictions about reality as if they are necessarily accurate descriptions of reality itself. It is possible to do otherwise, but it is not very popular. Even discussing the simple abstract phenomenon itself is typically very popular, if such a conversation is invoked from an object level instance like this, despite it being a philosophy forum (psychology forums are similar in my experience). Paradoxically, abstract discussion is often extremely popular, but only if the invocation of the topic is from an abstract perspective - then, people very often thoroughly enjoy discussing the phenomenon, including their personal shortcomings.

I'm thinking ChatGPT and AI in general will some day be very helpful with this issue as technologies improve.

A world where all our needs are met

But humanity without thought isn’t able to survive, is it?

How do you define a utopia though.

> Why can't political belief be a combination of all of the things they are referring to?

If you're asking literally, a shortlist of the root causes (imho):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curriculum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics (kind of joking on this one lol)

It's somewhat similar to why historic practices in medicine and science were so "obviously" (from our current perspective) wrong and primitive: we had not yet discovered how to do otherwise (in many different ways), though in this case it is not known whether it is possible to do otherwise in practice, even if it is possible in theory.

Sure, but I think that you’re discounting the probability of cybernetic augmentation allowing for the advent of a new human race capable of merging with AI. Of course some will die and fall to decadence and decay—but, still some will rise from those ashes towwrd even greater heights.

Isn’t the term acceptance more suitable? Also setting the limit is very active, isn’t it rather accepting one’s own limit? Also do you mean internal* crisis?

Bc ignorance is a extreme risky incomplete and therefore counterproductive form of peace to me. It also tends to make external crises worse.

Please keep in mind our first commenting rule:

> Read the Post Before You Reply

> Read/listen/watch the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

This subreddit is not in the business of one-liners, tangential anecdotes, or dank memes. Expect comment threads that break our rules to be removed. Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

We can reach it but we will rebel against it I think. As the only way to enjoy paradise is with out thought, the thing that makes us human

Because I don’t think our intelligence can expect a end of history reality. To sit in pleasure chair and nom our brains. We would become slugs, dogs as we broke them from wolves. And in the process decay human intelligence to a point we may lose sentience

Depends on how you define utopia. Utopia is a ideal, something perfect. Something that can’t be reached because humans aren’t perfect.

So I’d say no. Humanity and perfection are contradictory. There’ll be always some kind of struggle.

When I say ignorance I say you set a limit to the full grasp of reality. Because it’s kind of bleak really, we are in a endless void where we likely won’t no the reason for the existence. So best way to avoid external crisis is to piece meal that thought and enjoy a self created reality of the things to can learn and can understand. To the storm instead of battling it

Can you describe how or why you think that utopia-in-praxis would destroy us as a species?

How is peace ignorance tho? For some, rather many probably but not necessarily.

Not getting something you want might end up in frustration. Same for wanting peace. It is paradox to most bc humans are purpose oriented beings. I think the paradox only exist for those that believe you need to want peace to get it. If you regret you never reached the stoic ideal in the first place. Also you’ll never know if you’re going to regret, that’s why you should let go of thinking about it. Wanting to live is also a desire btw. To your second question, according to stoicism content comes from inside. External things, like the possibility to travel are never guaranteed and so is your peace.

Remember tho this is just an ideal.

Exactly why so many people are just frustrated, they feel themselves compelled to mold to the confines and package values of a party when the reality is the individual issues are what matter. I hate when people automatically label me a Dem or Rep or whatever when I answer my thoughts on an issue. No, that’s my thoughts on that issue, please don’t just assume “Ok that’s what Dems think so naturally all my other views line up with Dems”. It’s the inherent flaw of party politics is that there are only two “boxes” you are allowed to be in when there are in actuality innumerable combinations of stances one can have. In other words I think a lot of political frustration is that many people don’t feel well-represented by either of the two major political parties.

[removed]

[removed]

Ironic you'd say that whilst demonstrating your ego to the point you refuse to engage with my words only tyrannise them...

You would have to do a lot more work to prove those things are contradictory.

Regarding pro life, the GOP seems to be heavily weighting things being done TO a life, like abortion, relative to things happening as a result of inaction. I don't think that's obviously incoherent.

Regarding guns, they believe guns offer them a means to protect themselves and loved ones. People of diverse ideologies have recently lost trust in the police. Couple that with the fact that the police legally have no duty to protect you, and have qualified immunity when they do something wrong. Again, not obviously incoherent.

Well peace in life is just the ignorance of external crisis. Most struggle is the attempt to survive in the self made mode of existence. Once you truly take in you can only control so much if even that and reality is a mystery you can not truly understand you have two options, enter despair at your lack of knowledge to reason you exist or or continue onward in the pursuit to learn more. We all must bare a personal manifested Destiny but must realize it is manifested. You have nothing in the beginning and ending but you can find joy in this little while in the attempt to gain something.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Narcissism is really being overused these days 🙄