TED Conversations

Same AsIs

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Hypothetical assumption...

Regardless of accumulated assumptions, combined with study of the Earth, could it be possible that we are wrong in understanding ourselves.

Acknowledging that after thousands of years we still have no concrete answers yet carry the arrogance that would assume we do based on new assumptions.

Furthermore, if you could define the characteristics of a cancer, would one of them be ignorance?

Would the characteristics mimic mankind, self absorbed, self righteous, self denying, destructive to both itself and its environment (the only thing keeping it alive).

Would you define the assimilation of good cells to follow bad cells as a characteristic of humans convincing others to follow its ignorance?

If our vanity is correct, why are we accomplishing the opposite.

If knowledge explained that we are sheep, is that not true? And is that not a catalyst for failure?

Could we be the creators of the big bang's we teach ourselves about? And if so, how would we achieve this, could it be via the creation of black holes? And could this be achieved by awakening a dark matter which immediately begins to absorb with the vanity that we can control its actions?

And if we are this chemical reaction (thought) and did achieve our endless goals of being responsible for the expansion of the universe, would it include a explosion, pieces traveling through space (meteor showers) eventually landing on fertile soil and through evolution begin our journey carrying the knowledge that we descended from the dust of the last meteor which carried our genes to the next phase?

Would vanity be enough to block ourselves from acknowledging this?

And finally, if so, should we continue and therefore stop caring about hurting ourselves for the sake of its continuance, since the two appear to go hand in hand?

+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    Lejan . 30+

    • 0
    TED Translator
    Jan 1 2013: What is wrong with sheep? And why should they be a 'catalyst for failure'? We would do good to chew some grass, as it would finally add some higher purpose to our overall deeds ... hypothetically ... :o)

    • Same AsIs

      • 0
      Jan 1 2013: Less than 5 minutes ago: Nothing wrong with sheep themselves. For a human to imitate defines cowardliness and that fear is placed in us by those who dominate us. We were told to break free which is what a guy tried years ago to empower us to revolt instead of blindly follow into a self destruction which is what has happened and if anyone thinks we are doing good...they are confused...so a human being a sheep equals self destruction. Unless our leaders are not filthy self righteous pigs, maybe they are right 47% of the people should be eliminated?

      Interesting reply...what about the rest?
      • thumb

        Lejan . 30+

        • 0
        TED Translator
        Jan 2 2013: It is not any leaders fault, as any human has the choice to make up his own mind and to act upon it.

        The fact that human are destructive to themselves and their environment is no reason to generalize about them or even consider some of them to be eliminated. If you think this way, you may not be surprised if people choose not to listen to the whistle you are blowing, as you could be nothing but just another wolf in sheep's clothing.

        What do you do instead and in an appropriate manner to inform your own species about the changes which need to be done for their own sake?

        You got to win hearts instead of blaming them, if this change towards a better behavior is what you are wishing for; otherwise you are just another voice of pessimists who shout 'the end is near' since the beginning of our culture.

        So what is your plan and what will work to really change for a better?

        • Same AsIs

          • 0
          Jan 2 2013: Thanks, your absolutly right..the generalization is based on the calculation that all are one...we sit in this circle of one and point fingers at each other judging extremes, for an example using wealth, some who have a million want more and are called greedy by the one who has 100,000 and then there are those with none who think all are greedy...if we let individual opinion decide the truth we would never achieve an answer which is pretty much the way it is now...knowldge which as best that I can decipher is a view point from a third party claiming we are all the same so I do not argue and therefore it appears I generalize...by your words I am failing and I can understand why you say that so thank you...

          So what will change...the truth with out emotional opinion....i believe there is a truth and can be discovered by taking everything we know and putting it in place, as I never add I only interpret everything that has already been taught...or atleast that is my attempt...obviously on sites there is a huge need or desire to express which general excludes listening so I attempted to remove my explination and innitiate thought by asking questions but still that did not work...i thought people would read and attempt to discuss possibilities instead of looking only for similar ideas, those that will console them...so not sure what TED is all about...it appears loaded but not with those searching as I assumed...

          An example of this puzzle I put together is, evolution, metoer, man appears carrying the understanding it rose from the dust and talking big bangs and black holes...so my rational mind tells me we were on that meteor and where do meteors come from...big bangs and there just so happens to be evidence on the moon of a meteor shower the same time as the one that hit the earth and covered it in dust...as for the black hole I am led to believe is the catalyst with which we create big bangs and realize that it comes from messing with dark matt
      • thumb

        Lejan . 30+

        • 0
        TED Translator
        Jan 2 2013: I think we don't even need to fetch that far for dark matter, black holes or big bangs to know about the obvious for any species, not to destroy the very foundation of its existence. We don't need to know the reason or the origin of our being to act in our very interest, so the question remains, why and in general are we not changing our behavior of which we already know it isn't leading us to anything good.

        Yet as we all know, knowing about the right thing to do and finally doing it, is often a difficult task, sometimes to often, yet any day and all of us can finally start as soon as we feel ready for it.

        So I do not agree on your thought, that '..if we let individual opinion decide the truth we would never achieve an answer', as the basic answer how we should treat our environment, our very planet is already known. We 'just' not act accordingly, so to find any change the reasons why it is this way, would be key to solve our problem...

        • Same AsIs

          • 0
          Jan 3 2013: NOT SURE WHAT IS GOING ON BUT I MUST BE MISSING CONVERSATIONS, I SINGLED OUT ONE PERSON AS HELPING BUT AS I RE READ HE IS NOT ALONE I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR RESPONCE

          Even now as I read your words, in my mind I already answered it, but obviously I did not explain it. So now I am confused as to how to break down centuries of suppression and its side effects which to me are simple to understand.

          Take an individual who assumes leadership through violence, he accepts no responsibility for his actions and is completely self centered. Now this person is in charge of the distribution of knowledge. He teaches how to give, what the truth is regarding life, god and the earth. If his disciples do not agree they are abanduned or shunned.

          Now take another individual who assumes leadership through intelligence, he accepts the same authority but teaches the need to assume responsibility but does not change the rules created by the first (I refer to this as the band-aid effect). The ideals put in place regarding life, god and the earth are left as is because it helps to guarantee he remains in power as that is how and why they were written in the first place.

          So two different leaders, same world, one speaks against all backed by physical strength, the other a softer hand but speaking words of wisdom but not putting them into practice. Now as time moves on these self righteous rules of guidance hurt or exclude some of the people.

          Now all ignorance spawn by these actions. My challenge to anyone is to determine if it was out of design or naivety based hunger.

        • Same AsIs

          • 0
          Jan 3 2013: I can tell you this, all minds have stopped at the first interpretations and walked forward not challenging the first perceptions and then their determined reasoning's (the best example Aristotle when he created his "box of thought all was based on understanding before him which he combined with the obvious and wants (which today has become needs) (intelligence does resemble rumor)

          Although some have challenged one aspect of reason, that being God's existence (based on the manipulation of its description more so the reality of its existence), they unknowingly argued the naive description based on the origin of thought itself used to do the calculation (then as all things it became tarnished by the will of man).

          Note; although the study of God (earth) is a digression, ironically jumping back before man arrived but not assessing the characteristics of that first walk...and instead of redefining it, it challenged the description only.

          So before we go any further, you must digress to an evolutionary period of the origin of thought. Imagine thought without memory! Absolutely everything is new, similar to an unborn child except no guidance what so ever. Except for that which was observing us (pointing up to a God)with the message of creating this for us and choosing a group to lead, characteristics took care of the rest!

          Fear would have been the catalyst which generated or directed all reason...if you can achieve this observation you can walk forward with all the answers and you will conclude that the one that created us is not the one that gave us life and by its example defines love which we feel we are naturally apart of...but sadly we are not monkeys, we are an uninvited guest who was told when we landed and began to form...I unconditionally accept all (anything that lands on me stays)...but the inspirations (energy (spirit) that flows through) of knowledge was over rid by thought itself (walking away)...

          Clearer? You want answers...begin with a clean slate...

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.