[Guest]

WRITE YOUR OWN LAWS

I think it’s possible that we can resolve the whole peace issue by simply writing our own CODE. One that we and others can live by. If you have any suggestions as to what would be useful in a unilateral agreement reply to this post and maybe we can cut the world leaders a little slack and even make them redundant.

Lets formulate our own civilised code here, Then send it out to all the governments etc to dare to act.

I’ll pay the postage

[Guest]

we can all kill each other and use the blood of our victims to mark our territory

what? you said write our own laws

see why this isn't sound?

[Guest]

we can all kill each other and use the blood of our victims to mark our territory

what? you said write our own laws

see why this isn't sound?

Frankly no Ploper.. Lets have some input that CAN be used please. Why not pull it along in the right direction or offer advice - I can stand correction, not argument for agrguments sake..

The young want to know everything, the old forget everything and the others think they know everything.[i]

[Guest]

I think it’s possible that we can resolve the whole peace issue by simply writing our own CODE. One that we and others can live by. If you have any suggestions as to what would be useful in a unilateral agreement reply to this post and maybe we can cut the world leaders a little slack and even make them redundant.

I don't want to be a downer, since you seem to be genuine, but seriously, do you really think this would work, or even accomplish anything worthwhile in the process? Humans have been making and breaking laws for thousands of years. The best intentioned idealism is always cut down by the reality of human self-interest, greed, and pride. In a utopian world, socialist and communist ideals have a lot of promise, but we have plenty of experience to prove their inadequacies.

Read the charter of the United Nations if you want proof that a lofty code is not sufficient. Even when the governments over most of the Earth's population agree to a set of ideals, they prove incapable of accomplishing them. Not even close.

[Guest]

I don't want to be a downer, since you seem to be genuine, but seriously, do you really think this would work, or even accomplish anything worthwhile in the process?

I am genuine Duh Puck, I do think it will work. Needs input of ideas as well as debate.

Humans have been making and breaking laws for thousands of years.

SOME of the laws have been inadequate, same can de said of enforcement, apllication, motivation/demotivation etc.

Time to add OUR innput

The best intentioned idealism is always cut down by the reality of human self-interest, greed, and pride. In a utopian world, socialist and communist ideals have a lot of promise, but we have plenty of experience to prove their inadequacies.

Can relate to that statement. Idealism can be something to aim for but the goal post keep moving (subject to who's ideals/getting on the same page then finding a few missing words/translation/intention can over/under sell a point) Your point seems to ME that their inadaquacies need to be "improved" - Time to add to our own charter

Read the charter of the United Nations if you want proof that a lofty code is not sufficient. Even when the governments over most of the Earth's population agree to a set of ideals, they prove incapable of accomplishing them. Not even close.

Perhaps we need to ADD to THAT charter or pull it appart and reassemble it with our own bits added in, use some other charters too.

Why reinvent the wheel? - Just improve it!

It is a lot to ask but one suggestion can make adifference (when multiplied by billions)

Perhaps each suggestion could be seen as a vote!

Input = heading for soloution

no input = no soloution

SOME TIMES WE GO BACKWARDS BY STANDING STILL

[Guest]

the sad but simple truth is that no matter how hard we try, there will ALWAYS be people who won't follow the code

and they are the same people that don't follow govornment issued laws

this would be a useless idealism

[Guest]

the sad but simple truth is that no matter how hard we try, there will ALWAYS be people who won't follow the code

and they are the same people that don't follow govornment issued laws

this would be a useless idealism

Let's face it, anything we say and do on this forum is pretty inconsequential. If that's sufficient reason not to bother, why are you still logged in?

On the other hand, I don't think it's laws that are wrong, more the way society enforces them.

I reckon we should have a ratings system like what they use on ebay. That way when someone behaves unpleasantly, you can give them negative feedback. If that accumulates, the whole world will know they are a git.

[Guest]

Is it bad form to use 2 quotes on the same thread from different members - Let me know if it's not cricket.

From Ploper.... the sad but simple truth is that no matter how hard we try, there will ALWAYS be people who won't follow the code

and they are the same people that don't follow govornment issued laws

this would be a useless idealism

Not if we get it right - it's the application of laws that need attention too. As i see WE (the people) are not making the laws (cos we are not inputting)

Lots of people don't want to pay the parking tickets and similar fines - I think Tokyo has a very high penalty forsuch things £2k for parking not gonna pay or not gonna do it? ( Though millionaires will offend in these situations - then complain they are broke at a different level )

Let's face it, anything we say and do on this forum is pretty inconsequential

.

Sad we don't take ourselves seriously - don't know why I include me -must be tired!

On the other hand, I don't think it's laws that are wrong, more the way society enforces them.

Society shows us what we are - solitude tells us what we should be"

Can't rember who rote that (many moons ago in greek or latin)

Another one translated to ... The youth of today have no morals, dont listen to their parents blah blah blah!

just go to show nothing changes. So should we give up - No is my answer - dare to bother!

Maybe if we are successful there would be one less thing on the forum for the BRAINDENT to talk about God or bad depends on your point of view

[Guest]

Let's face it, anything we say and do on this forum is pretty inconsequential. If that's sufficient reason not to bother, why are you still logged in?

first of all, we've got that whole "new puzzles" section

which is the reason I signed up anyways

second, on the threads centered around debates, I do the ones that interest me

I do Religious debate for my own personal gain in knowledge, and to express what I allready know

I do War and Peace, because LIS asked a question, and I'd really like to answer it, and although I have, I now have to explain it VERY thouroughly, but that's not for me to continue talking about on this thread

but ON this thread, LIS seems to be aiming for something revolutionary

not gonna happen

[bonanova]

A while ago a brilliant scientist, a colleague, opined to me that in the face of widespread bad behavior, it would be a good thing if we could implant a microchip in everyone's brain - essentially removing personal choice regarding legal and moral behavior - and in that way make the situation better.

I thought for a moment and then asked him who would write the program.

Not me, thanks. My plate is pretty full guiding my own actions.

It's fun to think and discuss, tho ... interesting thread.

[Guest]

ON this thread, LIS seems to be aiming for something revolutionary

not gonna happen

All this and fortune telling too!

Are your predictions ever correct ! - I am not saying you are or not!

[Guest]

A while ago a brilliant scientist, a colleague, opined to me that in the face of widespread bad behavior, it would be a good thing if we could implant a microchip in everyone's brain - essentially removing personal choice regarding legal and moral behavior - and in that way make the situation better.

It's fun to think and discuss, tho ... interesting thread.

i-robot ??

Would one computer be able to deal with the relational data and auto response if it could work, would you need more than one, if so how many?

Mmm! big brother/madman/controlfreek as well as incorrect string/code error/upgrade incompatable/Beta testing etc

Even if used for gathering data only, would it be relatively useful if reliable hardware n software were available?

Difference between mad and eccentric is a matter of value ($) not opinion.

[Guest]

Just a thought - perhaps this would work better on a taxi / hairdresser site

They have all the answers it seems

[unreality]

Are you dissing our decision-making skills because not everyone here agrees with you? That's life, my friend

[Guest]

Are you dissing our decision-making skills because not everyone here agrees with you? That's life, my friend

1 - nope, am respecting all, hope to be friends to all !

2 - do you diss taxi drivers /hairdressers? - becareful you'll get a bad haircut and a note that a taxi driver won Mastermind

3 - getting different input on other forums (other languages) looks like the thinking process is slow here but may be perfection takes longer.

No life is totally wasted, one can always be a bad example.

[Guest]

Come on people! This is like revolution by committee. Where are the new laws? The world won't change at this rate, and we'll have to admit that Ploper was right all along (he's reading this with glee but can't post a reply because it will prove he's following this topic avidly despite professing not to be interested).

Well, I've made one suggestion. Here's another: Let's outlaw beards. Punishable by stoning I think. Nobody will oppose that because if they do we'll know they have a beard.

[unreality]

1 - nope, am respecting all, hope to be friends to all !

2 - do you diss taxi drivers /hairdressers? - becareful you'll get a bad haircut and a note that a taxi driver won Mastermind

3 - getting different input on other forums (other languages) looks like the thinking process is slow here but may be perfection takes longer.

No life is totally wasted, one can always be a bad example.

1- you basically said (in your earlier post) that taxi drivers and hairdressers have sharper minds than us quite possibly true, but dont deny what you said, it's not a bad thing, it's just your opinion

2- no I don't, thankyouverymuch... where did you pull that question from? lol

3- so our thinking process is slow...? And you say this when you've had many replies to your topic. We are in the second page already. What you mean is that it is slow as people side with you, because as Ploper and Octopuppy have said, such a "code" isn't real or practical or even possible. I understand you're trying to MAKE it real. But it's not practical nor is it possible. Nobody will constantly follow their own "code"... unless their code is "you can do whatever the hell you want" which is what most people would do. Or what about people making BAD codes? Like "my code is to set fire to thai food places, cuz they're hot" I suggest you think things completely over by yourself before opening them to mass input on the internet, just a suggestion though

[Guest]

- What you mean is that it is slow as people side with you, because as Ploper and Octopuppy have said, such a "code" isn't real or practical or even possible. I understand you're trying to MAKE it real. But it's not practical nor is it possible. Nobody will constantly follow their own "code"... unless their code is "you can do whatever the hell you want" which is what most people would do. Or what about people making BAD codes? Like "my code is to set fire to thai food places, cuz they're hot"

Mind reading Unreality - "what I mean"... yes (I think) it is slow, maybe I'm impatient, not asking anyone to be on my side - just looking for quality input based on others agree/confirming with their replies

Unviversaly accepted code - Is a chance to make a diference.

I think it's great that there are some sureal suggestions, Ploper's first remark put a smile on my face.

I suggest you think things completely over by yourself before opening them to mass input on the internet, just a suggestion though

Thinking by myself - Mmmm!

I don't mind correction - is the topic flawed?

"Welcome what you can't avoid."

[Guest]

I believe that your 'CODE' was started on the assumption that man is basically good and that society creates the evil. If that was true, than all we have to do is make this 'CODE' but personally, I don't think that man is basically good. I think that you would need to prove that man is basically good or that man is perfectible before we can make this 'CODE' with a good conscience.

[Guest]

I don't think that man is basically good. I think that you would need to prove that man is basically good or that man is perfectible before we can make this 'CODE' with a good conscience.

You could be right bociniki, so your not good ????

My thought was that given the option, will people chose goog or bad, there seems to be enough good to keep us from finnishing off the human race , perhaps we are perfectable - are we civilsed enough yet? Are we reacting to a chemical inbalance and/or mental inbalance (which of course may be chemical too)?

Perhaps in my old age I am producing less chemcals that make me react angrily, that with a few experiences that perhapd make me think first.

I look forward to goverment spending on Education and happiness rather than destruction/defense!

[Guest]

No I am not good. I can try all I want to be patient or not to get angry but it doesn't work to well unless God helps me out.

[Guest]

No I am not good. I can try all I want to be patient or not to get angry but it doesn't work to well unless God helps me out.

Sorry to hear you're evil, bociniki, still I suppose it takes all sorts. I'm with Lost in Space on this one. There are lots of things that make people do bad things, but that doesn't mean that people are bad.

If we could get rid of fear, ignorance, want, religion and intolerance and create a more self-aware society in which people learned to understand their own desires and other feelings, we would see that people are basically good. Of course that was a very big "if", but the point is that these are social problems. My experiences have taught me that bad actions usually have a specific cause, and that the default mode of behaviour for human beings is to be reasonably good to one another. We all want to be happy, and trying to achieve that at someone else's expense is a bad strategy.

[Guest]

Thanks O

Have to point out that religion is often a motivating factor and a way of validating why they exist as well for many people.

Would suit me if there were no religions.

Nearst I have found suitable is Zen and Bhudism, mostly for meditation

Guess I'll stick with pranayama for now

Don't forget to breath... inhale slowly, exhale slowly and

R

E

L

A

X

.

.

.

Z

z

z

z

!

[Guest]

Sorry to hear you're evil, bociniki, still I suppose it takes all sorts. I'm with Lost in Space on this one. There are lots of things that make people do bad things, but that doesn't mean that people are bad.

If we could get rid of fear, ignorance, want, religion and intolerance and create a more self-aware society in which people learned to understand their own desires and other feelings, we would see that people are basically good.

I think I understand where bociniki is coming from. If you believe the Bible, which doesn't seem to be much in vogue these days, then there's a basis for believing that man, in a fallen, sinful condition, is inherently inclined to do what is wrong. According to Genesis 8:21, "the inclination of the heart of man is bad from his youth up." I don't think this is the same as saying that we are inherently bad, but rather that we have a natural inclination to act selfishly (for evidence, just watch the selfish behavior of infants). However, regardless of religious belief, most people are inclined to recognize the benefit of moral guidance and an altruistic interest in the welfare of others, so we have a counter-balance to inborn desire. Will man, as a whole, ever achieve a world where every member of society agrees to live by a unified code, even when it is not directly in their own best interest? I think such a society is possible, and is exactly what God originally intended, but I don't think it will happen without divine intervention. While people may not be completely "bad," there will always be a conflict between self-interest and altruism, and as long as our natural inclination is to act selfishly, there will never be a utopian solution.

[Guest]

be nice to each other- respect each other, treat others like your treated, ........... work as one- not use money as power use life.

[Guest]

My replies in bold - LIS

If you believe the Bible, which doesn't seem to be much in vogue these days,

(Due to lack of conviction/evidenceo/other perhaps),...

then there's a basis for believing that man, in a fallen, sinful condition, is inherently inclined to do what is wrong.(Could be or cld be not…. latent, inherent, chemical or other(s) .. I think that’s not fully proven)

According to Genesis 8:21, "the inclination of the heart of man is bad from his youth up." I don't think this is the same as saying that we are inherently bad, but rather that we have a natural inclination to act selfishly (for evidence, just watch the selfish behavior of infants).(Infants and youth are two different things and misguidance does not help. Also indoctrination may raise doubts as opposed to enlightening when curious)

However, regardless of religious belief, most people are inclined to recognize the benefit of moral guidance and an altruistic interest in the welfare of others, so we have a counter-balance to inborn desire (generally - we are hoping to improve ourselves is how I am reading this)

Will man, as a whole, ever achieve a world where every member of society agrees to live by a unified code, even when it is not directly in their own best interest? I think such a society is possible (so do you have any additions to the code?), and is exactly what God originally intended, but I don't think it will happen without divine intervention(You could include 6 - 10 commandments - that was divine intervention) While people may not be completely "bad," there will always be a conflict between self-interest and altruism, and as long as our natural inclination is to act selfishly, there will never be a utopian solution.

ALL the bold type is my opinion. Note that I am a lay man when it comes to religious and mental health issues. In other words, I am not the final say in any of this. LIS

Re last paragraph.......

I think such a society is possible,

and as long as our natural inclination is to act selfishly, there will never be a utopian solution.

The two above conflict, can you clarify?

I trying not to be picky, beliefs/religion will have a degree of effect, but the point is apart from arguments, is there a chance this code does not exist on this forum - apathy or lack of commitment to a subject that is perhaps too debateable - have more say make a difference if you or anybody wants.

Just because I don't have a belief I am not saying that it should simply be exclude - more of a case that it is at the moment likely to cause conflict to include them in a followable code. Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps there is a way to include it but I personally don't see it.