INTP's as World Solution scientists

[Birdsnest]

What I would like to see us do is put our INTP heads together and come up with world issue solutions. I think we could make an excellent team of solution finders for some of the Worlds problems. If Einstein could do it, why not us? This is a post for INTP's to suggest solutions to some world issues that they feel strongly about. If we get good enough, we could incorporate ourselves and be the only INTP worlds solution team. Aren't we supposed to be good at visualizing and finding solutions to things?

[Avengardh]

Make drugs legal, impose a high tax on them, use the money for something useful.

Do NOT let Bush back in office.

Become an unified nation.

Those are my ideas.

~*Aven*~

[adamjaskie]

Yeah, right now, get Bush out. I don't think Kerry will be much better, but I doubt he could be worse.

Make some drugs legal. I dunno about stuff like heroin, crack, LSD, etc, but MJ is pretty mild stuff from what I hear.

There is one thing that would probably solve all the world's problems (or a great majority of them). Make sure every kid has two loving, responsible parents at home. It probably is not going to happen, though.

[Division56]

Make drugs legal.

Stop making war with anything that moves and use the saved money to stop taxing anything that doesn't move.

Force the Senate and Congress to have an even age distribution. The country should be run by an equivilent of it's population.

Do not make it a distribution by race, because skin color means nothing. People should learn to ignore it more.

[file cabinet]

connect everyone to a machine and let robots rule the world.

[Google Monster]

lol some wild suggestions you guys have there. I just say stop f**king with the enviroment. Find better ways. Sure our planet is good at healing itself but parasites like us humans only slow that process. We should change our role from parasite into an anti-boitic. We all work together to make a better world would probaly make us better without us realizing.

[Jkrs]

Most of these are going to be thought out for the U.S., but could apply to most countries.

Birth control in the water supply. If you don't pass a class on how to care for a kid and have the means to do so (I'm sorry, but people living in homeless shelters have no business intending to raise a child in that environment) you don't get the blockers that allow you to become fertile. If something could be arranged for both genders it might also have an effect on how many parents per family there were, as a couple would be most likely to seek their permits &etc at the same time.

If it could be applied globally (not likely, but I'm speculating here) with the goal of lowering the world population, a less restrictive method might be to give everyone, no matter what their status or ability, the transferrable right to 3/4 of a child. That way you'll tend to get two parents per kid, and even the poorest will have something to sell to help raise it. People wanting more than one child will know up front that they'll have to make sacrifices for it.
[Addendum: Lower population also means higher wages, in terms of real money.]

Get rid of Bush. It'll make the world rather more peaceful.
Whoever is in after him should establish some kind of legitimate authority in Iraq, then move the U.S. forces out of there unless that authority asks them to stay. (The legitimacy factor will tend to reduce any attempts to make this a certainty.)

Legalise drugs, tax and regulate them heavily. The reduction in organised crime should allow for a reduction in spending on most forms of law enforcement.

No tax cuts for anyone with an income of more than $750k/year, ever. It's a surprisingly small proportion of the population, and they can afford it. That goes a fair way towards assorted underfunded government programs.


There's more where that came from. *grins*

[Division56]

Wow, if you were a leader, I'd have to assinate you...

[Johnny]

INTP'ers solving the world's problems? Dream on...

[Birdsnest]

Well, I guess you are right at that!

My idea is to have people or kids that could be in abusive situations have some type of device like a button on the wall they can push, or a phone or camera that is watching to alert police. There must be a way to 'invent' something that would help a lot of people that need police protection in that area. Unfortunately more often than not, the police tend to completely ignore this kind of thing which is awful.

I am dreaming, but you know, we need something like that. I think they already have cameras hiding in places most people do not realize though.

[SensEye]

I tend to agree with people who are thinking along the lines of population control.

I would think the main problems which will pose a serious threat to human kind are related to overpoplutation, exhaustion of the world's resources, destruction of the environment and the like.

There needs to be some sort of screening process before people are allowed to reproduce. Too many idiots out there breeding. Health care and socialism have taken Darwin out of play.

But even if a practical compulsory birth control solution was possible, people would never accept it. Even I have concerns about the "big brother" ramifications.

On the bright side, I should be long dead before the crisis hits. ;)

[Division56]

There needs to be some sort of screening process before people are allowed to reproduce. Too many idiots out there breeding. Health care and socialism have taken Darwin out of play.


the words of someone who's never been truly down on their luck...

[Claverhouse]

Quite; although no-one has ever accused me of socialistic sympathies, it may be worth saying that one reason for historical degeneration is that the unhealthy wealthy reproduce their degenerate off-spring in comfort whereas the hardy peasant poor had hunger, poverty and cramped conditions for their sometimes stronger or cleverer children. :ph34r:

Stupidity and idiotic beliefs have never been confined to the poorer sections of humanity.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[SensEye]

Well my intention is to promote zero population growth not really increasing humanity's genetic IQ.

I do not know how much genetics have to do with IQ. I quite agree poor people can have intelligent offspring and rich people not so intelligent offspring.

So not having any better criteria, I would suggest only when people have sufficient economic resources should they be allowed to have children. And nobody would be allowed more than two or three period. None of this six, eight, ten children stuff anymore regardless of wealth. This way at least the children would have access to proper food, shelter, health care and education so as to at least be given the chance to realize their potential.

But hey, I'm easy, you want fairness, how this: maximum 2 children per person, minimum age requirement of 28.

Anything would be better than the current "let the chips fall where they may" approach we have now in my opinion.

[Division56]

You guys are sending my inner need for independence and self-authority wild. We're supposed to be a non-controlling type?


Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and none of you should get anywhere near power...

[SensEye]

You guys are sending my inner need for independence and self-authority wild.

Your emotional inner needs are over ruling your ability to think rationally. Let's face it, human intellect has allowed us to overcome natural selection (I mean this in a "culling the herd" sense). We have to use our own self control to restrict our inherent tendency to over reproduce.

By the way, after further reflection, I like my unbiased 2 children with minimum age requirement approach the best. Those with insufficient economic resources can benefit from humanity's civilized nature and get handouts.

[Claverhouse]

You guys are sending my inner need for independence and self-authority wild.

Who, me ?


We're supposed to be a non-controlling type?

Who, me ?


Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and none of you should get anywhere near power...

Who, me ?



Claverhouse
:ph34r:

[Claverhouse]

But hey, I'm easy, you want fairness, how this: maximum 2 children per person, minimum age requirement of 28.


Won't work: the millions of third world poor will keep on having babies, and the first worlders, limiting their output, would be overrun.

Still, that's what's happening now

Anyway, for ideal health people should reproduce around 17 - 22, when the various components are freshest.. We are animals after all, and in the wild would be dead by 30. Back before civilisations they had to start as early as possible. Besides which the human body is at it's peak around 20, from about 22-23 it no longer grows but declines. Sad but true.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Division56]

You guys should note that in most first world countries the rate of repopulation is well under repopulation standards. Most of your theories would be irrelivant because it's already happening, and to a greater degree. It's the third world countries that need population control.

The most effective route would be mass distribution of a safe and effective birth control to the third world (i.e. water supplies and food) and then an antidote when they were ready to have children.

This could back-fire in so many ways it's not even funny though...

Your emotional inner needs are over ruling your ability to think rationally.

No they're not, I just don't trust any of you that much. And absolute power does currupt absolutely. Think of the power one would wield if they controlled the means for populations to reproduce. A there would be no stopping a genetic holocaust.

My advice to you is thus; if you don't know the past, it's free to repeat itself...



Free Inquiry magazine devoted their latest issue to this very problem. I recomend all of you pick up a copy.

[Claverhouse]

You guys should note that in most first world countries the rate of repopulation is well under repopulation standards. Most of your theories would be irrelivant because it's already happening, and to a greater degree. It's the third world countries that need population control.

That's what I was saying.


The most effective route would be mass distribution of a safe and effective birth control to the third world (i.e. water supplies and food) and then an antidote when they were ready to have children.

This could back-fire in so many ways it's not even funny though...

Already has. Ever heard of genderbending fish ?


. And absolute power does currupt absolutely.

Don't knock it, til you've tried it.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Division56]

I'm a mod, I know how power corrupts. ;) :lol:

[Vagabond]

Uhm, this thread has gone crazy... you guys are scaring me...

We should have left nature evolve as nature knows how to. We didn't do that, we messed too much with everything. So now the well-repeated circle will take place again, and may the next evolved species be wiser than us.

[Claverhouse]

We should have left nature evolve as nature knows how to. We didn't do that, we messed too much with everything.

We chose to build civilisation. :D But that leads to science, and science leads to controlling the basic elements and power over nature. It's a chance to create 100s of different hells. GM, vivisection, drugs, dying whales...



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[SensEye]

Just for clarity, I did not say I had a practical way to implement zero population growth, I am simply suggesting it is a problem that will eventually cause major problems if it is not dealt with sooner or later by humanity. I don't think the technology, or more importantly, the will to do it, is here yet.

Even achieving this goal would leave many problems. Our whole economy is currently based on consumerism, GDP growth, etc. In a zero population growth situation this would have to change. There would be much upheaval. Wealth distribution would tend to even out. I think this would be a good thing in the long run, but in the short run many powerful vested interests would vigorously oppose such an eventuality.

Besides, there are other issues such as crime, war, etc. These would not be eliminated (although possibly reduced) by zero population growth.

Please keep in mind the topic of the thread is INTP's as world solution scientests. I am simply speculating on what might be root causes of serious world problems and possible corrective measures.

No need for alarm Vagabond. :hello:

[int]

Education. Everyone needs a connection to Google (or some other world-wide search system) so they can find where they fit in this chaotic mess, to optimize their individuality. They'll probably learn about birth control, the environment, corruption, etc... given the opportunity. Most people just don't have the opportunity, and those that do often don't feel or think they fit...other issues come about at that point.

I think a bottom-up (look at the individual person) solution is far more appropriate and effective than a top-down (government) solution. That's not to say government doesn't have its place. I say, start putting people in positions they should be in, optimizing each of our individual brains, talents, personalities, and so on, and provide the proper resources for that person to grow. Give them the resources to educate themselves and I think we'll be far more productive. How is it that you know about birth control and it's uses in the first place?

And I know it's not without problems (conflict with the Church, for instance, on the use of birth control), but I've seen this mentality work in some Mexican border towns. A lot of American generosity and thought have gone into a couple projects that are remarkably effective. And inspiring (sorry I don't have a website).


I'm really surprised to read about cameras and the like here. Besides, if anyone comes into my home, trying to install cameras and crap, someone's going down before I'm hauled off to the looney bin and a thought suppressor is installed in my left ear. :blink:

[Vagabond]

Why wait (so long) for a new & wiser species? Let's assume that we all kill ourselves; this new species will have a random chance of springing into existence; it will progress in a random way; it may well repeat "mistakes" similar to ours. Nothing says it will grow wiser than our own potential.
If we kill ourselves in order to make things move a little faster, we would still be messing with the natural course of things; the next random species may as well repeat the same mistakes, which will lead to similar results, or just may not. I only said I hope it will not. I think it is too late to turn things back now as far as human interference is concerned; it would be possible to act in ways that we don't mess more with nature, but I think the human ambition is too high to go back, as well. So I really don't think there is much to do at this point.

Claverhouse: In no case am I against evolution - lol, how could I... however, I would be perfectly pleased (assuming I was a scientist) to discover/acquire new knowledge, any type of knowledge (bad knowledge and good knowledge are the most empty terms I have heard in my life - as if knowledge has conciousness' dilemmas :D); now, if the use of it could not be of assistence or would be destructive, I wouldn't use it. I would still go on trying to discover its depths, though, being totally happy with knowing how to do, as opposed to doing.

Senseye: No alarm is ringing over here. :hello:

[Claverhouse]

Claverhouse: In no case am I against evolution - lol, how could I... however, I would be perfectly pleased (assuming I was a scientist) to discover/acquire new knowledge, any type of knowledge (bad knowledge and good knowledge are the most empty terms I have heard in my life - as if knowledge has conciousness' dilemmas :D); now, if the use of it could not be of assistence or would be destructive, I wouldn't use it. I would still go on trying to discover its depths, though, being totally happy with knowing how to do, as opposed to doing.

Dunno if morality is allowed here, but I'd definitely say

a/ Knowledge, even if vastly valuable and saving of millions of lives, is not worth it, if to get it, one inflicts pain on someone or something who has not volunteered. No life has more value than another, in a neutral sense.


b/ Some knowledge is too dangerous for humans to know.

( You wouldn't really give a raving psychotic a ton of anthrax, would you... :D )


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Vagabond]

Lol, agreed :D Actually I was totally theoretical on this - there is no way that humankind would discover for the sake of discovery, leaving the acquired knowledge unused if it was not to be helpful in "good cause". I guess I was describing something utopic. If only we could set a distinction between knowing and doing - of course what you *do* should involve considering how you can leave everyone unharmed; simply *knowing* though doesn't hurt per se. But, like I said - the day humans will know for instance how to rule the world but choose not to, is a day that will never come...

(In other words: the INTP in me says "go for knowledge, it is harmless" - theory; the INTJ in me says "knowledge will be used for a purpose, so if the purpose is hurtful, better leave the knowldge indiscovered" - practice... or sth like that).

[sme_bro]

Alot of people think that the best idea would be to focus on helping the eco-system and earth ect, Why bother guys? what we should be doing is looking for ways to sustain ourselves for as a long time as possible at whatever cost it has on the environment.
The human race has obvious superiority over all other creatures simply because of our smarts that allowed us the greatest feat in evolutionary history that changed everything ever since-the tool! it was our smarts that selected us in the begining.
As it is we control pretty much the whole world, G.E. will help us further this by making the environments carrying capacity for humans slightly larger (as the agricultural and industrial revolutions did) issues we should be worrying about should all be based around the long term survival of our species, if it is in OUR best interests to save whales then we should, if it is not, then let them be culled, if it is our best interests to build cities on rainforest then for the greater good then we should.
And, in the end even if we did pollute the world and kill most of the wildlife...almost no matter what, new life will arise and it will all begin again...and perhaps chances are no intelligent life will spring up and it will continue for a long time with everything in its rightfull place unlike it is now.
The best solution is to put humans first-then work from that.

[Google Monster]

I don't know if the last reply is a joke or not but I disagree. First of all if you really wanted to put humans first then we should protect them from killing themselves. The Eco-system is an important part to humans long term survival. The trees and forest you want to cut down for cities help bring in what humans need called oxygen. More pollution means less oxygen and lower health which also lowers life span. Now all humans need is technology that helps the earth instead of harming it. And it is this superiority type of thinking that caused a lot of problems in the first place. Things change when these superior people just realize they are equal. It is this superiority type of thinking that enslaved many Africans, killed and massacred majority of the American Indians and genocide many Jews.

To ensure the survival of the human race we must ensure the stability of the earth.

[Birdsnest]

:o

[NGene]

Birth control in the water supply. If you don't pass a class on how to care for a kid and have the means to do so (I'm sorry, but people living in homeless shelters have no business intending to raise a child in that environment) you don't get the blockers that allow you to become fertile.

That's one of the best suggestions I've seen for a while. It should be applied globally.

Someone should also invent a substance that would make stupidity painful and put it in the water supply. That way greedy, selfish, or just plain stupid people wouldn't be able to do anything stupid because it would be too painful. That would, probably, end wars across the globe because war is the most useless, stupidest waste of money, resources, and human lives.

[Pati]

Anyone read any Sheri Tepper novels lately? It's all that testosterone runnning rampant that's the problem! LOL

[KentOhio]

Let's see... How to embetter the world:
1. Make everyone carry a concealed gun; there will be no crime if the person you want to commit the crime against can potentially kill you.
2. Install cameras on every street corner, to put fear into people considering breaking any laws.
3. Quaranteen everyone with HIV or a likewise incurable disease on an island where they cannot spread it to healthy people. We can ship supplies to them.
4. Make unified database of the world's fingerprints and DNA, to be accessable by law enforcement.
5. Plant more ocean kelp, which makes most of the world's oxygen
6. Establish colonies on Mars and give it an Earth-like atmosphere via plants and microbes.
7. Eliminate useless jobs, such as interior decorators, in order that humanity be better served.
8. Give everyone a personal computer with internet access.
9. Eliminate sports
10. Have a government-run dating service to find your most compatible match, putting an end to so much wasted effort on the part of the individual.
11. Have every country ruled by a council of 16, one for each MBTI type.

[Jkrs]

7. Eliminate useless jobs, such as interior decorators, in order that humanity be better served.

Interior decorators are useful, though. One of my friends is planning to become one, and I was surprised at the psych courses she'd need to take along with the art. The space you live in has an effect on your mind, and the task of the interior designer is to make that a pleasant thing.



Wow, if you were a leader, I'd have to assinate you...
*looks innocent* Who, me?
I've no intention of running anything, except perhaps a space station where I could turn off the air to those who displease me. :devil:



NGene: Thanks. I figured I'd start with the small problem though. ;)

[Claverhouse]

That would, probably, end wars across the globe because war is the most useless, stupidest waste of money, resources, and human lives.

Wars are rarely carried out by the stupid. Not even the last Saddamite war. And without war there would be no civilisation. I'm anti-most wars, but some are necessary for the greater good.

Besides which, endless peace is boring. :devil:


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Vagabond]

I wouldn't want a fixed perfect world where everyone behaves well out of fear. I can't even stand censorship, for crying out loud.

[Claverhouse]

Let's see... How to embetter the world:
1. Make everyone carry a concealed gun; there will be no crime if the person you want to commit the crime against can potentially kill you.
2. Install cameras on every street corner, to put fear into people considering breaking any laws.
3. Quaranteen everyone with HIV or a likewise incurable disease on an island where they cannot spread it to healthy people. We can ship supplies to them.
4. Make unified database of the world's fingerprints and DNA, to be accessable by law enforcement.
5. Plant more ocean kelp, which makes most of the world's oxygen
6. Establish colonies on Mars and give it an Earth-like atmosphere via plants and microbes.
7. Eliminate useless jobs, such as interior decorators, in order that humanity be better served.
8. Give everyone a personal computer with internet access.
9. Eliminate sports
10. Have a government-run dating service to find your most compatible match, putting an end to so much wasted effort on the part of the individual.
11. Have every country ruled by a council of 16, one for each MBTI type.

1. OK, good for a laugh.
2. No thanks. You some sort of fascist ?
3. I think the Swedes have already done this for a long time. I've met some Germans horrified at the cruelty. Probably technically right but inhumane, like leper colonies. Still...
4. See 2.
5. How ?
6. Sooner you than me.
7. Thats 60-70% of jobs. And believe me, the unemployed are not loved.
8. Not everyone can use a computer or wants to. No point in forcing people to rely on stuff they hate.
9. BRILLIANT At last something we can agree on.
10. Eeeeek. Bureaucratise Love ? Eeeeek. No.
11. No. Just because you had 16, one of each type, does not mean you would not have 16 idiots.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[int]

This thread makes me want to revert to my anarchist days. These "solutions" are making my ass twitch. It's very frightening.

[Division56]

I agree, most of you sound insane.

[sme_bro]

Odd One
Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:43 am Post subject:


I don't know if the last reply is a joke or not but I disagree. First of all if you really wanted to put humans first then we
should protect them from killing themselves. The Eco-system is an important part to humans long term survival. The trees
and forest you want to cut down for cities help bring in what humans need called oxygen. More pollution means less
oxygen and lower health which also lowers life span. Now all humans need is technology that helps the earth instead of
harming it. And it is this superiority type of thinking that caused a lot of problems in the first place. Things change when
these superior people just realize they are equal. It is this superiority type of thinking that enslaved many Africans, killed
and massacred majority of the American Indians and genocide many Jews.

To ensure the survival of the human race we must ensure the stability of the earth.
No no, i wasnt joking eve n tho i only base what i said on fact instead of feeling-if i were to consider the morality of what i said than i would decide that it is best to put the earth first.

"First of all if you really wanted to put humans first then we should protect them from killing themselves. The Eco-system is an important part to humans long term survival. The trees and forest you want to cut down for cities help bring in what humans need called oxygen.s"

Well, as i said, if it was in our best interest to save the trees than we should do it, there should be (and probably is) a group of people predicting the furure based on our impact and planning from that. As i said if it is what is in our best interest than we should go with it.

"More pollution means less oxygen and l ower health which also lowers life span."

You say this based on what? modern day results based on small time frames, 100s and even 1000s of years ago you were an old man/woman if you lived past 35, these days-dispite all the pollution these days we stil l manage to live well past what they expected, and even in third world countries it is higher than the average was then.
-makes you think...

" Now all humans need is technology that helps the earth instead of harming it. "

I agree, as long as we reap th e benifets and it is productive for us

"And it is this superiority type of thinking that caused a lot of problems in the first place. Things change when these superior people just realize they are equal. It is this superiority type of thinking that ensla ved many Africans, killed and massacred majority of the American Indians and genocide many Jews. "

Problems? sure there are problems, quiet alot i geuss...BUT... would you go back to life the way it was pre industry? let alone pre-agricultural.The only w ay to fully eliminate these probems of contemporary lfe such as pollution and the whales is to resort to life the way it was in the beggining days, for each creature on earth the natural way is for there to be a carrying capacity for all species, it is the amount of animals an environment can hold at its max.
Humans obayed this rule-untill the tool, which gave us an advantage-there was suddenly a tool to both defend ourselves and to hunt food more easily, but this was no major change.
Agriculture was the first big step, it meant there was suddenly a way to bringing the food to the people and that meant that woman could have more babies and populations could grow even more.
Industry has been the biggest step of all, if you take the time to look at a graph of how human populations have changed over the millenia you will notice that first it is around 1million people(or so, have to say it might be closer to 1billion but im fuzzy on that fact been a while since i saw it) then the graph rises as agriculture is developed and spread through all the tribes...then it drops breifly because of the black plague then a little while after that it suddenly beggins what looks like an unbelievable shoot upwards and does not stop (still hasnt)
so today we have 6 billion p eople-why? because of technology....there is also the fact that the population would be considerably smaller without technology in 3rd world countries because that led to western countries taking advantage and leaving them no choice but to multiply faster so that they can use the children on the farms they no longer own.
But
would you be willing to destroy all of that? all of history? all of the 5 or so billion humans extra that there are due to technology? just so that the animals could live in peace?

A nd even if that did miraculiously occur(as it could through various means) the few humans that were left would most likey re-kindle society and it would begin all over again.

So, if you want your animals to stay completely unaffected by us humans and con tinue life the way it was meant with no intelligant life at all than i suggest you think about elliminating all people.

"It is this superiority type of thinking that enslaved many Africans, killed and massacred majority of the American Indians and genocide many Jews. "

As for that, it was a matter of the morals and culture of those people-, perhaps people in the future will look back and say 'how did they ever think they could let the animals live unnaffected by us?" and then they will go and ride the G.E. transport elephant to the pre-historic G.E. animals of the past zoo and laugh at all the precious primates and other wacky creatures

(sorry for my spelling guys, i type without looking at screen ((its my fastest way)) so sometimes i miss a word here or there, and im on a crappy comp so i dont want to risk spell checking for fear it will freeze on me)

[/i](

[Utopmk]

If I ruled the world:
Promisquity would be a human duty.
Everyone would be wasted on Soma.
Babies born in test tubes.

Wait! That's a book.

[Claverhouse]

sme_bro

so sometimes i miss a word here or there, and im on a crappy comp so i dont want to risk spell checking for fear it will freeze on me)

Oh yes, yes, yes. Same here. Sometimes it freezes ( at least the input devices, not the still winking screen ), sometimes the cursor goes haywire & starts running by itself, opening stuff, and sometimes the Blue Screen of Death... *
:rant:


Claverhouse :ph34r:


* Once saw a fix where you could change the colour to white or red or green, etc.. Didn't stop you still getting it, but it was customised for you...

[paladinoflunaria]

Utopmk said:

If I ruled the world:
Promisquity would be a human duty.
Everyone would be wasted on Soma.
Babies born in test tubes.

Wait! Thats a book.

And a damn good one, too!

How's about this idea: stop trying to save the world- it's impossible. While it is good to want others to be happy, we all live for ourselves, not others. You can't ignore the truth of impermanence. All empires, even humanity, eventually come to an end. You can believe what you want, and you can test your limits by trying to last forever, but eventually all the walls crumble down. Think of it as playing an arcade game with impossibly high scores- scores that take infinite years of non-stop playing to achieve (remember that they still seem achievable, just very difficult to). Who here is still willing to waste their time, and many future generations' time trying to do something that stupid. Humanity has already managed to survive; that work is done. Now we must move on.

I will admit that I used to be motivated to help mankind, though.

[paladinoflunaria]

Embrace reality for what it is. It will change on its own, no need for your help. This will make life a great deal easier.

[giftedmadness@hotmail.com]

Sure our planet is good at healing itself but parasites like us humans only slow that process. .

Stop thinking of ourselves as parasites. Perhaps if everyone thought this......well, who cares. For people to think that is absurd. Go kill yourself or something.

[Claverhouse]

Go kill yourself or something.

I'm too grounded to try this, or cowardly or something; but I'm not sure this is the best advice to give on a board with a number of depressives about.
:ph34r: :D :D :rofl:



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[candela]

I hate it when people say we're messing with nature. Everything we do is natural behavior of human beings.

I guess you could say it's ridiculous to say that because then the word nature has no practical purpose, but I just always feel like people think they're somehow above nature.

I'm not going to get into the actual argument here. Ha ha.

[Vagabond]

I think we could mess with nature, if we were able to make sure we wouldn't disturb the general balance of it. But that's on the level of theory.

[paladinoflunaria]

Everything we do is natural behavior of human beings.

I agree with that. I'm just saying we should take it easy. Nature has been taking care of itself (it's impossible for it not to) by itself. Our reality is one we create, but it's much easier to observe and possibly understand than to try and change it.

"Why?" not "Why not?"

[Crazy]

My additions

Punish criminals instead of giving them everything. You murder, death. I don't care how you killed them or what you were on at the time. Self defense and war are the only reasons to kill. Drive a car drunk and kill someone, that's murder, time to sit in the last chair you ever sat in. You steal, you go to prison and work it off, plus the money it takes to keep you in prison, by stamping license plates and picking up trash off the side of the road. You rape someone, stand in line with the murderers. Embezlement, go work with the theives. Just to help pay thier stuff off, have them do arts and crafts in prison and sell it on E-bay. Fighting, the cop takes you and the other egressor to the county boxing ring and they charge admission.

Guns for everyone, but only after you take firearms safety courses.

Driving tests should be harder and include an obstacle course, which is to be completed every 5 years, and is federally mandated, not state madated.

More later....

[Birnam]

Crazy- nice.
The only problem I have is with the death sentences, kill a murderer and that person is gone. The possibilities for a miscarriage of justice is too high a risk. (although killing off people indiscriminately would lower the population :evil:).
to quote Tolkien-
Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For not even the very wise see all ends.

additions-

require everyone to spend time (possibly a year) in a rural setting- they would be doing work associated with food growth etc. consider this a part of taxes. The hopeful results would be increased working ethics, an understanding of our food economic system. Another result would be the realization of the fact that to eat, to survive we have to kill living things. in a rural setting much more than in the city there is much more 'real' death. I've lived in both settings and the differences are striking. When you have to kill your pig in order to survive the winter, that is when you realize there is more to hamburgers than the wrapper. (okay, obviously everyone knows that hamburgers come from cows, but the fact that some animal was killed in order to feed you doesn't always hit home.) This would help problems such as in Japanese youth violence thread.
As a bonus, the increased free labour would enable farmers to make a larger profit (or say the government pays them [the farmers] bed and board for their 'students' with the increased budget due to drug taxes ;))

discourage fertility drugs. If you can't reproduce- adopt. There are a large number of children without homes that need them. The same goes for same sex couples. (Which means laws need to be changed first- all the better).

I'd say limiting one child per person- natural birth would let the pressure off population growth. There would be a decrease as not everyone wants to have children at all. But in addition to that, allow theoretically unlimited adoptions to decrease the homeless children. (unlimited in that you can adopt as many as you can demonstratively take care of.) Also! the adoption laws need to be changed so that the natural parents have no claim whatsoever on their children after they have given them away. No visiting, no contact, not even knowing where they are.

Divide the schools in two- those who are anxious to learn and those who are not. (or maybe three, those who are learning because they are SJs and can't help wanting to do what they are told, those who do not want to learn, and those who do.) This would include universities- though divided more along the lines of those who are just trying to get a job and those who want to learn for its own sake (an INTP dream). These divisions could quite possibly be included in the same school. And I have no idea how the division would be made... It is quite obvious who goes where but those people might not agree. I suppose it would have to be a self defining system where the student chooses which classes to take- which are marketed to the different mind sets. Along with that the entire school system needs an extreme revamp- I'm not sure exactly how, but perhaps I'll take that to a new thread.

later...

[Crazy]

Allright, I'll take Gandalf's advice and let the slime of humanity live, but instead of death, torture, and 5 years of slavery to the family of the victim, if there is more than one victim, you better just forget ever being free again.

Mandatory 6 months on a farm, 6 months in a factory, 6 months in a slaughterhouse, and 6 months in a hospital. This is not applicable to the infirmed and handicapped, however, they have the option. Also, you have the option to buy out by joining the military, police force, or fire department for a term of no less than 2 years full time, or 4 years reserve/volunteer.

Adoptions will be heavily tax deductible, and all adoptions will have a 1 month trial period where a representative of the government will live in your home to observe how the child is treated, followed by 1 year of unscheduled, suprise visits/inspections.

I will be illegal to sue someone for idiotic reasons such as fast food making you fat, or coffee being "hot." All such lawsuits will be punished by a 10 year stupidity tax of 5% of all earnings and 1 year of civil education.

You must be given a two week notice before you are laid off. The employer must also find 3 job prospects for the laid off employee. Getting fired must be accompanied by a good reason.

Fast food places must sell all menu items all day. Breakfast only till 11:00 my ass. "I'm sorry, we can't make your cheeseburger because it's 10:45, but if you come back in 15 min......."

[HairlessBluetick]

I hate it when people say we're messing with nature. Everything we do is natural behavior of human beings.

I guess you could say it's ridiculous to say that because then the word nature has no practical purpose, but I just always feel like people think they're somehow above nature.

I'm not going to get into the actual argument here. Ha ha.

Oh my. "Natural" and "a good idea" are not equivalent. I HATE this argument. Murder and rape are also natural.

[Birnam]

stupidity tax- yes!!! that would discorage them, and make the government rich (because it would, of course, increase with every offence.)

[Wrath Mania]

Get rid of sports? Not as long as I'm around.

I agree with some sort of population control. And any suggestion about getting rid of Bush and not starting war with every animate object is good for me.

Make education more selective for the students once they get into their teen years. Teach them nessecary basics but let them choose the subjects that they want to further explore. That might work a lot better with Ns then with Ss.

[int]

Make education more selective for the students once they get into their teen years. Teach them nessecary basics but let them choose the subjects that they want to further explore. That might work a lot better with Ns then with Ss.

:)

And with it comes understanding of differences, no matter what the type (I've seen a few Js smacked upside the head once they get "out there."

Travel should be a tax writeoff - especially if you can justify your experiences as a learning process. The world is a trip, and the more one is out there the more one sees that premise. It makes one come back to the table with a different mindset - at least imo and ime.

Start letting the kids be who it is they want to be. All I've ever wanted is that ability...

[greenintp]

I think a major accomplishemnt would be reducing crime worldwide by even 50%.
Let me know when we get there and I will re-evaluate my goals.

[s]

Most INTP's are too unstable, unevolved, and detatched from reality to solve anything much less the world's problems.

[Google Monster]

INTP's might make a good Illuminati kind of group. If you play Dues Ex: Invisible wars you should know what i mean.

[s]

Yes, Illuminati group... quite possible. Count me in on that one. ;)

[Google Monster]

Now we just need to sub systems that contradict each other. while maintaining control over everyone.

[Boozer]

I only wanted to add to what Division said about overpopulation, education is the best form of birth control.

I'd like to see better healthcare, more public transportation, moving to alternative fuels faster, and a genuine concern for the environment. Also some loophole free campaign finance reform. And moving away from a two party system, perhaps with wieghted votes, for example nader then kerry then bush(ack). Also supporting anti-censorship sites that help the Chineese and others get past government firewalls.

[Ckyzxr]

Ok so this will come off as arrogant I'm sure, but I'm not good at delivering strong messages at times.

There's is only one poster here who is even REMOTELY in touch with the issues associated with trying to "solve the world's problems"...
Now please go back and read paladinoflunaria's posts in this thread.

I was surprised and a little shocked at some of the serious ideas being offered as solutions here. The "world's problems" CANNOT be "solved", they can only be changed. I understand some of us here are young and idealist and full of hope for humanity, but I beg you to go back to your mind and spend a large amount of time THINKING about the situation and find the ROOT CAUSE. A problem WILL NOT be solved until you can ELIMINATE the root cause.

I realize that this thread is not meant to be the definitive answer to the issues, but I'm unsettled that some of you are serious in your (mis)conceptions of what we are as a biological entity.

Now share with me what you have learned so I can expand my understandings.

:rant: Great......now you got me going. :D :D :blink:

[Birdsnest]

If you think of it in terms of taking a hundred or two hundred years to implement a change, and know anything realistic will take that long to implement, thats the only way it will work. Nobody has to implement anything immediately, but its not a bad idea to think about it because proposals like this could bring out a solution over the long run. No, there are no fast cures, but yes, if you implement something that is gradual and people hardly notice, that takes a decades it would probably work.

[INTrPosr]

Yeah, right now, get Bush out. I don't think Kerry will be much better, but I doubt he could be worse.

My sentiments exactly! Actually, since FDR was able to continue running for President to get us out of the depression and WWII, I am for Clinton being able to rerun until we can find something better.


There is one thing that would probably solve all the world's problems (or a great majority of them). Make sure every kid has two loving, responsible parents at home. It probably is not going to happen, though.

As a parent, I take my responsibilities very seriously. I was not ready for them, but they are MINE and it's up to me to facilitate becoming happy and productive in some way.[/quote]

Good points Adamjaskie :cheers:

[Claverhouse]

Actually, since FDR was able to continue running for President to get us out of the depression and WWII, I am for Clinton being able to rerun until we can find something better.


Shouldn't that be 'into' WWII ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[MacGuffin]

FDR didn't get us out of the depression. WWII did that.

[INTrPosr]

I would start simple by breaking up this oligarchy now in existence, and requiring that at least three to four poltical parties are on ballot each national election.

[INTrPosr]

Shouldn't that be 'into' WWII ?

Well since he was still in office until his death in 1945, I can assess that we would still have concluded four months later. But the point is, I think that when in crisis as this nation is, who gives a shit about term limits. Put the person in that will get us back on the straight and narrow. Mark my word, we will not be better off whomever steals this election.

[KentOhio]

I'm against term limits too

[Arcael]

Stop the war on personal freedom errr im sorry The War on Terrorism and The War on Drugs


No they're not, I just don't trust any of you that much. And absolute power does currupt absolutely. Think of the power one would wield if they controlled the means for populations to reproduce. A there would be no stopping a genetic holocaust.

agreed

[Tranzors]

INTP's might make a good Illuminati kind of group. If you play Dues Ex: Invisible wars you should know what i mean.

Yes they would. But an Illuminati type group seems more like a INTJ thing, because we're arrogant elitists.

[Nighthawk]

I would start simple by breaking up this oligarchy now in existence, and requiring that at least three to four poltical parties are on ballot each national election.

Not that I'm a supporter of the two party system, but take a look at the mess the Germans had with their multi-party system. The CDU and SPD each had about 40% of the votes, so the small 10% FPD party called a lot of the shots. They would side in a coalition with whomever catered to them. So 10% of the people decided who ran the show. Not sure if that is better or worse than what we have now. Maybe a "no coalitions" rule would help.

[Vicideus]

Haven't any of you guys seen that episode of The Simpsons where the Springfield chapter of Mensa took ever the running the town? Do I need to get Stephen Hawking's British rump in here to lay a smack-down? :)

[gypseymothlee]

[quote="sme_bro
"More pollution means less oxygen and l ower health which also lowers life span."

You say this based on what? [/quote]

Technically people who grow up in more polluted areas are more likely to develop health problems such as asthma.


I'd personally say that most problems work themselves out given enough time. If we keep the amount of pollutants controlled, the ozone will start to rebuild the hole in it in about 10-15 years.
Scientists have been working on a way to reproduce the whole process of turning organic matter into oil and other natural resources (thermal depolymerization), this also is a practical way to dispose of the bodies of diseased animals so they don't add to global health problems.
AIDS is a large problem, but mainly because half the people who have it, don't know that they do. The main problem with the spread of it in most third world countries is their health care system, which could be improved with a small amount of education and the regular donation of supplies, such as syringes. Harm reduction centers could be a useful addition to more cities.
Technically, it's cheaper as a whole to house someone in prison for life than to give them the death penalty. I have also met one person who was accused of murder, found guilty, and ten years later found innocent when more evidence was added to his case.
We could also have enough food for everyone in the world if we switched to a more vegetarian diet, but since I live in the Midwest where some people believe that chicken is a vegetable, I know this is unlikely to happen.

Well... that was fun. I haven't solved anything, and now my brain hurts.

[Dunearhp]

Eliminate party politics.

Declare war on Proxima Centauri. It will be good for the world economy, and there is noone there anyway.

Promote familial allegiance above political, religious or national allegiance. The difference between a brawl and a war is the size of the groups involved.

Execute anyone proposing methods to solve all the worlds problems.

Channel more funds into mak... :laser:

[Chaos Symphony]

Well, I happen to subscribe to the belief that humanity will never, /never/, fail to completely screw up any sort of system, whatever form it might take, given enough time. We seem to be an essentially chaotic sort of species... diversified in such a way that no single universal setup could ever manage to stabilize the entire array of dysfunctions we are prone to. And it seems to be absolutely vital to our survival too... If we did all fall under one yoke, the chaotic element would ensure that at some point, the whole damned thing would implode, and take most, if not all, of us with it. So I suppose the only thing to do is to keep adapting, scattering, diversifying... Some fates cruel, some fates kind, but the survival of the species overrules all. And the irony is that this sort of planning and work for improvement of the human condition is just another part of that whole bloody cycle...

(I've no idea if what I just said makes any sense, but I guess I'll put it out there anyway. Could it be worth something? Nah... Probably said before, said better, and thoroughly ignored by people sensible enough to be less fatalistic.)