I agree with the title at least. |
|
|
|
But they are related, the economic ideas of the movement were in the film.
But you're not talking about economic ideas, you're referring to religion. |
|
|
|
Why are you so obsessed with if ignoring it? It speaks volumes about the zeitgeist "movement" and it gives insight for the reasons behind the same movements belief in inchoate, childish and pre-scientific economic assertions
I think you are confusing the Zeitgeist film and the Zeitgeist Movement. They are separate things. |
|
|
|
Awaiting zeitgeist true believers addressing the fact that the zeitgeist film fabricated a majority of the first act
Why are you obsessed with an issue irrelevant to the topic being discussed? |
|
|
|
Belief is a tool.
This is true, but as with any tool, its effectiveness is only as good as reality allows it to be. I don't believe that the entirety of the universe can be crafted into a giant super computer, but this thought does not cause me to be angry, because I recognize that reality is incompatible with such a belief. |
|
|
|
When you use a pocket calculator to help solve a math problem, is the calculator controlling you? When you use a knife to chop vegetables, is the knife controlling you? When people are watching television, is the television controlling society?
They aren't. It's impossible for a machine to control society. It's an impossible cybernetic transformation. And since I also think that belief is a tool (the principle of chaos magic) I tell you this. Transhumanists think that machines should/will control society. They also think that machines will improve themselfes in the future and that the ultimate fate of the universe can be controlled by building a giant computer out of all matter and thus becoming god. I told you transhumanists are nutjobs... again do you believe any of those things above? Why are you against something that is, in your words, impossible? |
|
|
|
Primitivist Anarchist with Futurist influences. you're being ironic, right? Nope. I think we need a more tribal and nature connected society without hierarchic structures. And I think there are certain technologies which can help to archive that goal. But I am strictly against machines controlling society. When you use a pocket calculator to help solve a math problem, is the calculator controlling you? When you use a knife to chop vegetables, is the knife controlling you? When people are watching television, is the television controlling society? |
|
|
|
Not your associations, your professed beliefs. Someone that believes in leprechauns or a faked moon landing almost certainly lacks critical thinking skills.
Because the ideas of a society based on relevant education, life sustaining values and an actual economy are equivalent to a belief in leprechauns? No, people who can think for themselves can recognize bullshit. The entire first act of zeitgeist fim is just hilariously retarded fabrications that I instantly picked up on. Crucifixion wasn't invented when any of the ostensibly christ-like figures died. The fact that they were the product of virgin births is also just made up. None of them returned after three days, either. It instantly discredits itself. Also, repackaged planned economy doesn't work better than a non-repackaged planned economy And what is an "actual economy"? Again with the no-true-scotsman You seem to be confusing Zeitgeist the film with the Zeitgeist Movement. I suggest learning more about these two separate things. And what do you mean "think for themselves"? Everyone learned how to think, or not think, from their environment. The people, places, events and experiences that we all go through shape who we are and what we think. Most likely I have had different experiences and have been exposed to different ideas than you, and most likely we have different thought processes as a result. Do you assume automatically that your way of thinking is superior to mine? |
|
|
|
The false dichotomy makes an appearance too. I am in the midst of master debaters.
You didn't answer my question. Again: Do you consider yourself a transhumanist? I advocate using technology to help people to make a better society for everyone. |
|
|
|
Are you implying that reading is bad? |
|
|
|
Not your associations, your professed beliefs. Someone that believes in leprechauns or a faked moon landing almost certainly lacks critical thinking skills.
Because the ideas of a society based on relevant education, life sustaining values and an actual economy are equivalent to a belief in leprechauns? |
|
|
|
"I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project."
Well I now have reason to believe you are a person with weak critical thinking skills.
Because presuming guilt by association is the hallmark of those with critical thinking skills such as yourself. Not necessarily. The Venus Project are genuine transhumanist nutjobs. And you are either one too, or didn't realize the fact and are not educated enough to know what that actually means. They (the Venus Project people) aim for a system where an Artificial Intelligence is in control over society. I can give you plenty of arguments why this is fallacious but first I'd like to know which category you are in. (transhumanist or uneducated) The false dichotomy makes an appearance too. I am in the midst of master debaters. |
|
|
|
"I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project."
Well I now have reason to believe you are a person with weak critical thinking skills.
Because presuming guilt by association is the hallmark of those with critical thinking skills such as yourself. |
|
|
|
Money, not currency.
You used them alternatingly in your comments. Why don't you go ahead and make a case? I used them specifically and purposefully. Read it again. |
|
|
|
The Zeitgeist Documentary series is the most influential and profound documentary trilogy that I've ever seen. www.zeitgeistmovie.com |
|
|
|
There's tons of examples where currencies aren't government sanctions. Some American towns have their own town-unique currency that is just decided on by the people that use it, in an effort to "keep spending local". There have been many currencies that are just gold coins not minted by a government but universally accepted. Hell, in the video game Metro 2033 the currency is a common type of bullet, which is pretty ingenious since that has intrinsic utility to people and is very portable/divisible. Things being sanctioned or not sanctioned by the government doesn't make them currency or stop being currency. You'd have to lack some serious economic knowledge, historical context and imagination to believe that money can't exist without a state waving some wand.
Money, not currency. |
|
|
|
How can an efficient market exist without some level of government or force majeure deciding what the common unit of value is? And if there is none then it turns to barter of disparate goods/currencies
I'm puzzled by these two sentences. Why? And why? Opinions are arbitrary. Is that a Jedi mind trick?  An efficient market can exist without an enforced common unit of value, and I was puzzled because I don't know of any reason why it wouldn't work. Without enforced units, there is near zero friction in exchanging units of value. There is no reason to think it is less efficient. Consider the situation we already have with competing crypto-currencies. First, you should realize that the best one will always be dominant, without it being forced on anyone. This is precisely because nothing is forced, otherwise there would be more competition as we can observe in State issued currencies. Second, if there is a phase that market is undecided on what's best, on-the-fly conversion will always be possible, thanks to efficient currency exchange markets. Ultimately, most people will accept most currencies directly, and quickly get rid of the one they don't prefer by exchanging them instantly or nightly or whatever. Is there anything I'm missing in this picture? Your second sentence is confusing me because of the word "barter". But I suppose we'd agree in general. Money is a matter of opinion, absolutely true. I don't know what `opinions are arbitrary` means. And money doesn't imply State. What money isn't associated with a state of some sort? |
|
|
|
How can an efficient market exist without some level of government or force majeure deciding what the common unit of value is? And if there is none then it turns to barter of disparate goods/currencies
I'm puzzled by these two sentences. Why? And why? Opinions are arbitrary. |
|
|
|
|
The Texas Bitcoin Foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
