Intoscience

Your responses have implied such, not me. I agree with you on the content part, people who are content tend to be at peace, those at peace tend not act negatively. What makes all people content?

Ok, thanks for your insight, I find this an interesting view point. So in essence lets not make any advancements because we can't verify the true outcome, and that there maybe adverse consequences that could potentially occur in the future. I would say that this is, if not more fallacious. I'll be sure to tell my friends that we are not going to potentially save their child with medical advancements just in case when she becomes an adult she might become a dictator and kill loads of people. If you invent a time machine and happen to go back to our primordial ancestors be sure to tell them to stick to the tree tops foraging for food in the forests. Better still, head right back to our single celled ancestors and convince them to stay singled celled because if not all hell will let loose. Why wouldn't they? Who decides when it is morally or otherwise ok to allow a male identifying as a female to use female facilities such as school girls changing areas? The male in question could argue that they identify as a female at any point they choose and should then instantly have the same rights as a female. Or is there a cooling off period where the person has to prove themselves or their intent. I have a problem with a male teacher, regardless of how they identify themselves being present in my daughter's changing area. I respect my daughter's privacy at home so why should I not expect that same respect from her teachers?

Ok, it seems we are describing the term greater good under differing definitions Even so we should continue to improve things for society in general. Agreed, some maybe all the above as you say, but I still see no reason why we should not continue our efforts, after all (Vat mentioned earlier) society is a complex and dynamic system that requires dynamic and diverse ideas to promote the "greater good", I think the aim should be to attempt to improve the wellbeing of all society members as the umbrella goal but the harsh reality is that all is most likely unachievable.

So what you are saying then, that there is not point in making any changes because the "greater good" (pleasing all people all of the time) cannot be achieved? So advancements in medicine should not continue because as a result you may save the life of a dictator who then might go on to kill more innocent people? I would argue that the greater good is what is determined by general consensus as a benefit for society as a whole. Giving all the minority groups equal opportunity amongst the majority is one for starters. Equal opportunity can benefit whole societies by creating diversity which otherwise would be missed. A child which would otherwise miss the opportunity of a good education may go on to be the next Einstein, this then benefits society as a whole in many ways, including morally.

A series of films staring Keanu Reeves

So you have no problem with a male teacher identifying as a female being present in a girls changing area?

Like I said no change is going to please all people all of the time. Change for improvement is about the greater good. (i'm sure dim will come back with "what is the greater good?") I'm assuming nothing. The parent was speaking in an audience environment in front of a panel of education board members. It wasn't some person spouting off to a news reporter or on social media. No one in the room contested her statement so one could argue that there was probably some element of truth in it. The point is, there are people out in the world who believe that this situation is acceptable since they truly believe the rights of the male teacher Identifying as a female trumps everything else. Just to clarify, I'm not from the USA and I don't have a political opinion on any other country outside of my own. +1

Ok, so this should go on the list of improvements - Equal opportunity for all. Maybe even the number 1 "best" thing for humanity. I could argue many but I don't have data to back any answer up, though I was asking you if there has been continuous improvement, and if there is....? I would probably argue that advancements in medicine, disease control etc... Which could be a sub section of the general "technological" advancements within the past 200 years.

I wouldn't say its "unanswerable" I would suggest that there is no one right answer. You are never going to achieve Utopia, that's an impossible goal and possibly fallible for all the reasons you have mentioned on this thread. But one should ask, is society a better place to live than it was 100/200/500 years ago? Cause if it is, and the general consensus is it is, then I would argue that we are continuingly improving things for humanity and have been doing so for years. What I fear is that this continuing improvement may plateau, and worse start to decline for all the wrong reasons. Then dimreeper is correct, and the question in this context is unanswerable. There can not really be any "one" thing, though one could argue extinction since it appears we are destroying the planet.

Not really is it. We can make predictions based on data and previous observations. The more data we have then the more likely the prediction is to be reasonably accurate. Yeah sure there is always the possibility of things occurring unexpectedly, there is sometimes that which we did not account for... The whole point of weather forecasting is to try and attempt to predict what we have to deal with in the future. Its not going to be 100% accurate, but over time the predictions become more successful, in part based on the data from previous reports where patterns can be ascertained. the further forward we want to forecast the less accurate the prediction is likely to be. But based on the historical data we can likely rule out certain situations. We have a fair bit of data and the results of previous actions in human history. So we should be able to ascertain to some acceptable degree the best course of action going forward. There is going to be a learning process even with this sure, also there maybe some sideways or backwards steps to take (re route) to get back on course. But doing nothing, or worse, heading too far off course is not moving forward. Well yeah, what is best for each individual is not going to be equal. But there are aspects that benefit all. For example a less violent society, a more effluent society, reduced disease in society... we can formulate a list that bears improvements for all, some more than others granted. But improvement for one at the cost of nothing to others can be said to be an improvement regardless. You can't please all the people all of the time.

Would certainly help towards reducing the obesity pandemic that is gripping the USA and many other "privileged" western cultures. I haven't a link, it was an example I saw where a parent was addressing the education board at a school in the USA. When an over corrective measure is used that introduces further issues without successfully addressing the cause of the original issue. Or when the original intent is misrepresented and used as a weapon for other agenda. Or when common sense goes out of the window and a society is left with confusing and conflicting ideas. Change is a great thing and should be encouraged, supported and implemented, provided the change improves. Funnily, I expected a similar response from you also, great minds and all that... I see no problem with correcting mistakes, learning from them and future prevention, that's my point.

Biased? I'm pointing out a fact not an opinion. If he wants to complain about something that only he himself can sort out then that's his prerogative. To your point about knowing better, well in part this might well be true since I have 35+ years extra experience in many things especially life lessons. Which doesn't mean i'm going to be correct, but I think this qualifies me somewhat. Reading through the thread I can see that any reply I make will be pointless anyhow. I'm basing my thinking on personal experience local to me. An example of extra privileges which is a real example experienced by a family member. My cousin, who works in a local hospital as a ward manager has been told by her senior managers that she must prioritise all ethnic minority patients so that the hospital can show that they are being inclusive and diverse. Wokeness gone overboard; A male sports instructor/coach who chooses to be identified as a female is given rights to enter the female changing room whilst young girls are changing. I have no problem with equal rights and equal opportunities and mending/learning from the atrocities that still go on and went on throughout history. But there has to surely be a line drawn when things are taken too far. That's fine so long as you don't steer too far the other way else you will still be off course. You have to ensure you actually get back to centre. So I will reiterate, I have no problem with steering the ship a little excessively to get back on course. I do however have a problem with steering too far.

Nowhere, This sounds absurd I know, but the hot dense state came into existence at the same time as spacetime and rapidly expanded, like really rapidly. Its hard for us to conceptualise something that is beyond our imagination and/or descriptions.

Good luck with that young padawan

Well we can test to see if telepathy is a thing or not. How do you test for a god? Now being a Jedi is definitely cool, where do I sign up?

What is almost infinite? Ok, that aside, it is not certain that there was "mass" in the way we understand it before 10-43 seconds after the inflation began. Also it is theorised that space and time came into existence at this point. Basically, it could be that the current laws came into existence also, which means we have no way of even beginning to understand prior to the BB if "prior" to even means anything in this context either. Definitely a head batterer!

Lol, yes of course I have reconstructed a persons voice when thinking of a phrase or other they have said which I have previously heard. But I have never had another voice conversing independently within my own mind. No, I just think it would be more plausible that a form of telepathy could be conducted between separate minds based something on the lines of em waves or similar since neurons in the brain fire electrical impulses. This seems much more plausible than the fantasy of an all powerful omnipotent being. My personal angel would be cool though.

Yes, Sorry, I was reinforcing your point but didn't make that clear.

The only voice I hear in my head is my own. If I found that another voice was present then I would seek medical help as I would most certainly be going insane or suffering with some form of mental illness. In fact I would sooner believe in telepathy over god as a more plausible supernatural explanation. If god exists and wishes to reveal him/her/itself to prove me wrong then fine I'm ok with that.

I would imagine that as you said there would be some consistent results influenced on what each religion prescribes god to be and also load of random made up answers that were influenced by personal experience. In which case the survey would be quite pointless. God has never spoken to me in any form, so until he/she/it does then I will remain skeptical at best. Then even then, if i started to hear voices other than my own, I would be looking to seek some psychological help to begin with.

What makes you assume I'm privileged? I have no problem with giving up any privilege if that means sharing with people less fortunate. The problem starts when those less privileged are empowered with extra privileges more than anyone else as compensation for the lack of previously. It just then becomes a vicious circle, where's the equality in that? Just to be clear before I get accused of being something else. I'am a white male (possibly privileged) my partner is a black female, my kids are mixed race. I'm more than aware of prejudices, especially racial. I haven't forced anyone to do anything, nor would I try. My son complains about something only he has the power to change. Go figure

If you want to survive you will be bothered to feed yourself, if not then you may have a different agenda, I guess. So if someone chooses not to act towards something that cannot be ignored and has no valid reason to do so, other than they "can't be bothered" , then what term would you use to describe this?

Ok thanks for clearing that up. If a system appeared by all attempts close enough to be conscious then is there any reason to assume it wasn't? How would you define which is and which isn't "conscious". Tricky I guess.

Well that's an easy argument to address since you have answered it in the description already. Just cause you are sitting on your arse not doing anything physical doesn't necessarily mean you are being lazy. Deep thinking is not being lazy, chilling out to re-energise is not being lazy. Being lazy is not doing something that needs to be done for no other reason than you can't be bothered.

You can easily program a machine/computer having discerning senses. It just takes some form of receptor / probe and then software. So it may not necessarily guarantee consciousness. However, the ability to "experience" may require a certain amount of perceptual input and indeed maybe a requirement for consciousness.