This is kind of my point. A long time ago we were taught white superiority, and we theorized about how brain size is related to intelligence. And eventually those were further researched and proven to be false. So science will continue to progress, and always continue to improve our understanding of ourselves, the world, and the universe. 
What do you guys know about participatory economics? I barely heard about this today :eek:
time to researchâŚ
No. It isnât your point. Iâm sure several people living at the time knew this was bogus bullshit, but it was still accepted as âvalid scienceâ, and it was FILLED with the opinion and biases of these so called scientists, proof that Science itself is not some bastion of objectivity, but is just as susceptible to the biases/prejudgements/outright hatred of its proponents.
Message received. Maybe you should have added some text other than just a picture response. I assumed it was a joke or a troll. Youâre right it has been used like that in a time when society as a whole (including the scientists) were a lot less intelligent.
You canât however neglect the fact that technology and science have greatly improved our quality of living. It is because of this ever increasing understanding of science, and the streamlining of technology that a lot of the things we take for granted in our current lives are even possible.
Science was created to solve problems. We can take our problems and apply the scientific method to them, and solve them scientifically. Through this way we can and will solve the energy crisis, the problems with climate change and limited resources, and the issue with the population.
I see your point, but what I was trying to say in the post was that a system based on science will do a much better job at solving our problems because it was designed to do so. A system based on a free market takes into account the variables of supply (resources, labor) and demand (consumer), but it doesnât take into account the harm it might cause (environmental, social, physical through creating products that are bad for the consumer). In order for this to happen it needs to be regulated, but under a small government or state governments this wouldnât work. Regulations wouldnât be uniform, and if they were companies would still break them to maximize profits if they can get away with it (going beyond limits, illegal disposal of waste, etc). Even under large governments it wouldnât work, because they would still lobby for their own agendas, or get politicians who are involved with the corporations and get away with things (and who wants to give more power to the government?).
The common problem is that in a capitalist system the goal is profit. If you take away the monetary aspect the goals would be efficiency (in production and use), sustainability, and eco-responsibility. It would also allow technological advances to be encouraged instead of being impeded (as per the current system).
Never seen that before. That pic is the holy grail for the idea that knowledge = power. Youâd have no way of knowing how bunk that idea was other than cracking open a nigga skull and finding out for yourself.
Today, we have no way of knowing half the truth on a lot of stuff without getting first hand knowledge in a similar fashion.
This, folks, is why hackers always win.
and the only way to prove that itâs bullshit?
is science.
Science isnât this all to be solution to problems. It will never be.
Remember that objectivity and logic canât solve all the issues we face as a species.
Yeah⌠them damn womens and their irrational behavior will make this a fact for eternity.
Wow, those RBE videosâŚimagine somebody presenting this to an actual forum of people.
RBE guy : âHere is an idea that will change civilization forever, end world hunger, unemployment, starvation, war, homelessness, poverty, and inefficiency.â
Public: âAre u kidding me? what is it?â
RBE guy: âTechnology.â
Public: âwhatâŚ?â
RBE guy: âWell, first you have to quit your jobs, and then somebody needs to build these big
circular future cities that also eliminate all our farmlands, and nobody
will have any money anymore, and everything you ever want to have or own, may or may not be provided to you based upon the decision of a large
computer or an elite, small ruling group of scientists that have total control over everything and live as gods.â
Public: "You know what? Sure. Lets do this. I hate my successful career that that I enjoy working
hard at every day, and that enables me to have whatever I
want in life. Where are the people pods? How does this work? How do we start this lifestyle?
RBE guy: âUhmm, well, tehnologyâŚâ
Public: âNo, really. I mean, lets how do we do this? Lets start this baby up!â
RBE guy: ::cough, cough:: ." TECHNOLOGY, OK!? Now please donate to this websiteâŚwe need
money to start our world of no moneyâŚ"
lol nice. Check out cooperative businesses models and parecon (participatory economics). I think that that would be the link between modern capitalism and a more advanced society (such as a RBE).
We are already being ruled by an elite group. The world is ruled by plutocratic corporatocracies. Basically we are ruled by people who have money. Iâd rather be ruled by a scientist than a dysfunctional, out of touch with reality politician or executive. But in a RBE we wouldnât be âruledâ by scientists, we wouldnât really be ruled by anyone. But maybe that is too scary of a thought.
TO ME a scary thought would be if War remains seen as a profitable business instead of a disaster. A scary thought to me would be that we would exploit our fellow human beings so that we can enjoy our lifestyle of over consumption, meanwhile the planetâs ecosystem is becoming less stable due to our waste.
And to me a scary thought is if we continue to do nothing, even with our knowledge of the problems that are affecting us. These arenât your parentâs environmental problems. These arenât your parents economic problems. Itâs getting worse, and thanks to our parents not doing anything the responsibility falls to us. We have less time than they did, and our minds are set in our irreversible ways. If we do nothing, the responsibility will be the next generations, with no way to reverse the damage done to our environment, and with a far greater population and even more troubles.
But letâs forget about everyone other than ourselves. All I know is that Iâm going to be making that bank 
Thatâs the only thing that matters in this life right?
/argument.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
Except not at all. Youâd be ruled by whatever entity controls the distribution of good.
No way man, we would be like, scientists and stuff, and people would be like totally over that, cause scientists are like, smart or something.
Can we just accept this RBE model fails to take into account any economic principals altogether? I find that hilarious when economy is in the model name btw.
nah, bank donât mean shit. Its all about that EGO. Bank means shit when I got the biggest EGO ever.
Seriously, if people let go of their ego, shit like the financial sector meltdown wouldnât have happened.
Its not any stupider than capitalism. The idea that you have to continuously consume like a fucking tumor, I mean come on. WTF is that shit?
I guess. I mean, you can have the freedom to buy and have whatever you want, or live on a jetsonâs dairy farm where a computer takes your job and tells you what you can have. Nothing about capitalism forces anybody to continuously consume either. I am not sure what you are talking about. You can buy or not buy whatever you want. .
âŚactually no. If people didnât need to buy, we wouldnât be bombarded with advertisements 24/7 to facilitate the over consumption. If we all donât buy, basically the economy will go down, like in the recession that we are still in. When the market crashed in '08 people lost a lot, and they were scared to spend.
Donât know if I agree. I also do not think it includes enough, eg Lobbyists.
Link to source, going to post it on facebook.
Found this: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/10-college-majors-lowest-unemployment-rates-163049193.html
I saw it on a friendâs facebook wallâŚ
Also good article, shows Computer Science has become more popular, leading to a higher un-employment rate:
http://graphicsweb.wsj.com/documents/NILF1111/#term=
I suppose the main character in Fight Club was an actuarial scientist.
capitilism forces you continuously consume. By not continuously consuming at an ridiculous pace the fear of economic meltdown is pushed hard by those who have power. If supply is constant how can you speculate, how can you generate money from nothing? By not consuming people lose jobs, money is lost, and chaos ensues, or so they say.
I should say, Our current model of capitalism isnât any more stupid than working for free.