>suffering builds character>therefore we should increase the ammount of suffering
>>25182492Character is of dubious material value.
>>25182496Okay how about SOVL
>Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.-Romans 5: 3-5
>>25182547You'd love it in hell.
>>25182668If you're in Hell you're cut off from God, and therefore have no hope or joy.
>>25182730That's some fucked up psychological bullshit. Stop spreading verbal disease.
>>25182734Sorry, anon, you're drawn to the truth whether you want to be or not.
>>25182749Dollars to doughnuts you have never read the bible front to back
>>25182793You didn't dispute the passage he quoted at all.
>>25182492That's not what he said. He said that humans need to act in the world and achieve things in order to be fulfilled, and specifically we need to earn our material existence or else we go crazy, and this is clearly true. Give anyone infinite free time and nothing productive to do and he'll slip into addiction and become miserable. Uncle Ted was right about everything.
>>25182806Ackchually i really like that one. Not the original hell poster. This place is too dead and i have picked up the horrible habit of responding to random posts. Im not the only one. They need id tags but that would reveal how truly dead this place is.
I was more caught up on his argument later in the book that technology has a way of running away from us. That an automobile might have at one point been an innovative way to remove previous limitations on mobility and increase freedom of the user, but as time went on and it became adopted by more and more people, society became built around it. The features that made it a neat convenience suddenly made ut mandatory to have. The same goes for other technologies like the cellphone and internet. We have these things because its impossible to participate in society without them. We gain experience at the expense of freedom.
>>25182812Also, I think this probably is the reason behind the fermi paradox. That alien civilizations that fail to deindustrialize die a quick unforseen death, probably nukes. The truly long lived civilizations return to some neo-paleo-communism of some sort and become hostile to technology. That or maybe they are really advanced but dont talk to us because we aren't vegan.
What was his solution?Any country without tech will be taken over by one with tech. Eliminate all tech in the planet and it will evolve again. Literally you have to build a spaceship, find a new planet, and destroy your old tech if you want to live in a society without technology.
>>25182817Also even if you were on a planet with no tech, and you made laws enforcing no tech, would it not still be inevitable?
>>25182817It's not about laws or social convention. The idea is that the industrial technological system will inevitably collapse utterly, it will either collapse soon (less disaster) or later (horrible disaster), so we should do what we can to organize for the time when it is teetering on the edge so we can give it a push, exactly what that looks like is unknown, but it certainly won't be some country adopting laws that ban industrial tech. Ideally after this collapse the tech will be unable to be remade, possibly due to the lack of easy to access oil which is necessary for bootstrapping the entire tech society.
>>25182836>after this collapse the tech will be unable to be remade, possibly due to the lack of easy to access oil which is necessary for bootstrapping the entire tech society.Only in a fantasy world will technology not re-evolve (maybe slowly at first) after a collapse. Maybe a collapse will happen, but it will be temporary.
>>25182846Throughout history there was only a small area where industrial technology emerged, basically Europe. If Europe didn't have the precise historical and environmental conditions, it may not have emerged at all. It was far from inevitable. For example, if after the collapse the world has environmental conditions similar to Australia, then in all likelihood the world would consist of hunter-gathers, like the Aboriginals. They didn't create industrial technology because the conditions were not right.
>>25182852I disagree with your overall theory. At some point in some place some dickhead will creat industry wherever it is possible and spread it to places where it has not emerged. Unless we got struck by a world ending meteor first. Man has already done this many times through history. Agent Smith was correct.
>>25182867I should clarify what i meant was that man, consistently through history, spread tech and trade goods to places where it had not occurred or was not possible. It's what we do. We multiply and try to work smarter not harder.
>>25182730Actually Hell is God's love.
>>25182808So let's make everything unneccessarily complicated for ourselvesso we'll feel fulfilled from overcoming it.
