Planetarion Forums

Kurashima · 23 May 2003, 20:26

Its funny, but walking down the street today, i noticed a guy in a wheelchair. Clearly , he has some form of mental or physical illness, but it didnt prevent him from trying to interact with those around him. And it set me thinking.

Nature is not kind.

Not every child will be born healthy

Genetics is not an exact science (yet?)

Darwin ..... well heres my point for discussion.

Are the mentally and physically disabled people of the world put there as a reminder by nature of the frailty of man, and as such, should we take care of them and learn from their uniqueness.

Or was Darwin right. Survival of the fittest. These people were born like this, and deserve nothing from us except to be shut away somewhere they can be neither seen nor heard.

Tzencath · 23 May 2003, 20:29

those people would probably be dead if it wasn't for human society helping them, it is the survival of the fittest, except we chose to help those who need it.

Dante Hicks · 23 May 2003, 20:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Are the mentally and physically disabled people of the world put there as a reminder by nature of the frailty of man

No.

Quote:

should we take care of them and learn from their uniqueness.

We should help humans out because I think it's our moral duty. Basically it's the right thing to do.

Quote:

Or was Darwin right. Survival of the fittest. These people were born like this, and deserve nothing from us except to be shut away somewhere they can be neither seen nor heard.

Darwin was right, but from memory I don't think he had much to say about gassing the disabled.

Rule #1 : Don't use the word "deserve" in any thread about evolution.

Proteus · 23 May 2003, 20:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Rule #1 : Don't use the word "deserve" in any thread about evolution.

I'm afraid that'll have to be Rule #2.

Rule #1 is "No-one on the internet is female".

queball · 23 May 2003, 20:47

We could learn from their uniqueness AND gas them. And provide jobs for hundreds of morticians.

LHC · 23 May 2003, 20:48

That would cost thousands of jobs for carers though.

queball · 23 May 2003, 20:49

Quote:

Originally posted by LHC
That would cost thousands of jobs for carers though.

Gas 'em.

inf · 23 May 2003, 20:52

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
We could learn from their uniqueness AND gas them. And provide jobs for hundreds of morticians.

and burn their bodies, providing a source of power for the masses!

Proteus · 23 May 2003, 20:56

If you're going to burn them, why would you want to waste gas?

JonnyBGood · 23 May 2003, 21:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
If you're going to burn them, why would you want to waste gas?

Their screams might distract us as we count their possessions?

Vermillion · 23 May 2003, 21:15

Something to consider: In a Modern western society, perhaps "The Fittest" is no longer defined by how fast you can run or how much you can lift. Perhaps many phsically disabled people may prove to be 'fitter' to survive in the New Economy than some perfectly healthy people...

W · 23 May 2003, 21:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Its funny, but walking down the street today, i noticed a guy in a wheelchair. Clearly , he has some form of mental or physical illness, but it didnt prevent him from trying to interact with those around him. And it set me thinking.

Nature is not kind.

Not every child will be born healthy

Genetics is not an exact science (yet?)

Darwin ..... well heres my point for discussion.

Are the mentally and physically disabled people of the world put there as a reminder by nature of the frailty of man, and as such, should we take care of them and learn from their uniqueness.

Or was Darwin right. Survival of the fittest. These people were born like this, and deserve nothing from us except to be shut away somewhere they can be neither seen nor heard.

I think anyone even considering either option is dead stupid.

Nodrog · 23 May 2003, 21:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Or was Darwin right. Survival of the fittest. These people were born like this, and deserve nothing from us except to be shut away somewhere they can be neither seen nor heard.

Evolution being true means that its wrong to help the disabled, just like gravity being true means that its morally wrong to fly in an aeroplane.

Freakozoid · 23 May 2003, 21:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
just like gravity being true means that its morally wrong to fly in an aeroplane.

What?

Cmdr_Cyrax · 23 May 2003, 22:35

How do you define physical or mental disability?

If you are short sighted for example, you could be classed as disabled, yet many people who need glasses contribute towards society as a whole.

If people you classify as disabled were killed to 'improve' our gene pool might we be losing other key beneficts to our society?

'Stephen Hawking' option.

pablissimo · 23 May 2003, 22:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Vermillion
Something to consider: In a Modern western society, perhaps "The Fittest" is no longer defined by how fast you can run or how much you can lift. Perhaps many phsically disabled people may prove to be 'fitter' to survive in the New Economy than some perfectly healthy people...

If they're that disabled they don't generally get to procreate.

'Darwin' still 'works'

Cmdr_Cyrax · 23 May 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by pablissimo
If they're that disabled they don't generally get to procreate.

'Darwin' still 'works'

Quote:

Originally posted by Cmdr_Cyrax
'Stephen Hawking' option.

pablissimo · 23 May 2003, 22:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Cmdr_Cyrax

Does he have kids?

And if so, note the use of the word 'Generally'

G_frog · 23 May 2003, 23:09

Healthiness is neither here nor there, Darwin was concerned with the very specific concept of fitness to the enviroment (most easily approximated by how many grandchildren an organism leaves).

Genetics is a very exact discipline.

And the last bit is just gibberish.

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 14:23

Hey guys, what's this 'understanding what I'm talking about' that I heard about?

Proteus · 24 May 2003, 14:31

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Hey guys, what's this 'understanding what I'm talking about' that I heard about?

It's the reason I haven't said anything in this thread except a query about burning people.

Sandsnake · 24 May 2003, 14:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Freakozoid
What?

meaning "irrelevant."

Physical evolution has gone a different route, some would argue that we've begun to "devolve" physically due to the evolutionary controls being artificially removied via technology. What does this have to do with how we should treat handicapped people? absolutely nothing.

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 14:52

But it's not "devolution" as it makes us more fit to exist in our environment.

That's like saying fish are a terribly badly adapted species because they can't live inside a sun.

Sandsnake · 24 May 2003, 14:56

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
But it's not "devolution" as it makes us more fit to exist in our environment.

That's like saying fish are a terribly badly adapted species because they can't live inside a sun.

that's why I said "some." The argument being that as a species, we are becoming less physically capable of survival and require technology to do so. Basically, the idea is that if we were to suddenly lose the technological aspect of our lives, most of us would be screwed. I'm not exactly sure how that would happen short of full-scale nuclear war, and then survival would be a very slim chance anyway.

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 15:01

I was just expanding the point.

queball · 24 May 2003, 15:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandsnake
that's why I said "some." The argument being that as a species, we are becoming less physically capable of survival and require technology to do so. Basically, the idea is that if we were to suddenly lose the technological aspect of our lives, most of us would be screwed. I'm not exactly sure how that would happen short of full-scale nuclear war, and then survival would be a very slim chance anyway.

Do you think the Romans or Egyptians thought their civilisation would collapse? For nuclear war all we need is one wacko with some well placed nukes, perhaps with a particularly violent religion. Technology could be lost easily, all you need is a few economic disasters and collapse of government, and subsequent mob rule. How can you be confident Western civilisation will still be around in a hundred years?

huh · 24 May 2003, 15:55

I think humans are generally becoming weaker and weaker physically.

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by huh
I think humans are generally becoming weaker and weaker physically.

It's because steroids are banned.

THE FOOLS

Nodrog · 24 May 2003, 17:06

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
Do you think the Romans or Egyptians thought their civilisation would collapse? For nuclear war all we need is one wacko with some well placed nukes, perhaps with a particularly violent religion. Technology could be lost easily, all you need is a few economic disasters and collapse of government, and subsequent mob rule. How can you be confident Western civilisation will still be around in a hundred years?

The more I think about it the more I become convinced that mass destruction of civilisation would benefit humanity tremendously in the long run, although it would kind of suck for me (and for anyone born within the next 300 years)

JonnyBGood · 24 May 2003, 17:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
The more I think about it the more I become convinced that mass destruction of civilisation would benefit humanity tremendously in the long run, although it would kind of suck for me (and for anyone born within the next 300 years)

I don't think I'd mind it that much. Assuming you lived through the initial plagues and lootings it'd be very interesting.

huh · 24 May 2003, 20:27

I think this possibility alone is enough to justify the arming of the civilian populace. And an attack on France, as they clearly have weapons of mass destruction capable of bringing about such a situation.

pablissimo · 24 May 2003, 20:28

Comedy 'Darwin was a schmuck' option.

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 20:30

Quote:

Originally posted by pablissimo
Comedy 'Darwin was a schmuck' option.

Yep.

Cmdr_Cyrax · 24 May 2003, 21:33

He had a funky beard tho

MrL_JaKiri · 24 May 2003, 21:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Cmdr_Cyrax
He had a funky beard tho

College man, as it happens.

Snurx · 24 May 2003, 22:58

Who cares anyways? Helping people is the nice alternative, why not? No matter if people are weaker, or smarter, or faster, or slower, if theyre born that way, or got there by accidents, lets help them.

All those fat, greedy ****ers that gets disabled because theyre stupid can rot in hell for all i care.

MrL_JaKiri · 25 May 2003, 13:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
Speaking to a couple of Germans they said how odd it was that this country has so many disabled people.
Probably due to the fact the MoD exsposed the UK to quite a bit og radiation in the 70's to 'see how we would react' incase we get attacked in that way. nice.

This thread's gone all urban myth on us.

sayonara · 25 May 2003, 15:35

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
This thread's gone all urban myth on us.

It started earlier than you think.