Humans building skyscrapers is as natural as birds making nests. How did he miss this?

File: 84 KB, 600x749, ted.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:37:59 2023 No.21750490 [Reply] [Original]

Humans building skyscrapers is as natural as birds making nests.

How did he miss this?

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:43:27 2023 No.21750512
File: 5 KB, 316x159, images (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21750490
Inceldom shrinks one's brain and especially one's capacity to be easy going. Just try to visualise the difference in wellbeing beetween a sex haver and an incel. The sex haver will slap his knee cry laughing, the incel will grab his shoulders and hunch and make a grumpy face as if you took his pacifier away.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:43:56 2023 No.21750514 >>21750490 Fun fact: if you can't build it on your own then it's a product of modernity

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:50:00 2023 No.21750538 >>21750514 A bird can't build a nest on its own. At minimum it needs the assistance of other plant life, and at maximum it has to rely on the products of other organisms interactions with the ecosystem in order to build its nest. Are birds modernist?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:53:00 2023 No.21750554 >>21750490 No, humans building houses is as natural as birds making nests. Nests = homes. Skyscrapers = modern Jewy shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:53:24 2023 No.21750556 >>21750514 You sound like a reactionary single celled organism that resents species that sexually reproduce.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:54:41 2023 No.21750561 >>21750554 So where does a house get too tall to be "natural'? Adding a second story? Are attics unnatural? Are castles and churches? Show where the cutoff point it

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 19:55:54 2023 No.21750565 >>21750514 >the pyramids are modern

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:02:58 2023 No.21750586 >>21750561 Not only that, once you've shown the cut-off point, enlighten us with the justification for that cut-off point. Is it really a matter of ecology, or simply a matter of aesthetics?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:11:28 2023 No.21750601 >>21750490 He doesn't care if people build skyscrapers. He has nothing against any individual technology (with basic exceptions like nuclear warheads or PCBs etc). Do you niggers even read?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:14:08 2023 No.21750607 >>21750601 Skyscraper here being a symbolic stand-in for all of industrial society of course. The point still stands.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:15:58 2023 No.21750613 Skyscrapers should be demolished the moment people start jumping off of them. Technology is supposed to serve life, not the other way around

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:16:06 2023 No.21750614 >>21750565 yes, they are a product of agricultural revolution and its consequences

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:21:32 2023 No.21750644 >>21750514 What?

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:21:43 2023 No.21750645

>>21750613
We should also get rid of all vehicles since some have used them to commit suicide. While we're at it, let's get rid of knives, guns, and rope. Oh, and don't forget prescription medications. Some people hang themselves from trees, better cut all of those down.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:23:20 2023 No.21750656

>>21750607
Industrial society is not "a nest" but a nearly literal organism that is competing with humanity for dominance. I guess you could say it is natural for humans to be cells in a superorganism (as the individual cells of slime mold are independent organisms) but this is not the same.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:24:46 2023 No.21750662 >>21750561 >>21750586 It’s about purpose. A house is the home of the nuclear family. It’s a natural habitat. A skyscraper is excess. News stations, banking corporations, tech start-ups, deluxe housing, etc.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:26:53 2023 No.21750674 >>21750512 Kill yourself faggot

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:28:49 2023 No.21750681 >>21750674 Low IQ post.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:33:23 2023 No.21750696 >>21750645 Nails and teeth are sharp too how do we go about it? Or muscles?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:33:51 2023 No.21750699 >>21750662 the nuclear family is a very modern invention though

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:35:35 2023 No.21750707 >>21750645 Techology isn't a living object. If a human bites the dust because of something dead, that's intrinsically bad. A tree is a living thing, so even if a tree falls on someone, another one will take its place. Life will go on

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:37:13 2023 No.21750711 >>21750699 The extended family also, then. In any case a same-blooded “tribe”.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:42:12 2023 No.21750738

>>21750699
>>21750696
>>21750662
>>21750707
This is not the point tho tedfags. The problem is industrial society as a construct that competes for dominance over the fate of humanity and which has the ability to entirely replace and destroy human beings.
You CAN construe this as entirely natural. Some transhumanists say the obsolescence and peaceful extinction of humanity due to births being unnecessary is merely a step in the evolution of human beings (or other such things). But this is highly degrading and if you believe it's fine that's because your values are different and you can't convince a tedfag that it's great for humans to be cogs in a machine.
>>21750699
It's not a recent invention. It's been around since time immemorial, with some exceptions (primarily polygyny in the form of high-status males having hundreds of concubines and low status ones having a single wife).

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:45:53 2023 No.21750753 If an isolated tribe built a skyscraper he would have no issue. However, the skyscraper as an expression of the technological system is different.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:48:35 2023 No.21750763 >>21750514 Conservatives are so fucking stupid man, literally the most shit for brains you will ever meet

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:52:04 2023 No.21750773

>>21750738
A better way to put it is that the technologies we are seeing today (those that are dependent on industrial society to manufacture) are the extensions of a separate organism (as >>21750753 said) that is competing with human beings. The war against industrial society (which really needs a more personal name like Leviathan or Basilisk) is completely natural. It is a battle between human beings and a runaway creation.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:54:44 2023 No.21750782
File: 931 KB, 1920x1152, bowerbird nest.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21750662
Nature is not frugal. The bowerbird makes elaborate and resource intensive nests to show off. Many predators kill more then they need to eat. Your notion of "excess" is no more than a personal value judgement.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:56:05 2023 No.21750789 >>21750490 As soon as you have distribution of labor and specialist skills, it's too much technology. Pretty simple distinction.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:56:54 2023 No.21750792 >>21750782 That photo but with the caption “Let me guess, you ‘need’ more”

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:57:16 2023 No.21750794

>>21750738
>The problem is industrial society as a construct that competes for dominance over the fate of humanity and which has the ability to entirely replace and destroy human beings.
>You CAN construe this as entirely natural. Some transhumanists say the obsolescence and peaceful extinction of humanity due to births being unnecessary is merely a step in the evolution of human beings (or other such things). But this is highly degrading and if you believe it's fine that's because your values are different and you can't convince a tedfag that it's great for humans to be cogs in a machine.
Portraying NeoLuddites are radical humanists makes sense desu. Also sounds appealing to the masses potentially.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:57:27 2023 No.21750795 >>21750789 That's going to hunter gatherer-primitivism. Not bad, definitely the ideal, but unrealistic now.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:59:08 2023 No.21750801 >>21750490 Skyscrapers aren't necessary to human survival in a hunter gather sense. Do you think before you open you mouth?

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:59:08 2023 No.21750802

>>21750738
>It's not a recent invention. It's been around since time immemorial, with some exceptions (primarily polygyny in the form of high-status males having hundreds of concubines and low status ones having a single wife).
The extended family and the hunter-gatherer band have been around since time immemorial. Isolated mother-father-children units are new.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 20:59:10 2023 No.21750803 >>21750794 This is what Kaczynski is trying to do. He's not a primitivist or anything. He's not even anti-tech, he's anti-industrialism.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:01:09 2023 No.21750811 >>21750801 So only what is strictly necessary to survival is natural? Would you chastise animals for playing around and getting high and having fun?

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:01:10 2023 No.21750812

>>21750802
Oh, I see what you mean. Husband-wife monogamy has been around forever, but you're right that the isolated single unit families are new. I oppose the nuclear family in this way, and I'm sure the original anon >>21750662 really wasn't referring to isolated units.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:02:43 2023 No.21750817 >>21750803 Adding on to this, "Anti-Tech" is such a misleading name. Readlets have been fooled eternally. Even the FBI erroneously believed Ted was an anarchist.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:04:32 2023 No.21750822

>>21750795
Yeah, unfortunately agriculture is here to stay. If only due to population. So now we need to limit the amount of land individuals (And corporations, which frankly should be abolished) can own. Three acres and a cow per family sounds reasonable.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:06:05 2023 No.21750833

>>21750812
>Husband-wife monogamy has been around forever
From what I've read about hunter-gatherer tribes pair bonding does happen but generally is limited to a shorter period and tends to be a lot more fluid. Lifelong monogamous pair bonding doesn't occur before agriculture and possibly civilisation as far as I know, and even then it only happened to some degree and only if strictly enforced.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:07:08 2023 No.21750838 >>21750803 >>21750817 Isn't that partly Ted's own mistake? I mean it's in the title of his book.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:11:26 2023 No.21750853

>>21750833
As far as literature and oral history goes, there is no evidence that polygamy was ever the norm, and if I remember correctly, genetic evidence shows overwhelming amounts of monogamic reproduction as opposed to polygamic.

I'm going to side with the literature anyway. If polygamy was common at some point, there would be a culture somewhere that has a longstanding oral tradition or literary account of this societal practice. Instead, it's limited to small tribes or modern communes. I don't doubt that some communities became polygamous, but I do think that for whatever reason it was not a good socio-evolutionary strategy and it led to those cultures being outcompeted, or to them adapting into monogamy to compete.
>>21750838
Anti-Tech is catchier and has a ring to it. That's doubtless why he chose it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:13:01 2023 No.21750858
File: 797 KB, 1125x2068, 0013B822-C5A0-46E1-B732-D1555F280F94.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21750833
It took me not even 5 minutes to find this you stupid fucking lazy faggot. Next time, before running your mouth, why don’t you try using your brain. Probably won’t though because you’re a scumfuck narcissist like most 4Chan users.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:20:11 2023 No.21750885 >>21750858 Calm down broseph... He was being polite (tho he's probably a cryptocommie)

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:22:57 2023 No.21750898

>>21750885
His self assured arrogance (despite categorically wrong on everything he claimed) really pissed me off. The arrogance of the average post on here and on /his/ really makes my blood boil. The world would be a better place if someone curbstomped him (and many, many others) so hard it fucking decapitated him. Our civilisation is being overwhelmed by functionally retarded subhumans who can’t even be asked to look up evidence before being making bold assertions.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:27:22 2023 No.21750908 >>21750898 In fairness, most academics are really pushing the unfounded narrative that monogamy "isn't natural." He may have just sided with what he genuinely believed was the truth, not just some pinkhaired college marxists opinions.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:54:34 2023 No.21751020 >>21750853 Sounds like you forgot about Arabs. If you have less than 4 wives there, you're basically considered a virgin.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 21:55:57 2023 No.21751025 >>21751020 That's just a meme niggra

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 22:01:40 2023 No.21751043 >>21750858 Why are you angry at my post describing serial monogamy and then showing me a screenshot confirming it? Lel.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 22:05:34 2023 No.21751062

>>21750898
You need to relax, friend.

>>21750908
Isn't it obvious that monogamy (real monogamy) is extremely rare if not nonexistent among humans? Of course we have institutions that attempt to enforce monogamy culturally to differing degrees of success but the fact that they even need to do that suggests humans aren't naturally monogamous.

To clarify: Monogamy as in lifelong exclusive pair bonding with one partner. Serial monogamy is not monogamy. If you have had more than one sexual partner you are not monogamous. If you desire to have sex with more than your one partner you are also not biologically/psychologically monogamous.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 22:51:07 2023 No.21751220

>>21751062
Just because cheating is a strategy doesn't mean humans aren't monogamous, but that's beside the point: We have cultural evidence that monogamy is not NEW and has been a cultural and societal ideal and norm whether enforced or not for all of recorded history (and before that) which is really all that needs to be said.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:02:40 2023 No.21751268

>>21751220
It depends on how you define monogamy and how you define new. All of recorded history is less than 5% of the existence of our species and took place during the agricultural age which is radically different in social organisation than what came before and included new problems like inheritance of property for which marriage and lineages became important.

It is not at all evident that husband-wife monogamy has been around "forever".

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:07:50 2023 No.21751288

It’s a weird form of human superiority that you see with almost everyone.

People believe that what humanity does is against nature. That we somehow escaped it. Many therefore think that we should live ‘in accordance with nature’. Ted was an extreme example but most ecotards share some form of that mindset.

I meanwhile disagree. Humanity building shit is as much of a part of nature as birds flying and fishes living where nothing should be able to. We don’t destroy habitats we replace them, we’re not the only living thing that does that. Many animals have the time of their lives in our ‘unnatural’ cities.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:23:12 2023 No.21751354 >>21751288 >Many animals have the time of their lives in our ‘unnatural’ cities. I have a special respect for species that exploit us desu, whether it's cats or rats or poppies.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:38:27 2023 No.21751393

>>21751268
We have lots of evidence cultural and genetic for monogamy- even of the husband-wife type. We have almost no evidence for polygamy ever existing as an institution, not from archeological, genetic, or cultural research.
Primitive hunter-gatherers also seem to have been monogamous and serially monogamous, definitely not the free sex bullshit that cotton candy head academic retards try to peddle.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:40:42 2023 No.21751404 >>21751288 Industrial society is a competing organism. Ecotards oppose the runaway self-propagating systems that comprise a stronger social force than individual human desires. You're just a literal brainlet that read too many reddit posts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:43:23 2023 No.21751414 Is Ted actually worth reading beyond the Unaboomer manifesto or do I basically get the gist having read that?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:45:05 2023 No.21751419 >>21751404 Not him but isn't industrial society a "layer upon" humanity rather than competing? In the sense that it only exists as far as we exist and if it outcompetes us it dies? Seems like it needs us more than we need it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:49:37 2023 No.21751428

>>21751288
or maybe like OP you are just neutering the word "natural" to avoid discussing the actual meat of the matter
"life" as it exists today for man is an absolute Dirac-distribution tier anomaly for all we know in 300k years of hunter gatherer life(and that's just counting homo sapiens itself, not even our close cousins); call it however you want, doesn't change the substance
man is a wholly unique being whether you come from the totally materialistic side or not, and despite being a single species from 300k years it has vastly changed its way of living extremely recently, whereas any other animal's life has always more or less been defined narrowly by its nature: a monkey 1 million years ago lived largely comparably to how a monkey lives today
the only exception to this are at best domesticated animals which in any case have been specifically selected by man, again, very recently in the gran scheme of things

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:51:45 2023 No.21751434 >>21751404 Creating an industrial society is in our nature. Humanity and industry are one and the same. You can’t stop it only delay the inevitable.

Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:56:03 2023 No.21751443

>>21751419
In a sense it is a parasitic organism that has the ability to both destroy and control us. With advancements in AI, it is conceivable that it will also be able to think without humans. I'm not an AI alarmist, but consider the following: Individual humans function as brain cells, and books, laws, and cultural pactices are its memory. As humans relegate more and more tasks to AI, such as managing the collection and distribution of resources, to developing design improvements on tools, to searching for and constructing infrastructure, there may come a time when all of society is managed by AI. Humans will just be workbots. There doesn't need to be a skynet moment; humans will gradually lose control over more and more, until eventually so much is in the hands of AI that humans are a tool used by the system to handle its various tasks.
It wouldn't take much for an AI to glitch out and suddenly all of humanity starves. What will remain are bots growingn building, constructing, and spreading, with no human input required.

AI already has a dramatic amount of influence. If we were to stop using AI today, almost all of the economy would collapse overnight. It's used in stock trades, financial transactions, traffic control, etc. We even use AI to design more efficient aeronautical parts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 6 23:59:17 2023 No.21751449 >>21751434 And if we destroy it, that is also in our nature. But like the sophists Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, we are just using different meanings of the same word (nature in our case) and saying nothing.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:02:19 2023 No.21751462

>>21751428
We’re the way we are because our environment made us select for intelligence in the evolutionary process. And intelligence is the biggest power an animal can possess.

High amount of intelligence allows us to essentially replace the slow and random nature of evolution with the faster and more deliberate method of learning. That’s why our way of life changed so fast so quickly. Humanity, simply put, outran everyone in the arms race.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:06:15 2023 No.21751477 Sure building cities is natural but it's also ugly, evil, and unsustainable. Highways are worse.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:07:12 2023 No.21751483 >>21751419 >>21751443 To put it into common parlance, "market principles" or societal efficiency, is a stronger social force than human wants. Human beings are no longer driving society; only efficiency.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:09:54 2023 No.21751503 >>21751443 I guess the idea of technology becoming so advanced that it no longer needs humanity hadn't occurred to me as a plausible scenario. I've always been a bit suspicious of the wilder AI claims but maybe that's just close mindedness on my part.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:13:02 2023 No.21751519

>>21751462
fine, and the whole point of the anti-tech literature starting from Ted is to not only look carefully at the absolutely unprecedented changes of the last ~500 years in particular and broadly of the last ~10k ones but the effects it has and will have on humanity itself, on top of the environment, including possibly eschatological consequences about our species' very survival and dignity
neutering the word "natural" won't change this, it's quite obvious what it's meant here with this word precisely because how repentine the change has been, it's not like it followed a linear growth, but an exponential one

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:18:02 2023 No.21751546

>>21751404
This has always been such an odd, non-committal, almost both ignorant and optimistic take. Industrial society and technology isn't a "competing organism", it's an extension of humanity's deepest desires. Its invisible hand is a reflection of what we wish to one another, its technological progress and its abuse are both light and shadow upon our nature. Tech isn't its own monster, and the technocrats, technomancers, preachers and propagandists all bow down, ultimately, to the collective will. The public wills this.
If I'm reading your post right (never read Ted, last meme book I read was Capitalism Realism, if I want to waste my time I either shitpost or read philosophy instead) the argument seems to be that the individual good dies atomized in a modern society where the will of the majority is rule, but... Hasn't this always been the case? lol
Plurality is the natural state of all living beings. It's literally encoded in nature, just as aberrations are another evolutionary strategy. E pluribus unum is the only word modern industrial society speaks, and it's the word of God.
People jerk off to absurd, phony videos of a hyper fantasy fed to them in ten second bites, endless source of dopamine to go perfectly with their saturated-fat meals and sugar-spiked drinks, giving a life to passivity, gluttony and slavery, knowing it's inadequate but still relinquishing themselves and their decades on this earth to it as much as possible, pulling others down in the climb to higher pleasures, status and affirmation, phony revelations, psychological breakdowns, gore-tainted concrete adorned by skyscrapers and blinding light begging you to forget because that's what they want. The world is a reflection of our actions and inactions, and in the case of people like Teddy of those too afraid to see, see through, point it out and burn at the stake, be stoned or crucified.
That is the human experience.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:29:37 2023 No.21751597

>>21751503
It's unlikely for AI to take on a generalized sentient aspect, but it is possible for society as managed by AI to be more efficient than without it. Think about this as well:

1. A human's contribution to society is generally a specific task that can be conceivably done by AI. Even mathematical proofs are being done by AI.
2. If humans develop enough specialized AI, such as ones to manage supply chain, ones to manage construction of solar panels, mining facilities, factories, etc., ones to handle R&D (Boeing is notorious for heavy use of AI in R&D. All the AI has to do is run simulations of various designs, right now humans test them in the physical world but it is conceivable that seperate AI could also manage this), and ones to manage other subgroups of AI, it will be possible for it to operate without humans.
3. Any localized area that, for whatever reason, no longer supports human life will be more efficient than those that do not: It will no longer be required to waste time on agricultural or residential projects, it will save a very large amount fuel from transport and production of finished food, etc. It will have a competitive advantage.

We can't be SURE that AI will plainly exterminate humanity; I think it's rather unlikely. But what we can be sure of is that it is possible for industrial society to do without humans, and that there is an evolutionary advantage to doing so. Will AI be put in charge of managing human population, and at some point benign math will say that the necessary population is 0?

>Current population: 3,400,000
>Human productivity last quarter: -4,200,000
>Estimated population goal for maximal efficienxy: 0
>Course of action: Encourage birth control, provide increased rations to sterilized individuals
>Estimated time to reach goal: 240 years

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:32:59 2023 No.21751608 >>21751597 What will be the driving force behind this AI activity though? If there are no longer humans, wouldn't there no longer be a market to produce for?

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:39:32 2023 No.21751629

>>21751546
I wouldn't call myself particularly intelligent, but your post seems to be profoundly unintelligent. This could be due to the obvious, or it could be due to the fact that you admitted yourself that you didn't read on the topic yet, for whatever reason, seem to be highly opinionated about things you know nothing about. This is, by the way, the definition of the DK effect.
Do you want to read and come back or, let me guess, you want it to be simplified in a single post?

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:44:34 2023 No.21751637

>>21751608
Governments can be assumed to desire growth, as well as corporations. If an AI manages the growth of a corporation or government, it doesn't necessarioy need a human component. I imagine tax and capital will be relatively outdated by then, corporations being bureaus or other groups assigned to handle various tasks, and even without humans we can assume that the AI might be stuck in a loop of
>Collect resource to maintain current infrastructure
>Research improvements in efficiency
>Upgrade infrastructure
>Collect... etc

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:46:35 2023 No.21751646
File: 40 KB, 720x719, I can't eggscape the pain.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21750490
You can stretch the definition of the word "natural" indefinitely. Technically, everything that exists is natural. There is nothing outside of nature. However, when most people use the word natural, we know what it means. And most of us have an itch in the back of our minds telling us that something is horribly wrong with industrialized society. Even if we can't pinpoint what it is exactly, we know that something has gone awry.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:47:26 2023 No.21751650 >>21751629 >highly opinionated Only moderately. I was expecting a conversation, by the way, not yet another post saying absolutely nothing.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:48:00 2023 No.21751654 >>21751646 No point in arguing with sophists. They are stuck on the signs-signifieds and can't distinguish reality from symbols.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:52:02 2023 No.21751667

>>21751637
So kind of like the paperclip maximiser meme but more subtle and diffused in its incentive structure, like dark factories on a civilisational scale.

I can imagine it, but even in a very automated system I think the flat out disappearance of humans not disturbing either the activities/maintenance and the end goals seems quite unlikely. Which doesn't mean it can't have tremendously dystopian outcomes in other ways of course. Or utopian, if the troonshumanists are to be believed.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 00:52:33 2023 No.21751671

>>21750490
It isn't about whether something is 'natural' or not. Nothing is outside of nature. There is nothing wrong with a skyscraper in itself, but that skyscraper does not exist in a vacuum. For it to exist there is required particular arrangements of human society which may be desirable or not. Skyscrapers require mines and factories, wage labor, organizations (corporations of production associations or whatever flavor you like) to ensure production of necessary materials, states to look after the interests of these organizations, bureaus to maintain order in the lives, minds and behavior of the masses (for skyscrapers of course require masses) through propaganda, police power and other coercive means, we require roads, engines, computers, integrated mosfet circuit production, armies of officeworkers, coders, accountants &c &c &c.
Whether or not this is a desirable arrangement is a matter of opinion.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 01:10:12 2023 No.21751731 File: 5 KB, 200x185, 1645323480862.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21750782 This picture is fucking with my mind. I have very hard time deciding whether or not it's "art" and I'm too tarded to put it into words

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 01:13:55 2023 No.21751747

>>21751667
It is unlikely right now, until humans are no longer necessary for labor. The biggest thing is that whether humans ever become obsolete or not, humanity's fate is no longer in its own hands.
If it is more efficient to lobotomize 99% of humans from birth, it would be done despite the fact that almost no one ever would think it's a good thing. Humans are already being bent, medicated, and engineered to maximize industrial society's growth.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 01:14:57 2023 No.21751750 >>21751731 Does it being made by a bird factor into it or is it the work itself?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 01:18:14 2023 No.21751761 >>21751654 I think some lurkers would benefit from the clarification. Maybe even OP himself, depending on whether he's arguing in good faith or not.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 01:35:54 2023 No.21751809 How likely is it that industrial society will lead to human extinction? Should antinatalists support it and oppose luddites?

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:00:29 2023 No.21751878
File: 288 KB, 549x430, 164532309156.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>The idea that "surrogate activities" are a completely modern construct
Stupid.
>The idea that a chaotic system of desires cannot self-regulate and will ultimately lead to complete extinction
Delusional.
Autists get the rope.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:07:28 2023 No.21751903 >>21750490 humans are as natural as pancreatic cancer is healthy human tissue.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:08:49 2023 No.21751908
File: 28 KB, 551x367, FFAD157E-2D54-42A3-8DC8-01F50543DD22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

What Ted didnt get is that industrialism was inevitable, even from an evolutionary standpoint. Evolution doesnt care about right and wrong, it only cares about what works (hence the parasitic wasps that made Darwin sneed over God). And what works, what really fucking works is huge factories and automobiles and a hot cup of convenience every morning and oh dont forget the constant bombardment of advertising so you eat sweet sugars you dont need as you sit in your tight cubicle and click clack away at another 3096 Report for the Boss Man because evolution doesnt care, and it cant be stopped. You’re the caterpillar, and Human Civilization is the wasp. Get ready for the sting, fucker.
Its only going to get worse from here. Any sporadic acts of token resistance will be washed down the drain like failed mutations. Are you ready?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:12:48 2023 No.21751921 >>21751908 >What Ted didnt get is that industrialism was inevitable in how and why he literally said that cultures that didn't embrace ind. would be out-competed by those that did.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:14:11 2023 No.21751925 >>21750514 then modernity must be based. Its post modernism that is really the cancer

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:16:20 2023 No.21751937

>>21751908
people are just too fucking whiney. Life now is the best it has ever been in history. Very little disease or war or famine. The only problem is people are so lazy they let themselves get enslaved by the government. If you people were spartans, you would've been thrown off the mountain.

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:30:19 2023 No.21751999

>>21751925
post modernism has been dead for at least a decade now. People who say “post modernism is the end” are literally just postmodern cultists, no different than retarded cryptobros hyping up their latest shitcoin and trying to will it to succeed
The current movement doesnt have an official name but its infected everything. Gaugenflora’s Anti-modernism is somewhat accurate

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 02:33:59 2023 No.21752011

>>21751937
>quality of life is solely determined by a lack of hardships
X to doubt
If we’re really living in the best times imaginable why are the suicide rates up again? Why are there so many superfluous, miserable people? I dont think laziness is a good culprit

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 05:00:17 2023 No.21752443

>>21751809
Yes anti-natalists should support industrialism.
>>21751878
He doesn't say surrogate activities are modern constructs.
He also didn't say that industrial society can't self regulate; he specifically said it can and probably will on the LITERAL second paragraph. Sheesh you have brain damage.
>>21751908
He stated that industrialism is essentially inevitable and that if industrialism is reverted it will probably come back after a few hundred years- but just as you shouldn't think OH WELL IF WE GET RID OF A CORRUPT SYSTEM NOW ANOTHER WILL TAKE ITS PLACE AFTER A FEW HUNDRED YEARS you also shouldn't say the same about any other problem.
>And what works, what really fucking works is huge factories and automobiles and a hot cup of convenience every morning and oh dont forget the constant bombardment of advertising so you eat sweet sugars you dont need as you sit in your tight cubicle and click clack away at another 3096 Report for the Boss Man because evolution doesnt care, and it cant be stopped. You’re the caterpillar, and Human Civilization is the wasp. Get ready for the sting, fucker.
>Its only going to get worse from here. Any sporadic acts of token resistance will be washed down the drain like failed mutations. Are you ready?
Yes, the principle of efficient systems. Kaczynski outlines this and the method in which industrialism can collapse as well- that being how any efficient system can collapse- destabilization without the proper time to adapt.
>>21751937
In a modern society the individual is up against drones, tanks, massive dragnets and spy satellites, etc. Large organizations have a far greater level of power compared to the individual in an industrial society when compared to historic ones.

All of the above posters are retarded and in every single Kaczynski thread there are these sorts of retards that think
>THEN PUT DOWN LE PHONE???
>LMAO HE USED TYPEWRITER IT LE TECHNOLOGY
are somehow hot takes- they don't even bother to read. Absolutely shameful. You don't have to support Ted, but please, read and don't make yourself look dumber than you already are.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 05:35:52 2023 No.21752513 >>21751999 postmodernity didn't really begin I think. We are still riding the wave of the enlightenment and the 2 great wars we fought about it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 06:16:02 2023 No.21752623 >>21750681 Meant for >>21750512

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 06:54:38 2023 No.21752716 >>21750490 I remember when this guy wasnt spammed everywhere. I literally posted him ONCE on /g/ a few weeks back and now I see him EVERYWHERE.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 07:26:58 2023 No.21752779 >>21750561 >Adding a second story? yes

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 07:50:29 2023 No.21752825 >>21750490 Skyscrapers and 5g towers are all Babylonian bullshit

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 08:53:06 2023 No.21752918 >>21750490 >It's natural So is my disdain

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 09:29:32 2023 No.21752948 File: 967 KB, 2625x1688, 1647090051016541.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO BUILDING THINGS WITH OTHER PEOPLE IS ANTI-NATURE! ..cried Ted as he endures another nightly ass raping by his muscular black inmate.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 10:52:39 2023 No.21753054 >>21751925 >>21751999 None of you (and no one in general) has any idea what "post-modernism" is, you should sto posting and start reading, possibly good books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 13:13:26 2023 No.21753331 >>21752443 To me it seems very plausible that industrial society is a one time thing since we’ve used up all the surface level fossil fuels.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 13:20:52 2023 No.21753346 >>21751731 The creature is just following what its hormones tell it to do. Pure chemical action, no free will. Is a picturesque rock formation cut by a waterfall art?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 14:06:48 2023 No.21753449 Off-topic: they say /lit/ is dead, and that might be so, but I’ve been touristing on other boards after a long time and let me tell you: this thread reads like Cicero compared to /int/.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 16:47:48 2023 No.21753941 >>21753449 Yeah the real blackpill is that /lit/ is the best place on the internet despite how shit it has gotten.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 16:49:07 2023 No.21753945 If man is capable of building skyscrapers, then he was designed to.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 16:50:48 2023 No.21753952 >>21753945 >rape apologetics

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 17:25:53 2023 No.21754053

>>21750490
He discusses how technological advancement provides a selection advantage and will naturally progress, that's actually one of his fears, that it can't be controlled or modulated. That's why the only solution he saw was trying to violently bring down the system by destroying critical infrastucture (he intimates this in Anti-Tech Revolution but is more explicit in some of his letters).

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 17:31:57 2023 No.21754066 >>21753952 man is capable of making laws against rape

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 17:45:19 2023 No.21754116 >>21750763 How is Ted.k a Conservative?

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 19:38:01 2023 No.21754485

>>21752948
This is why the appeal to nature argument is ultimately fallible. We can never escape nature; we're always nature doing nature. 'Techne contra naturam' is an absurdity when the former is the entelechy of the latter. The true intellectual endgame is Schopenhauerian pessimism on the matter.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 19:41:18 2023 No.21754495 >>21750538 Are you dumb? That’s building it on its own.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 19:45:19 2023 No.21754510 >>21750538 >Are birds modernist No, but ants and bees are modernists and monarcho-communists.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 19:47:45 2023 No.21754525 >>21750662 >Nuclear family You couldn't even call anything 'nuclear' without the invention of the atomic bomb

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 20:00:10 2023 No.21754591 >>21754116 ted never said such a dumb thing

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 20:02:07 2023 No.21754598 >>21754525 This. Democritus should be grateful to the USA for the Manhattan project.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 20:04:13 2023 No.21754606 File: 154 KB, 755x451, someone wrote this.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21754598

Anonymous Tue Mar 7 20:11:26 2023 No.21754640
File: 1.70 MB, 3247x2435, chongqing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Very good Americans, keep thinking that your country must be deindustrialised.. become peasants again.. Cities and technology are for bug people, you wouldn't want to be a bug do you?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 20:23:15 2023 No.21754684 >>21754640 strawman addressed in Technological Slavery(pbuh) the TIS must collapse all at once precisely to avoid local powers reconstituting it for their own advantage, ergo anti-tech activists ought not to abandon high-tech or act too rash

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 21:49:48 2023 No.21754980 >>21754066 He is also capable of breaking them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 21:52:17 2023 No.21754990 >>21750490 The whole thing is an ideological screed detailing what he thinks humanity ought to be rather than what it is, and that is a species that develops, innovates and cooperates.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 21:58:42 2023 No.21755014 >>21750512 Daily reminder that Kaczynski's been bombarded with so many offers for marriage and sex that he has no idea what to do with them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 22:09:43 2023 No.21755054 >>21750512 I actually think there's some truth behind this, but you're a faggot, sorry

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 23:17:16 2023 No.21755262 >>21750614 Based

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 7 23:42:38 2023 No.21755342 >>21750512 Good post.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 03:16:29 2023 No.21756065 File: 70 KB, 720x563, 1676479646471232.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] To the anon with a terminal illness that posts this image often, could you detail your tranny trifecta again?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 03:27:25 2023 No.21756094 >>21754684 who of you larpers is gonna learn mandarin in order to go propagandate in china and get thrown into the gulag?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 08:09:19 2023 No.21756894 File: 21 KB, 320x335, 1303180495779.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21750538 your sophistry is 3rd grade level 'well akshully...' embarrassing /vg/ is more your speed

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 08:18:04 2023 No.21756919
File: 257 KB, 1520x909, 10_rocky-mountains.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21750645
>We should also get rid of all vehicles

yes. imagine having to travel 12 hours just to see your grandparents twice a year. how inhumane and unnatural. disgusting.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 08:29:02 2023 No.21756942 >>21756894 he completely countered the ted k fanboys, yet you only seethe why do you have photos of children on your computer

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 08:30:08 2023 No.21756947 >>21756919 >romanticism is... le GOOD! i swear to god you motherfuckers will support anything as long as there is a fancy painting, a good song or a memorable slogan associated with it

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:11:43 2023 No.21757055

>>21756065
>1. The Psychogenic Troon
Psychogenic troons are those with dysphoria caused by sexual perversion or as an accessory to other illnesses. They have always existed to some degree, but they are mentally ill. There is no real problem with a psychogenic troon snipping his balls off or cutting her tits off, because he or she is insane. The psychogenic troon doesn't necessarily need to be killed, but instead controlled (like the iatrogenic) The issue is that they are foundational to the beginnings of trans-ideology that later leads to the horrors we are now experiencing- they must needs be shunned, or removed from society by any means necessary if all else fails.
>2. Sociogenic Troon.
The sociogenic troon is the most common today. They result from societal conditioning, sexual or emotional abuse, and feelings of insufficiency and inadequacy that result therefrom. They are boys and girls that have been conditioned by society into "testing" transitions. They have likely not been informed that puberty blockers lead to IRREVERSIBLE effects, and that the IRREVERSIBLE effects are SCIENTIFICALLY AND ACADEMICALLY AGREED UPON. They are NOT IN DISPUTE.
The sociogenic troon is a victim of I.S. and the social conditioning that it enables.
>3. Iatrogenic troon.
The dangerous one. There is a lot to be written here. The iatrogenic troon is a culmination of propaganda, medical conditioning, pharmaceutical pollution, and other epigenetic and environmental effects. This troon is the saddest of all, still a victim, but irreperable. They cannot be fixed. Like the Psychogenic troon, the Iaotrogenic troon must be removed from society.
The solution here is to eliminate Industrial-Society, which supports the technologies that allow global pollution and the production of "gender-affirming" chemicals.

These are just the basic pastes. the Iatrogenic and Sociogenic troons are highly related, the Sociogenic troon is the primary victim in this mess.

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:14:54 2023 No.21757062

>>21757055
The iatrogenic troon is dangerous because they are critical to normalizing mass sexual, psychological, and physical abuse and mutilation of boys and girls. Iatrogenics are essentially pharmaceutical Frankenstein's monsters that are pointed to wherever there is a need to excuse the gross sexual mutilation of the vulnerable.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:25:31 2023 No.21757092 >>21756947 This is /lit/. Why are you expecting some high discussion here.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:29:48 2023 No.21757102 >>21757055 how much time a day do you spend thinking about trannies?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:30:29 2023 No.21757103 >>21757102 19 out of 24 hours per day...

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:46:43 2023 No.21757129

>>21751443
this feels like it is conflating AI and simple computer based automation. Most of those things used to be done all by hand and still could. Not to the exact same degree perhaps, but there's nothing stopping us. They are used as tools to do more. If your goal is to simply remove all undesirable possible effects of advances then you could always turn to Amish life. It is not without its own problems but it is relatively easy to continually reproduce itself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:51:11 2023 No.21757134 >>21755014 That was after he wrote his Ellul fanfic and bombed those offices so it really has no bearing albeit.

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 09:55:40 2023 No.21757140

>>21757129
>this feels like it is conflating AI and simple computer based automation. Most of those things used to be done all by hand and still could. Not to the exact same degree perhaps, but there's nothing stopping us. They are used as tools to do more. If your goal is to simply remove all undesirable possible effects of advances then you could always turn to Amish life. It is not without its own problems but it is relatively easy to continually reproduce itself.
I should clarify that AI is not the problem. AI just may be a more efficient adaptation for industrial society, and whether we use computers to automate anything or not doesn't matter, because I.S. is regardless living and growing.

Living a primitive or Amish life doesn't work out in the long term. The U.S. is already bullying the Amish on a regular basis, they've already had to make multiple forced concessions, and they will continue to be forced into this. But all of this is beside the point. The issue is that any change in the political wind could result in their way of life being annihilated, they have no choice whether they inhale microplastics and pollutants, whether toxic sludge runs down their rivers, or whether a scientific experiment goes awry and vaporizes them.

The issue of I.S.'s rampant growth and the dramatic increase in power of large-scale organizations in comparison to individuals and small groups is the incentive that Ted had to fight back rather than become a primitive recluse-- he did ACTUALLY try to live peacefully.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 13:43:30 2023 No.21757540 File: 1.93 MB, 608x1080, youmfs.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21757140 >industrial society bad meanwhile you

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 13:49:02 2023 No.21757548 File: 1.08 MB, 200x200, soyjak laughing edit.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21757540 amazing webm

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 13:52:55 2023 No.21757555 >>21750514 So a termite mound is a product of modernity?

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 13:56:11 2023 No.21757562

>>21756094
the Chinese learn english and maybe some people have already translated Uncle Ted in Chinese, who knows
although the Chinese seem to be even more buck broken than westerners regarding bug-like mentality, they are also the ones perhaps who would produce a more thoroughbred anti-tech activism

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 14:35:56 2023 No.21757645 >>21756947 >things SHOULD be ugly and horrible, because that's the status quo I'm used to! The logic of a loser.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 14:52:29 2023 No.21757683 >>21757540 >put down... LE PHONE! Your IQ is not above 85, is it?

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 15:20:21 2023 No.21757780 >>21757562 all their online communication is unencrypted and actively monitored by government. you can't even meme "lying flat" let alone blow the whole thing up. that said there is a strong ludditish tradition in taolism

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 16:01:57 2023 No.21757920

>>21757683
no, its not, which is a blessing since i know i am not a hyper-intelligent genius who can singlehandenly tear down the arguments of the "I.S." and thus do le based returning to le monke, and finally transcend iq forever.

i am stupid. i am le monke. i am what you want to be.

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 16:18:53 2023 No.21757985

>>21757645
you know why people (artists and architects, namely) moved past realism and hyperornamentalism, anon? and no, this time it actually not the jews, believe it or not, there is actually a very good reason for it, but people outside the art world rarely understand it, because, well, they're outside the art world.

See, if you'd actually go to an art museum that features these kinds of art works and not just post them on 4chan, you'd find out that your eyes would be bugging out after a few hours. when you see a fancy building or a very detailed painting once in a while, it's nice, but when your life and career revolves around art, suddenly landscape painting #582 is no longer as special, and imitation of a Greek building #92 seems more pretentious and silly than "based" and "evropean". this then leads to new styles and techniques, some of which may be "objectively" uglier than a sculpture of a ripped duded holding a spear or something, but which are ultimately vital if we don't want to be stuck staring at foggy sunsets and mountains forever.

now, with AI that can shit these kinds of artworks at lighting speed and thus spoil the art style for the rest of humanity, and not just art critics, we have an excellent capacity to transcend, as a certain austrian painter put it, "stupid imitations of the past."

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 16:47:46 2023 No.21758107 >>21750662 >A skyscraper is excess So it's a castle or a cathedral

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 16:48:39 2023 No.21758109

>>21752011
social media encourages empty meaningless connections and bombards you with pictures of people who are younger, prettier, and richer than you for no good reason and who are having some amazing time in their heavily produced and doctored photos and you're here on your phone wondering where your life went wrong. Then throw in the amazing disparity of wealth and opportunity in the US. Then throw in the infuriating culture war bullshit shoved into everyone's faces so that they don't pay attention to anything but how people disagree and divide themselves into bitter camps. The core of it, I think, is that a ubiquitous network of a billion minds is ready to pick apart every single aspect of a random person's life for almost no reason, and they don't mind searching endlessly for anything that might look bad even from decades and decades ago. For that reason, and because things like cancellation get so much visibility and publicity, people are living perpetually as overly self-conscious wrecks, afraid to do or say anything that may be misused.

>>21757140
that makes sense. in that light the ideas he presents for what the problem is are in line with what others are now saying in published works. Seems like a shame that he turned to bombing people instead of becoming someone who tried to make a positive influence. You don't change organizations by bombing them, because they just replace whomever you killed and then double down their efforts. Moreover, the people are still central to all of these things and can act over them. His style of activism is a logical conclusion one might reach if they are convinced it is hopeless to try activist means, but it's also a pointless pursuit in itself.

Anonymous Wed Mar 8 16:52:27 2023 No.21758125

>>21758109
he didn't bomb people so that the bombing would change said companies. the bombing was just to extort big newspapers into publishing his manifesto which was the only way such a radical text could reach a mass audience before the internet. the notoriety from the bombing also made sure that people would actually be compelled to read it.

in a way he did the perfect thing to capture an american audience: violent serial killing.

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 18:54:36 2023 No.21758583 >>21758125 >in a way he did the perfect thing to capture an american audience: violent serial killing. based

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 19:08:18 2023 No.21758624 File: 53 KB, 644x642, e1jgjcoomcma1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 19:48:15 2023 No.21758737 >>21757920 lmaooo

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 8 22:48:27 2023 No.21759293 >>21750512 It doesn't shrink the brain but unless you get over the chip on your shoulder (jealousy) you'll be permanently crippled emotionally and mentally for your life.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 02:43:02 2023 No.21760060 File: 134 KB, 1125x885, 1673382685387318.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21757055 Thanks, and godspeed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 02:49:07 2023 No.21760085 >>21750490 Pre-industrial society is more healthy and people are probably more happy and free on average. However, both happiness and freedom are not the main values humans should strive for.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 02:59:00 2023 No.21760115 >>21760085 >happiness and freedom are not the main values humans should strive for. which ones are?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:32:43 2023 No.21760210 >>21750561 Anything too large for one family.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:34:40 2023 No.21760221

>>21750586

It's a matter of psychology. Our brain's reward system has been wired over hundreds of years of evolution to be most comfortable in small tribes and families. Expanding our societies beyond that point is inherently disconcerting to our psyches.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:35:41 2023 No.21760224 >>21750645 Everything but knives, yes.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:38:27 2023 No.21760234 >>21750802 The nuclear family doesn't have to be isolated, just discrete.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:40:20 2023 No.21760243 >>21750811 It's more about material consumption as opposed to surrogate activities. if we lived a more primitivist lifestyle, we wouldn't feel the need for such idle distractions either.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:41:22 2023 No.21760248 >>21750822 >Yeah, unfortunately agriculture is here to stay. If only due to population. Who says the population is here to stay, though?

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:41:55 2023 No.21760249

Tedtard here, I'd like to share an idea which I think might help some of the people in this thread understand my position.

Humans have instincts which are the product of evolution in a certain environment. Living in an environment in which following your natural instincts is beneficial to you is better than living in an environment in which following your natural instincts is harmful to you. By better, I mean subjectively preferable, but not necessarily characterized by more of any given "positive" emotion or phenomenon, such as physical pleasure, comfort, giddiness, etc. This is because a man in the former environment is his own ally, internally unified against his external threats; whereas a man in the latter environment is his own enemy, like a house divided against himself. A man whose instincts are contrary to his interests feels internally sick, like his problems are inescapable and insurmountable, and he experiences subjective discomfort and disharmony of a degree previously unknown. These negative experiences are not made up for by any amount of physical pleasure.

As a simple example, let's take the natural human urge to consume as many calories as possible. Consider which of these scenarios is better: to live in a place where there isn't enough food, and try your best all the time to eat as much as possible, or to live in a place where there's too much food, and try your best all the time not to overeat? My assertion is that the former is subjectively preferable at any given level of success:
-The successful eater in a time of scarcity is fully contented and satisfied in all ways, physically and mentally
-The successful self-moderator in a time of abundance is physically dissatisfied, feels that his victory came at a cost.
-The man who fails to eat in a time of scarcity is physically in pain, but at least he can suffer or die knowing he did his best, and curse the Earth for being gay. Note well that nobody ever committed suicide due to the discomfort of starvation.
-The man who fails to moderate himself in a time of abundance, morbidly obese and suffering the consequences, hates himself. This is evidently a less bearable fate than starvation because many such a man has taken his own life out of sheer misery. He suffers both physical and mental distress of incomparable severity.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:45:24 2023 No.21760262 >>21751414 If you found ISAIF interesting, the rest of his writings and correspondence is pretty interesting too. He goes on to defend/answer specific questions about his philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:47:04 2023 No.21760274 >>21751434 You can reset the clock though. If we're knocked back to the Stone Age, it'll be another hundred thousand years before we have to deal with industrial society again.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:50:56 2023 No.21760290

>>21751546

And Ted's point is that this is a negative thing and we should be actively be working to unwind such a system. Industrial society is basically the prisoner's dilemma, where we'd all be happier without it, but individually we are heavily incentivized to participate.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 03:55:26 2023 No.21760300 >>21751908 Disagree that we're doomed. It's very possible that nuclear war or Kessler Syndrome could reset society.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 04:09:27 2023 No.21760337 >>21753945 Man isn't capable of building skyscrapers though. Men are. That's the point.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 04:37:17 2023 No.21760411 >>21760274 Is there still enough easily-accessible fossil fuels for us to do it a second time? The first time we did the industrial revolution there was coal just sitting around all over the ground for the picking up. Today, I'm not so sure about that.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 04:42:48 2023 No.21760426 >>21760411 I'm not sure either, but that's a good point. So maybe we're talking millions of years then.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:15:36 2023 No.21760486

>>21760249
I sat thinking about a response to this for like 5 minutes, until the weak point of your argument appeared to me, like a bolt from the sky. it's this
>The successful self-moderator in a time of abundance is physically dissatisfied, feels that his victory came at a cost

the problem with "Ted K Thought" is that its not a real solution, not only is it impossible to execute, but there are also nothing that would prevent another "industrial society" from rising up, except at this point perhaps the sheer exhaustion of natural reserves. Kaczynskism is just looking at some problems that exist today and saying "its fucking technology that did it" and then drawing the insane conclusion that abolition of all technology is the solution. if you want a "way out of history", there are lot better thinkers for that than the schizophrenic subjected to MKULTRA who went bonkers, I'd suggest Terence McKenna.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:39:32 2023 No.21760526

>>21760486
Technology is the reason for it. Without tech there would be no mass pharmaceutical sludge, estrogen and puberty blockers for children, horrifying medical nightmares, nuclear waste piles, breakdown of social systems[1], etc.
Who cares if there's nothing to prevent industrial society from coming back? If you kill a mugger, there's nothing preventing another from coming back. If you topple your enemies, or le fascists, or le commies, there's nothing preventing them from coming back at all. Why give a shit? Because if it's a problem it should be dealt with regardless of whether it will come back. The exhaustion of easily attainable natural resources at least makes it almost certain that there will be no more industrial revolutions for thousands or millions of years, barring some new and totally unforeseen discovery in energy technology.

[1] In the modern day, deep social institutions are not NECESSARY for the survival of the individual like they were in the past. They are OPTIONAL and because of that, people either may not be born into one, or they may lose their social community, or alternatively it may be too psychologically difficult to enter one. We see that there is a dramatic rise in suicide that is absolutely unparalleled with anything in human history, likely because of this and other widespread psychological suffering caused by industrial society.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:42:07 2023 No.21760533

>>21760486
What's the weak point in my argument?
>>The successful self-moderator in a time of abundance is physically dissatisfied, feels that his victory came at a cost
If you meant that this line was weak, I did think that I could've elaborated more on the idea but left it out for the sake of parallel construction. Basically I'm saying that someone who has the means to easily overeat (and experiences frequent food cravings) is stuck between a rock and a hard place: if he overeats then he gets fat and sick, but if he controls himself then he feels deprived and burdened by his restraint. Humans are adaptable enough that it's obviously possible to restrain yourself from doing things that part of you wants to do, but the neural circuitry that's responsible for behavioral restraint is stretched beyond its means all too frequently in modern society. This is the kind of strain that really wears on you, becoming less tolerable over time, and leading to mental illnesses like clinical depression and anxiety. A strain like hunger, on the other hand, becomes more tolerable over time because you can learn to get used to it. This is why the concept of depression is unknown to starving people in the third world.
>not only is it impossible to execute, but there are also nothing that would prevent another "industrial society" from rising up, except at this point perhaps the sheer exhaustion of natural reserves.
If you mean that this is the weak point in my argument, well, I don't think it's really related. I agree with you that getting rid of technology will probably never happen, especially not permanently, and that ideation about such things is mostly pointless. But I still think it's a true diagnosis of the problem, and theoretically if I had unlimited power to improve the subjective experience of the human race, the best thing I could do would be to get rid of all technology that came after the industrial revolution and bury the rest of the fossil fuels too deep for anyone to dig them up again.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:52:32 2023 No.21760563
File: 57 KB, 976x850, 1670726129169191.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Can someone explain how the Tedfags absolutely btfo every single argument in every single thread? Are they samefagging weak arguments to attack? Are the critics readlets? Are tedfags so autistic that they have nothing better to do than read all day?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:56:57 2023 No.21760568 >>21750490 Humans irradiating the entire planet and ending all life is as natural as birds making nests

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 05:58:56 2023 No.21760575 >>21760568 Well... DUH? Humans exist and are natural. Natural thing does thing. Therefore thing is natural. Ergo, everything is natural QED. Drink the mercury chud.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:01:06 2023 No.21760582

>>21760526
hating technology — because of obesity or nuclear waste or... climate change, which despite being a very important topic for Ted, is interestingly missing from your list that seems to consider "estrogen" a civilization-destroying thread — is like hating guns because they can kill, or for that matter, hating all life, because all life can theoretically kill other life. it doesn't make sense to hate powerful things for their power, but rather one should understand that power and try to use it for good. yes, the "modern world", if that is even an appropriate description for today, does have problems, suicide, obesity, trannies, whatever, but I think wanting to tear it all down like a pack of monkeys is neither a viable solution, nor a sign of serious intellectual horsepower. Opposition to this so-called industrial society seems to be entirely based on phobias (like your abhorrent fear of... puberty blockers?), and i would actually argue that the generation of these phobias, these psychological complexes of horror, is more of a sign of the misfunction of the IS, than anything else. Scroll down to "The Fault in Ourselves" sections of these to see how exactly the industrial society, or rather, the internet, has poisoned your mind:
https://goddisk.substack.com/p/language-is-a-virus-a-study-in-memetic

As far as comparing the destruction of IS to killing a mugger, which I initially assumed to be a codeword for something else, before realizing we are not on /pol/, the problem with this (in addition to it being 1. impossible, which you interestingly ignored, and 2. a mere childlike fantasy like that of the Marxist revolution) is that it would doom humanity to an eternity of building these industrial societies, or at least fighting each other for the scrap that's still left in the ground after us. Redemption can not be achieved from walking this path down, we can't just pretend that heavy machinery, the seed oil industry, uranium-powered spacecraft and so on never existed, and go back to spear-hunting mammoths (oh wait, they're all gone), that's as fruitful of an idea as treating the acne and growth pains of puberty with puberty blockers.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:08:59 2023 No.21760604

>21760533
>If you meant that this line was weak
no i think its wrong. i get your point theres no need to rewrite what you wrote above, its just false, incorrect, for most cases anyway
>This is why the concept of depression is unknown to starving people in the third world.
well despite the fact that this isn't exactly true, this is again just a matter of perspective, they have their problems, we have ours. the grass always looks greener on the other side.
>If you mean that this is the weak point in my argument, well, I don't think it's really related
this wasnt related to the point above i just kind of moved on
>would be to get rid of all technology that came after the industrial revolution and bury the rest of the fossil fuels too deep for anyone to dig them up again.
that seems a pretty anti-nature (not anti-nature as in anti-trees but anti-nature as in anti-thenaturalflowofthingsandprogressofevents), the planet, the "gaian mind" if you want to be woo woo about it, has given us oil, it has given us all the prerequisites and incentives for industrial society, yet you in your great wisdom think that Nature herself made a mistake, that because some scruffy bearded dude wrote some fancy slogans, now the existence of oil in the ground was a mistake? the industrial society is here to stay, i think a more beneficial way to approach things is not though childish revolt fantasies, but understanding exactly why we have massive coal plants and acid rain, perhaps, as horrifying as they seem, they are in some sense truly necessary for tomorrow.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:10:11 2023 No.21760608 >>21760533 >>21760604 im retarded

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:14:02 2023 No.21760615

>>21760582
I was laughing through your post. You are like a literal meme. Honestly I can't hate you for it, but I do wonder what you're like in person.
Technology is a bit of a force multiplier. Humans will always commit atrocities, whether we have tech or not, but in a pre-industrial society this is a lot more limited. It's easy for a dictator to vaporize millions in a few minutes, but in a non-technological world this wouldn't be possible. It is also to do with technological progress which is dangerous in and of itself, for example in the case of DHT or PCBs. Both chemicals were extensively tested in labs before use and found to have no harmful effects, but after decades of buildup in the environment they were determined to be incredibly hazardous in unpredictable ways. Any new technological development has the potential to cause immense suffering, even if it is thoroughly tested.
Just imagine some new wonderdrug that cures all diseases. Maybe a responsible government tests it in a lab for 60 years before allowing its use to the public but, oh! it causes the a generation of environmentally persistent prions that don't affect the taker or child, but build up in the environment and cause massive and intense suffering globally after a hundred years.
Obviously that's an outlandish example, but there are much more reasonable possibilities, like the accidental detonation of a superweapon, or the release of engineered toxins, etc.

I don't think you know much about the subject. Did you read ISAIF or Technological Slavery?

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:14:30 2023 No.21760616

>>21756894
this
>>21750538
>Hurr Akshually the plants builded the nest because bird cant grow wood checkm8 atheissts
wow retard, it's almost like saying people can't build fires or basic shelter on their own without the help of plants and wildlife.
Go ahead and build a skyscraper on your own using only natural materials.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:15:29 2023 No.21760620 >>21760604 You're profoundly ignorant and your use of sophistry is cringe. Is your post supposed to be satire? lmao

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:15:45 2023 No.21760623

>>21760486
I had a dream recently that some ancient ruins were discovered around the Earth, which contained these wells filled with a magic-like nanobot liquid which could immediately dissolve anything thrown inside. Heiroglyphic inscriptions inside the ruins explained that they were built by an ancient prehistoric civilization which had previously attained levels of technology comparable to or superior to ours, until a Ted-like hero started a social movement to dismantle the existing technology and return to an idyllic state of nature. So in order to permanently destroy all technology without leaving a trace, this civilization constructed these nanobot wells and threw everything they had inside. The inscription ends with an instruction to a future advanced civilization that if the wells are rediscovered, then we can and should use them for their intended purpose again.

This discovery sparks what is basically a global-scale cult riot where a huge percentage of people just drop everything and devote themselves fully to the cause of throwing things into the wells. Huge mobs of people are swarming the streets, picking up everything that isn't bolted down and disassembling everything that is, and carrying it all to the wells, and throwing it inside. The governments and police of the world are completely outnumbered and powerless to stop what's taking place. The economy grinds to a halt, people starve and are trampled, corpses go into the well. After a few weeks, a radical extremist sub-cult emerges which contends that it's not enough to throw technology down the well, but technologists themselves need to be captured and fed to them. After the obvious suspects are apprehended and sacrificed, the situation devolves into Maoist-tier struggle sessions where everyone accuses each other of having been a technologist before the wells were discovered and massive brawls frequently break out around the wells for former neighbors to throw each other in. Another cult preaches salvation and eternal life to anyone who voluntarily jumps inside.

I got killed by a well-cultist about 2 months after their discovery so I don't know how things ultimately ended up. But by that time, buildings were just starting to get dismantled, residential houses were mostly reduced to piles of wood and most people lived in tents outside or in the lobbies of empty commercial real estate. There was pretty much nothing else around, the world was largely picked clean.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:16:29 2023 No.21760627 >>21750699 >the nuclear family is a very modern invention though >basic family structure, paralleled in other species, is a modern invention Is /lit/ actually becoming the most retarded board?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:18:01 2023 No.21760629 >>21760627 Whenever a marxist posts the average IQ or a thread drops by 10 points

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:24:40 2023 No.21760648

>>21753449
It might read better but most of the content is still as dumb. It's just the same shit with a coat of perfume. At this point the age gap, between new posters and people who still have some memory of what it used to be like here, has become generational. I think it's just the proportion of younger people that don't know shit is noticeably overwhelming the minority of anons who still possess some level of experience and intelligence

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:28:25 2023 No.21760661 >>21760623 Based. I was the one that threw you into the well. Gaia must feed!

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:30:14 2023 No.21760668

>>21760604
>that seems a pretty anti-nature (not anti-nature as in anti-trees but anti-nature as in anti-thenaturalflowofthingsandprogressofevents), the planet, the "gaian mind" if you want to be woo woo about it, has given us oil, it has given us all the prerequisites and incentives for industrial society, yet you in your great wisdom think that Nature herself made a mistake
I don't personify nature, nor do I think that good or bad really exist outside of human value assignments. I do "like" nature, insofar as I like hiking and the outdoors, plants and animals, and I'm interested in biology and natural sciences, and I think that preserving that stuff is good because it's cool for humans to look at and enjoy. But none of it is more important than the quality of human experience. If i thought technology was a net positive for humans then I would be wishing there was more coal; but since I think it's a net negative then I wish that there should be less coal.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:34:03 2023 No.21760682

>>21760629
Right after I made that post I remembered seeing multiple marxist threads in the catalogue. I immediately put the two together, and then I saw your response and laughed.
I guess they keep coming here because they think all written word counts as literature. Maybe /his/ should have it's name changed so the illiterate can better understand what the "Humanities" part entails.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:40:51 2023 No.21760689

>>21760615
like a literal meme? as in, extremely effective at communicating ideas and converting people? okay i'll stop with the reddit energy but just know those are heavy words from someone who is unironically arguing for the most meme viewpoint there is.

all of your points here are merely fearmongering, "imagine a new bioengineered superweapon that leaks out from a Chinese lab, imagine nukes, imagine... prions?" yeah, technology can be dangerous, perhaps it even is inherently dangerous, perhaps there is no amount of safeguarding and preparation that we can do with scientific tests to make sure we aren't opening Pandora's box, but again, what are you gonna do about it? as much as we all would like to leave in le based trad village in the landscapes of 19th century paintings, it isn't possible, and since it isn't possible, i'd argue it's not a good option anyway. i guess this boils down to pessimism vs optimism, but i do believe that the pollutions and DDTs and nuke-touting dictators exist for a reason, that this is merely a necessary evil, some kind of a stepping stone to greatness, of which kind i don't know, but i think technology will one day redeem itself, that all of our (for the moment, valid) concerns will seem preposterous. I have read ISAIF and found it interesting but a bit bizarre and seeing ted seethe about "leftist activists" is pretty funny, but not Technological Slavery, the crude and clickbaity title of which already repulses me.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:46:12 2023 No.21760698

>>21760623
well you do have interesting dreams, my dreams are pretty dull compared to that, i must admit, i don't really know how to address that, i guess i'd just hope you'd know how to use that internal visionary energy for something else than rebelling against things.

>>21760620
i wouldnt say i am particularly sophisticated for a board literally about literature and language, perhaps the rhetoric on /pol/ or perhaps even /b/ would be more to your liking

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:54:37 2023 No.21760729

>>21750656
>Industrial society is not "a nest" but a nearly literal organism that is competing with humanity for dominance
How so? Materials aren't alive or conscious. The computer can't turn itself on. So where does the animating force of this organism exist? In our own minds?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:56:19 2023 No.21760735 >>21753346 Yes?

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:57:03 2023 No.21760737

>>21760689
We don't need fearmongering to see the real negative effects of wild 'progress.' Not only that, but you are merely excusing it as some stepping stone to an uncertain borderline spiritual "greatness" at some as yet indeterminable period in the future. Rapid technological advancements are unpredictable and incredibly dangerous. It's not fearmongering- it's essentially a truism backed by indisputable evidence. Your position is not even tenable.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:58:11 2023 No.21760741 >>21760735 Accidental beauty =/= art.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 06:59:57 2023 No.21760745 >>21760729 Yes. Industrial society is an organism that currently requires human minds to solve problems. Think of it like a super-organism (such as slime mold) made of many independent organisms.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:03:27 2023 No.21760753 >>21760741 I would like to argue that everything beautiful must be art, but not all art is beautiful. Also, "accidental" describes natural beauty up to a certain point, after which we must discuss the existence of God as a creator.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:09:15 2023 No.21760766

>>21760753
>I would like to argue that everything beautiful must be art, but not all art is beautiful.
This is inconsistent, read Joyce's Portrait.
God is the creator of everything, therefore his creation isn't art otherwise the moniker would be superfluous. Art is human creation (look up the etymology of the term.)

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:20:23 2023 No.21760791

>>21760737
>Not only that, but you are merely excusing it as some stepping stone to an uncertain borderline spiritual "greatness" at some as yet indeterminable period in the future
that's correct, because what else options do we have? you can either a. become a complete doomer waiting for the imminent collapse that will occur in 2 weeks b. spend your life waiting for the anti-tech revolution and return to nature (which is just your version of "borderline spiritual "greatness" at some as yet indeterminable period in the future") or c. accept that technology is here and since its here and since it will stay here, it must serve a greater role than porn and nuclear annihilation.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:21:13 2023 No.21760793
File: 48 KB, 929x1018, 1671486508591089.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21760729
Whether Industrial Society (let's call it the Basilisk, after Roco) is a sentient or conscious organism or not doesn't really matter. It still fulfills all of the characteristics of a living organism:
The Basilisk consists of cells and organelles that perform specific tasks (humans, corporations, governments, organizations) such as consuming nutrients (mining), metabolizing nutrients (industry) transporting nutrients to critical areas (traffic), maintaining internal stability and homeostasis (international agreements, laws, trade), it has memory and cognitive capabilities that transcend that of any given human through the collective knowledge and capacities of all human beings, AI, and stored information, it adapts to environmental and internal changes, it grows, etc.

It is very much a living entity. The reason its desires are separate from the human beings that constitute it is because of how self-propagating systems work. Society develops not based on what is desirable for humans, but instead on whatever is useful, efficient, or expedient, simply because it gives a competitive advantage to whatever system that implements it. In the words of Plato, "The good is the useful, the useless, evil."
Capitalism currently gives countries that implement it a competitive advantage; for you marxtards, whether capitalism is the "best" thing for humanity or not doesn't matter- unless Communism is more evolutionarily competitive than Capitalism, it will not be able to survive. The Basilisk will make use of whatever adaptation results in the greatest internal stability, no matter what form, or how much human suffering it will result in.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:22:22 2023 No.21760795

>>21760766
Yes, God created everything in the beginning. He hasn't directly created anything since then, except for His Son. Everything else has been created through his already existing creation.
This includes human art as divine creation by God through humans used as instruments. However, in my opinion, the same can be achieved by the flow of a river, a storm, or a volcanic eruption.
One could argue that the Grand Canyon lacks meaning, lacks intention, or whatever else is needed as a prerequisite for something beautiful to be called art. What if simply being in awe at its view is its meaning? Just being delightful to see for us, the intention?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:22:45 2023 No.21760797 >>21760791 Then why worry about it? Just go with the flizzy flow bro. Who cares bro? Don't do anything except practice new dragon dildo dilation diameters.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:25:11 2023 No.21760801

>>21760745
Scary to think about. Gives rise to a lot of thoughts and questions. If industrial society is concomitant with human intelligence, as 'natural' as slime mold, then would it not have a purpose ultimately of benefit to humanity and nature?
If not, then it would seem to be something adversarial to higher consciousness, not only extraterrestrial but perhaps parasitic, like an invasive species. Which would beg the question, how did it 'sneak in' and why?
I think you could look at the enemy as being not technology, but human vice that puts it to vicious purposes, however, this circles me back to human vice itself being a 'natural' function arising from the odd choice of nature to evolve higher consciousness in vicious predators.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:29:50 2023 No.21760814 >>21750554 Beehives and ant hills are the equivalent of skyscrapers

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:31:05 2023 No.21760819 >>21760795 >What if simply being in awe at its view is its meaning? That would only be its meaning in relation to us, i.e. not essential to it. A work of art such as the Mona Lisa on the other hand takes as its essence being beautiful to the human eye.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:31:50 2023 No.21760820
File: 91 KB, 600x874, 89356dc9e8f06decd151650d5067085b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21760801
>would it not have a purpose ultimately of benefit to humanity and nature?
If humans are the most efficient form. And if not, humans will be outcompeted or "changed" into something more useful, either through medication (anti-depressants, perhaps estrogen reduces instability and violence), genetic engineering, or cybernetics. If the most efficient state for industrial society means attaching pleasurebuttons to the back of every skull and turning humanity into mindless drones, then that is what will happen, simply because on the organizational level it will be economically efficient, and governments that keep it illegal will be at a disadvantage to those that do not.
This assumes that that WILL be the most efficient state, but it may not be so. What matters is that the human GOODS or desires are NOT what determines the future of humanity, but instead EFFICIENCY.
Pic related.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:37:06 2023 No.21760830

>>21760801
>>21760820
>>21760793
An example of self organizing efficiency can be found in trans-ideology. It may just be that castrating millions of excess males from childhood will solve problems with instability and violence that nations have had to contend with since time immemorial. Nobody in their right mind would have considered this a good thing, but it may turn out to be the most economically and politically expedient adaptation for humanity. Nations that do not do it may suffer from an increased level of crime, so they may fall behind in economic efficiency and be forced to adapt in kind. We'll see.

This is why Industrial Society is an absolute menace, and monster that must be destroyed. There is no more moral pursuit than the destruction of the Basilisk.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:53:28 2023 No.21760851 >>21750490 I 100% agree OP What's the difference between a nest, a burrow, a leafpile, and a house? Nothing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:58:43 2023 No.21760867 >>21760797 i don't worry about it

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 07:59:54 2023 No.21760870 >>21760851 Nature doesn't mean "This weird green stuff I never touch and those birds 'n' sheeit"

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:01:15 2023 No.21760874 >>21760867 Then go dilate instead of make useless posts here. If it doesn't matter whether someone does something, then you have better things to than makr yourself look stupid.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:14:29 2023 No.21760891

>>21760819
Who else gives meaning to things, except us? How else can something's essence be described if not in human words - that is to say in relation to us -? Does essence transcend human understanding? If it's so then essence is divine and so a canyon's essence is situated in the same place as the Mona Lisa's.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:18:07 2023 No.21760896 >>21750514 I don’t think pyramids or Babylonian canals are “modern”, but okay.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:19:07 2023 No.21760897 >>21750613 What’s wrong with suicide? If people wanna die, let ‘em.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:20:09 2023 No.21760899 >>21756947 Why do you hate good things?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:23:28 2023 No.21760902 >>21751443 AI sounds cool

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:25:39 2023 No.21760906 >>21751519 Baseline humans will become extinct or an endangered species remaining in zoos and backwater margins. Most sentients will be genetically engineered descendants of humanity or entirely artificial. This is inevitable and a good thing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:27:21 2023 No.21760908 >>21750614 Based primitivist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:29:28 2023 No.21760912 >>21760737 Progress is worth any cost. The Godhead will be born.

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:42:19 2023 No.21760932

>>21760874
why are trannies and dilating on your mind? kaczynskibro, i'm sorry to say this but you made yourself look like the dirty stupid ape you are and wish others to be, in front of an industrial chad like me. but you are right, certainly what you do or say doesn't matter

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:43:26 2023 No.21760933 >>21760932 Ook ook smash aaah aaah scritch scratch

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:43:46 2023 No.21760934 >>21760870 It doesn't but there's definitely a distinction between a 'NATURAL' forest and a farm of trees. Both still 'in nature' but one is much more pleasureable to humans than the other.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:45:04 2023 No.21760937 >>21760899 >>21757985

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:47:34 2023 No.21760943

>>21760934
Yeah. The problem is that anon assumes nature is literally everything in the universe and all actions, when that reduces nature to a totally meaningless word.
All things are part of the natural world, and if every animal including a human is "natural," and every one of their acts is "natural" then there is no such thing as "unnatural." It's sophistry of the boring sort.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:49:08 2023 No.21760944 >>21760943 I mean what you just said IS true. Psychopaths are just as natural as skyscrapers. But yeah we have to consider the human experience in these instances.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:50:12 2023 No.21760948 >>21760937 Wrong.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 08:55:39 2023 No.21760958 >>21750490 >natural Not an argument.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:17:15 2023 No.21760990 >>21751443 But AI is just computer programs. Intelligence is a misnomer in that context, it doesn't think.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:25:33 2023 No.21761001 >>21760990 Can't we think of intelligence as an emergent property of these interacting systems?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:28:28 2023 No.21761006 >>21761001 “Emergence” is utter gibberish

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:29:21 2023 No.21761009 >>21761001 I dunno, but I'm a bigot, I disparage that as just calculations.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:30:41 2023 No.21761011 >>21760623 the well cultists didn't fight with the techno cult?

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:41:22 2023 No.21761024

>>21761006
>>21761009
So intelligence is not a property that emerges from individual cells (such as neurons)?
In any case, if we think of intelligence as problem solving, industrial society can more than solve problems that are too difficult for individual humans, groups of humans, or even all of humanity, through the use of AI, systems of laws and cultural practices, machines, and AI.
The intelligence arises (emerges) from the net effect of these interacting parts, so that Industrial Society is imbued with goals and the problem solving capabilities to achieve them. For example, it may grow to the point that it no longer has the resources to survive, and will attempt to reproduce or spread to other planets.
Reproduction being the creation of a separate "industrial society" that interacts in a loose manner with the previous one (as two humans might).

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:48:11 2023 No.21761028 >>21757055 >hsts >trans trender >agp whoa

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:53:25 2023 No.21761036 >>21761028 Not revolutionary obviously, but it all gets systematized and explained for the phenomenon that it is in relation to industrial society.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 09:59:53 2023 No.21761044 >>21750490 i mean isn't it? we always wanted to build the biggest thing, and building down was instinctually always a bad idea

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 10:22:53 2023 No.21761064 >>21760411 Necessity is the mother of all invention. There are other things that can make water boil than coal. Animal based fuels for instance.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 10:40:56 2023 No.21761095 >>21750512 Maybe the latter but definitely not the former, men are more articulate when vagina isn’t present. There’s literal studies to back this up

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 12:00:31 2023 No.21761206 File: 61 KB, 1024x580, 1671861530677705.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>21757055 What's your pseudonym for when your book is released?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 14:30:50 2023 No.21761444 >>21760249 good post, is this take directly from ted? if so which essay?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 14:41:57 2023 No.21761480 >>21750561 >Adding a second story? Are attics unnatural? Are castles and churches? yes

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 14:43:44 2023 No.21761486 >>21761480 based bantoid

Anonymous Thu Mar 9 15:02:20 2023 No.21761542

>>21750490
Ted's argument isn't that it is bad because it isn't natural. He views massive scientific innovation leading to technology that massively overthrows the more common ways of life as an unpredictable experiment on all of humanity that nobody really consents to and is just pushed down our throats.

Who gives a fuck if it's natural, that's not his point at all. You really think a 150 IQ math prodigy is sacrificing his life over the fucking naturalist fallacy?

You can try, for instance, bicycling to work everyday. But when cars are invented along with roads that facilitate them, workplaces naturally become more spread out and hence you will end up basically needing to take a car or a train since it would take you four hours now to get there by bike.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 15:12:39 2023 No.21761579 >>21760793 It's not a living entity because there is nothing self-reflecting onto all of it Human bodies at least have a self.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 16:04:19 2023 No.21761746 >>21760526 ....did you just put a footnote in a 4chan post lol? I love this board.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 16:06:15 2023 No.21761757 >>21761746 yfw dfw is alive and well he just lives in the forest as a tedposter

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 18:58:06 2023 No.21762363 >>21761757 It wouldn't surprise me.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 9 20:03:57 2023 No.21762628 >>21761579 So frogs aren't living? Amoebas aren't?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 01:51:31 2023 No.21764038 >>21761444 Thanks, I made it up actually. I mean, I got the idea from ISAIF, but it's an original phrasing of Ted's thesis.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 02:27:55 2023 No.21764191 >>21750514 Humans aren't solitary animals and always lived in communities where they helped each other. Modernity is enforcing an arbitrary hierarchy rather than everyone contributing to the best of their abilities.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 02:48:18 2023 No.21764249 >>21764191 Ironically his individualism is a product of modernity.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 04:01:42 2023 No.21764464 >>21764249 He's not an individualist. He hates anarchism and he has said primitivism is stupid and unrealistic. Sheesh you readlets are annoying.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 12:36:43 2023 No.21765695 >>21764464 He is very individualistic though. That's one of his core values.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 14:44:39 2023 No.21766039 >>21750514 >Fun fact: if you can't build it on your own then it's a product of modernity Fun fact beavers build dams in groups.

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 14:51:36 2023 No.21766061

>>21758624
You know this image was created by a man (male) as women don't think with their sex drive. You will see trannies who acknowledge this fact say that they no longer have a sex drive, yet off course they still have that discord server where they erp with 12 year olds. Curious.

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 14:54:23 2023 No.21766070

>>21760249
This is not so much an "idea" as it is an insane jumps of logic from shaky premises that you misunderstand.
>Humans have instincts which are the product of evolution in a certain environment.
Explain what this actually means and not just what you think it mean, you have the rest of your life to figure it out. Good luck.

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 15:01:29 2023 No.21766095

Didn’t read the thread but I would say that humans break into an anti-natural mode when they have “machines making machines”. I would say a bird building a nest and a man building a hut by hand are definitely equivalent but there is something else happening when machines or items or buildings or whatever are made by things built by hands. There’s another degree of separation, and there might be an even further degree of separation when machines get brains and can make themselves with themselves. Humans do seem to “break nature” with this but I’m not really versed in this topic so my ideas are muddled

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 16:49:12 2023 No.21766437

>>21766061
You seriously need to stop thinking about trannies, your brain is relating literally every input with trannies. I agree with you that they're disgusting but this is the definition of obsession. Seriously, I'm on your side with everything, but I'm telling you for the sake of your sanity that you need to stop. You read a cartoon which has literally nothing to do with trannies, and your reply essentially says "this was made by a male. And by the way, trannies are not male. Trannies groom children on discord." Like can you comprehend how much of a non sequitur this is?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 16:52:47 2023 No.21766452 >>21750514 this nigga said roman aqueducts are a product of modernity LMAO

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 16:55:06 2023 No.21766462

>>21750789
i mean rousseau realised even if you pinpoint that history has been corrupted since the division of labour it doesn't do much now since you can't go back
what the fuck's the point of these discussions if the underlying conclusion is that you cannot reverse these things without totally restarting the species?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 17:12:15 2023 No.21766515 >>21766039 Yes, but individual beavers can build dams too.

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 17:17:26 2023 No.21766534

>>21766070
>>Humans have instincts which are the product of evolution in a certain environment.
>shaky premise that I misunderstand
First of all, it's my premise, so I don't know how it has meaning other than what I think it means. Second of all, it's intentionally pretty general and difficult to disagree with or misunderstand. In fact, I can't even imagine a way to disagree with it. I'm not going to try to elaborate on this for you because you didn't even give me anything to indicate the manner in which you disagree or why. For all I know, you're some kind of schizo who doesn't believe in evolution or has a similarly wacky mindset that I'd never guess.

And just a note on your style: I know you have an idea in your head about why you're right and I'm wrong, why you're smart and I'm dumb, but your post contains absolutely no information. It does not come off to readers as being cryptic and sagely like you think, and absolutely nobody in their right mind would take you seriously. It's most likely that you are some kid who isn't posting anything of substance because you're not able. If you think I'm going to spend any significant amount of time wondering about how I'm wrong, because someone said "you're wrong but I'm not telling why", well, you might want to think about that some more.

Anonymous Fri Mar 10 17:21:52 2023 No.21766558
File: 41 KB, 376x282, B21C99D2-3A06-488B-A61A-4F5BFD21BF5C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>21766515
You can build anything we make alone with your own two hands, it will just take forever.

Case and point Justo Gallego built pic related all by himself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 19:24:05 2023 No.21766944 >>21766437 You do know you will never be a woman right?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 10 19:25:20 2023 No.21766953 >>21766452 As far as I'm concerned modernity began with Jericho (the Fall)

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 11 00:22:39 2023 No.21767961 >>21766944 Your reply has ten words, ten begins with T and so does Tranny. Trannies will never be a woman. Tranny tranny discord tranny

Anonymous Sat Mar 11 01:34:26 2023 No.21768217

Something fairly interesting is that humanity may not be able to make it past the Iron Age for millions of years if industrial society collapses:
There are almost no more natural surface coal deposits, metal refining will be nearly impossible, and in most areas almost all natural flint is gone. If industrial society goes, things are going to get ugly(beautiful) for a long time.

Anonymous Sat Mar 11 01:58:03 2023 No.21768330

>>21766558

1. And I'd take that any day over 10,000 mixed use apartment complexes.

2. He did not build that alone. From Wiki: Although Justo Gallego worked mainly alone for nearly 60 years, he was assisted by a local named Ángel López Sánchez. He had also been supported by his six nephews (who, for example, helped placing the girders for the dome) and by occasional volunteers. Occasionally, he consulted an expert at his own expense. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justo_Gallego_Mart%C3%ADnez))

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 11 11:01:38 2023 No.21769721 >>21768330 Thanks.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature