![](/static/img/peekaboo.16547b8aab5d.png)
![](/static/banners/S2.3e178f5e3a34.png)
User Controls
Is there a term for this? *the illusion of sin*
-
2017-08-24 at 12:13 PM UTCSeems I was mistaken. Somalia!
-
2017-08-24 at 12:49 PM UTC
-
2017-08-24 at 1:17 PM UTCgeorge clooney said it best in from dusk till dawn. 'we got a real good you don't fuck with me, i won't fuck with you thing going here'.
. -
2017-08-24 at 2:22 PM UTC
-
2017-08-24 at 3:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie Not how contracts work.
Literally how contracts work
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-is-implied-contract.html -
2017-08-24 at 8:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie Social contract what a load of horseshit, i didn't sign shit motherfucker.
We have observed how civilizations, as they progress,
inevitably become more complex. Each succeeding generation
elaborates the social environment of the past,
makes fresh additions, and passes on to the next generation,
which repeats the process in turn. This ability
to transmit social acquirements, both material and mental,
is one of the chief points marking man off from the
animals. It has, in fact, been happily termed "social
heredity." Because of "social heredity" each human
generation is able to start at a higher environment level,
and is not forced, like the animals, to depend upon
instinct and blind experience. Indeed, "social heredity"
forms the basis of all those theories which assert that
environment is the chief factor in human progress and
which minimize true (i.e., biological) heredity as a minor
or even negligible factor.
These "environmentalist" arguments, however, omit
one essential fact which vitiates their conclusions. This
fact is that, while hereditary qualities are implanted in
the individual with no action on his part, social acquirements
are taken over only at the cost of distinct effort.
How great this effort may become is easily seen by the
long years of strenuous mental labor required in modern
youth to assimilate the knowledge already gained by
adults. That old saying, "There is no royal road to
learning," illustrates the hard fact that each successive
generation must tread the same thorny path if the
acquirements of the past are to be retained. Of course,
it is obvious that the more acquirements increase, the
longer and steeper the path must be. And this raises the query: May there not come a point where the youthful
traveller will be unable to scale the height – where the
effort required will be beyond his powers?
Well, this is precisely what has happened numberless
times in the past. It is happening to multitudes of
individuals about us every day. When it occurs on a
sufficiently grand scale we witness those social regressions
of entire communities which we call a "decline in civilization."
A "decline in civilization" means that the
social environment has outrun inherited capacity.
Furthermore, the grim frequency of such declines throughout
history seems to show that in every highly developed
society the increasingly massive, complex superstructure
of civilization tends to overload the human foundations.
Now why does this overloading in high civilizations
always tend to take place? For the very simple reason
that the complexity (and, therefore, the burden) of a
civilization may increase with tremendous rapidity to an
inconceivable degree; whereas the capacity of its human
bearers remains virtually constant or positively declines.
The sobering truth was until recently obscured by the
wide-spread belief (first elaborated about a century ago
by the French scientist Lamarck) that acquired characteristics
were inherited. In other words, it used to be
thought that the acquirements of one generation could
be passed on by actual inheritance to the next.
Lamarcks's theory excited enthusiastic hopes, and young
men contemplating matrimony used to go in for "high
thinking" in order to have brainy sons, while expectant
mothers inspired their months of gestation by reading the classics, confident that their offspring would be born
with a marked taste for good literature. To-day this
amiable doctrine is exploded, virtually all biologists now
agreeing that acquired characteristics are not inherited.
An abundant weight of evidence proves that, during
the entire historic period at any rate, mankind has made
no racial progress in either physical power or brain
capacity. The skeletal remains of the ancients show them
to have possessed brains and bodies fully equal to our
own. And these anatomical observations are confirmed
by the teachings of history. The earliest civilized peoples
of whom we have any knowledge displayed capacities,
initiative, and imagination quite comparable to ours. Of
course, their stock of social experience was very much
less than ours, but their inherent qualities cannot be
deemed inferior. Certainly these ancient peoples
produced their full share of great men. Can we show greater
philosophers than Plato or Aristotle, greater scientists
than Archimedes or Ptolemy, greater generals than Caesar
or Alexander, greater poets than Homer or Hesiod, greater
spiritual guides than Buddha or Jesus? Surely, the peoples
who produced such immortal personalities ranked
not beneath us in the biological scale.
But if this is not so; if even the highest human types have
made no perceptible biological advance during the last
ten thousand years; what does this mean? It means
that all the increasingly vast superstructures of civilization
which have arisen during those millennia have
been raised on similar human foundations. It means
that men have been called upon to carry heavier loads with no correlative increase of strength to bear them.
The glitter of civilization has so blinded us to the inner
truth of things that we have long believed that, as a
civilization progressed, the quality of the human stock
concerned in building it progressed too. In other words,
we have imagined that we saw an improving race, whereas
all we actually saw was a race expressing itself under
improving conditions.
A dangerous delusion this! Especially for us, whose
civilization is the most complex the world has ever seen,
and whose burden is, therefore, the heaviest ever borne.
If past civilizations have crushed men beneath the load,
what may happen to our civilization, -
2017-08-24 at 8:38 PM UTCThis thread is off the rails, everyone has the right to bodily autonomy until you take it away from someone else.
-
2017-08-24 at 9:04 PM UTC
-
2017-08-24 at 9:05 PM UTC