uninhabitable eath with robots

[Dante]

I disagree. Humans are selfish, evil, egocentric savages who are only compassionate when it suits them or they can afford to be. I've said so before so there's no point repeating myself...

[Emperor Harkonnen]

I agree that we are selfish out of nature, though we are not evil. We are compassionate! that is also our nature.

we care for other people, more than anything.

people who follow religious values, are not necessarily evil.

[Dante]

Did I say they are?

There are many people who don't care about other humans more than anything. A lot of them loathe humans and I'm not just talking about autocratic dictators who see people as disposable I'm talking about people who actually go out of their way to hurt others because they think they deserve it. Or worse, killing animals for 'fun.'

What kind of race that invented killing for pleasure is fit to survive I wonder?

Apart from cats that is... :)

[Emperor Harkonnen]

lol! cats! that is so true :)

I agree about the animal thing. Killing animals for fun is evil! You are right about that, some people hurt others because they think they deserve it. though I don't believe they want people to get hurt in general. they don't do it for fun. they probably have some benevolent reason for it

[Dante]

I don't.

[Acriku]

If robots have no self-awareness of their civilization, then there is no moral obligation to give the lifeless forms a chance to function further than we would.

[Wolf]

Dust, I think you summed up my point in about three words. It is not "evil" or "cruelty" that breed conflict, and through that, violence -- for these are relative, descriptive terms. No. What causes conflict is inherent in human beings -- free will. Our conscious thought, our sentience, our intelligence, is what causes us to have conflicts, and through those conflicts, violence, and through that violence, organized violence, or war. If an alien race was nothing at all like us save for sentience, consciousness, or free will, they would have had their fair share of wars and then some.

[Dante]

Violence is inherant to sentient species... I'm going to latch on to that idea, it's very convincing.

As for moral obligation, there is no such thing as a moral obligation. But it would be kind of a pity to just let them wallow (wallow? Wallaw? I dunno...) in semi-sentience.

[Wolf]

I'm glad you like it. Though, you didn't respond to my post in the "Euryphro" section. I was hoping that you would get back to me on that, since you seemed to be a participant in that debate.

[Dante]

Well before I just said it was inherant to all humans but frankly that was a little underdone. As Edric pointed out, there is no 'violence gene,' or something along those lines. Sentience now, that's a good one to link with violence.

Incidentally, replied to Euryphro.

[Wolf]

Thank you. Incidentally, I replied back.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

we are at least none-violent here in the western war. we don't want war, we want peace. :) (though I don't mind having a war ;D )

[Wolf]

The Western World's fate has somehow been inextricably tied with warfare.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

perhaps now, since we just started to go against it, and have to prevent it. but just wait a few more decades and we will not be involved in wars. and when was the last time two western powers fought against each other? that's a long time ago. so we do not wage much war now.

[Dante]

Depends where 'West' ends. If it's hemispheral then technically the war is ongoing. If not then it was WW2 and not that long ago.

The nest few decades won't bring less war, they'll bring more war. As weapons get worse and governments get worse (if possible) it will be a downward spiral into total devastation. It's a pretty bleak outlook.

[Acriku]

Dust Scout, you're mistaken. With more powerful technology and weaponry, we can actually deter war from happening more easily and quickly.

[Dante]

Dust Scout, you're mistaken. With more powerful technology and weaponry, we can actually deter war from happening more easily and quickly.

Explain.

[Acriku]

Without the proper technology, a society would be forced to go to war with the bare essentials, such as in WWI and WWII. But in modern days, it is much easier to subdue the enemy, especially minimizing unnecessary casualties, without actually going to war. Note as well, the Congress has not declared a war since WWII.

[Vanguard3000]

That doesn't mean there hasn't been one...

[Acriku]

While that was just a sidenote, it does have merit to say that technology in the responsible hands will yield less possibilities of war. And since WWII, a grand-scale conflict has not occurred. Of course, before anybody brings up the Vietnam and Korea conflicts, those were fought with technology only meant for complete destruction, such as the technology used in WWII, but they were not Congressionally-declared wars, so I did not mention them. The technology of today effectually minimizes casualties you'd find in a war, minimizes battletime, and eliminates the enemy faster than ever could have been possible.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

Are you reffering to the Cold War?

[Wolf]

The Cold War was not so much an actual conflict as it was a rivalry; United States and Soviet Union amassed terrifying arsenals, but never fought with them. Of all wars, this is the most attractive. There are few deaths, very little actual violence, and a good deal of incentive for technological and cultural advancement.

This is not to say that a Cold War is something we should want to happen, but I am saying that if we had to fight a war, I'd rather fight a Cold War.

[Dante]

Winning faster does not mean that there has not been a war. Neither does minimising casualties.

[Scrinlord]

But what happens when a Cold war heats up?

Then EVERYBODY dies

[Emperor Harkonnen]

The Cold War shows that western powers does not go to war unless it is necessary. we do not want war! we are going towards a time without wars...