OTF Thinking Thread

But I don't think it's a loss for the dead, I think life has value if your alive but doesn't if your already dead (also I am not sure if this is my final opinion because I am still figuring out what I think about the world religion and what not)

Are you considering the fact that when someone dies, they have lived their full life, so they aren't really losing anything that could be lost?

They're only losing something they could never have, which is more life, and something that can't be had is something that can never be lost.

Value is a thing we as humans attach to something we want. but dead people don't want any thing, therefore they can't lose anything because they don't value things.

Death stops the dying. It can't do anything to those who are still alive.

Loss is a loss of value so the loss can't be for the dead person as he doesn't have any value, it may be a loss for the person he was when he lived

What do you lose when you die? A body that is badly damaged, unable to function anymore, essentially a dead weight. Literally like somebody relieved you of every burden you could possibly carry. A body that's living and healthy, though, can carry its own weight and then some. Death has no domain over the living; death is a rescue for the dying.

That is just wrong people can die at any moment from a accident

And I think as a living being I rather be living in a dameged body than not existing

Usually because their body has suffered an unlivable injury, yes.

You right my bad, but I think i rather have a consciousness than nothing

I think you would rather not live in a body that has an unlivable injury, but at any rate I don't think you would be given the choice.

Again, that's all well and good, but I wonder if people are given a choice

Can I say something real quick about economic systems?

How well various economic systems work is directly related to the morality of the people. If people were perfect, never made any mistakes, worked hard no matter the personal gain, communism would work. It would work because people would work for the common good, and since the ones placed in charge are also perfect, everything would run smoothly. But since that's obviously not the case, then capitalism is the next best method *PROVIDED THE PEOPLE ARE STILL MORAL*. The founders of the worlds greatest experiment knew this when they said their government was wholly inadequate for anything other than a moral society. Society doesn't have to be perfect for capitalism to work, but it does need to be moral and have standards.

I think our society may have gone past the point where capitalism no longer reliably works because the people no longer have a standard of right and wrong to follow. Depending on who you ask, corruption in governments is common, crime is common, and we've removed the standard held for hundreds of years before us. Would you agree that the 1800s to 1920s were better than our current world? If so, why? And if the answer is no, then is there a period in human history that was better than our current world and what is that period?