Profile

Cover photo
Chad Williams
Lives in Perth
141 followers|7,469 views
AboutPostsPhotosVideosReviews

Stream

Chad Williams

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Assume there are two people in the world. You and one other, Steve. Steve owns the whole world. All of it. But he tells you not to worry, you can live under one of his trees and eat the fruit there, as long as you pick a few pieces of the fruit every day for Steve. Nice deal, right? You get rent and food for just the small task of picking some fruit for Steve. That'd be like 3 minutes work; this is a big and healthy tree!

Is this a just system? Would you pick the fruit for Steve or just tell him to shove it and live under the tree without giving any fruit to Steve?

What if Steve had a giant stick, bigger than any stick you could find, and he started to whack you every time you said no? For how long would you keep saying no, before you would give in and accept the 3 minutes of fruit picking as a fair trade?

Just say you popped out a few children, and so did Steve. Steve let your kids work under some of his other trees, as long as they picked some fruit for Steve's kids to eat. Steve let his kids use the big stick too.

I reckon this is the world we live in. You're free to pick fruit and give them to Steve or you're free to get whacked by a big stick.

Peter is saying Steve should just let you have the tree and half the world because there's plenty to go around for all.

Stefan is saying that if you remove the stick then you and Steve will just get along and share the world. Some sort of balanced conflict/competition.

Peter says that just removing the stick isn't enough: you need to replace competition (for imagined scarce resources - the fear that there isn't enough for me) with cooperation. If you don't change the cultural philosophy from competition to cooperation then both you and Steve will start looking for sticks, and eventually one of you will find one, and that stick will be called the State.
1
Chad Williams's profile photomarly qq's profile photo
2 comments
 
+Chad Williams "One: He doesn't tell us WHY we should care about others in the first place. Why do I care if John over there is starving to death? Sucks for him, I guess. Oh well."

the reason people should care for others is because deprived humans produce negative effects. that is it. deprivation leads to abhorant behavior, and abhorant behavior will effect other people through violence or other harmful means.

for example: a person who is starving to death may go to a shop to steal food, of course the shop keeper will not just give him the food so the person may bring a gun with him to show he is serious, then whilst being robbed the shop keeper might pull out his own gun because he feels his life is under threat.. and just like that, 2 people are dead. or another example: a parent has to work 3 jobs just to keep up with her payments, after coming home exhausted week after week, one day she forgets to give water to her child, which causes a fatal deficiency in the baby.

these are the acts of causality which need to be retraced so as to get to the source of the problem. it's not even about money or the market or anything at this point. all you have to ask is: CAN we reduce these levels of deprivation? is it necessary for that man to starve? is it necessary for that parent to work 3 jobs just to make ends-meat? if you're answer is 'no', the question then becomes: then what is stopping us from achieving this?
Add a comment...

Chad Williams

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
the end of this is the best. the "legitimate" change is accepted. amazon as the most disruptive. interesting angle yeah? because money is respected. things for free are considered "bad". what is up with that? why can't free be good? the rich fear the [cost] free.
1
Howard Treesong's profile photo
 
The rich like 'free' well enough when it comes to having the morlocs work for free. Then free is not so much a problem.
Add a comment...

Chad Williams

Shared publicly  - 
 
Hello world!
2
Colin Fergusson's profile photoDomenic Horner (tgxn)'s profile photoShannon chin's profile photo
3 comments
 
+Colin Fergusson , bloody asian wannabe
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
141 people
Michelle French's profile photo
Dumb Troll's profile photo
Chevy Morgan's profile photo
Ben Wan's profile photo
Josh Soutar's profile photo
Dillon Mcintee's profile photo
Dino Valentini's profile photo
Ahmad Hayek's profile photo
Paul Murley's profile photo

Chad Williams

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Why should everyone's needs be met? We position ourselves above other species and exploit them for our own advancement; why is it suddenly wrong to do this to others of our own species? Why should I care about the homeless man in the street? Is there a reason to do so, or just an assumed moral correctness? I understand the existence of class exploitation, but I don't understand why it is assumed to be wrong. Can someone please tell me the argument why it is wrong?
1
Dos37's profile photoWilliam Martin's profile photoAden Kendroemen's profile photoAnonymous247n's profile photo
16 comments
 
+Chad Williams Hey, i know this is an old discussion, but i'd like to add my opinion too. No mysticism and no excuses.

We all make some assumptions in life. We assume all is real and not just a computer simulation. We assume there is no afterlife (if we don't see evidence for it and require it). We assume the people around us love us (friends, family). What if we are wrong, and all is a computer simulation, or if everyone around us is an actor?

I'd argue that people may find lots of evidence for some moral questions. Like, we can prove that murder is a bad thing. Theft too. But how do we determine the value of a human life? It's hard, so me and my friends here on the channel like tu make the assumption that human life IS VALUABLE and should be protected. Part of that is, giving equal opportunities to all, which means covering their needs. They could be valuable to us after all, so it's not completely selfless - every child on the street has the potential to become a leading scientist in a field you or your children may benefit from later. And of course, resource based economy would be very high-tech, so we would probably have the means to cover everyone's needs, at which point the better question would be "why not" :)

Well, hope this opinion helps a bit, it's all a debate and we do need to have such conversations.
Add a comment...

Chad Williams

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
1
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
141 people
Michelle French's profile photo
Dumb Troll's profile photo
Chevy Morgan's profile photo
Ben Wan's profile photo
Josh Soutar's profile photo
Dillon Mcintee's profile photo
Dino Valentini's profile photo
Ahmad Hayek's profile photo
Paul Murley's profile photo
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Places
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Currently
Perth
Links
1 review