Hello Doc!

[rickler]

Hi there!

 

[Bad_Influence]

Typing the word 'FACTS' in upper case, only means, you don't believe a word of it. The added wink confirms that.

I’ll give you one thing, you are 100% committed to proving your stupidity.

 

[Dong]

Well it depends on may factors.
For example, women tend to be more caring by nature (on average) hence there are more women in caring environments.
Same with Nursing.
How does the psychology of that stack with the statistics.
Women tend to find more satisfaction working with people rather than things.
Well that's a known psychological measure.
Hence women work more in caring environments than men because they get more satisfaction from it.
Is not an unreasonable hypothesis.
So therefore, their actions are based on individual choice.
If an action is based on choice, then it is self satisfying.

As for philanthropists, look up the history of families like the Rockefellers and see how they hired PR firms to change their images.
Look at Bill Gates today, on all the TV screens going on about Pandemic 2.0, yet he has invested Millions in, for profit, mRNA and vaccine companies.
Look at who the B&M Gates foundation fund, look at who his father funded and was part of.
I know, sounds like "oh mad conspiracy theorist talking" lol.. but its not, just go look it up.

It's the old Hobbs/Russo argument, its been around for a long time lol.

I think the Hobbs/Rousseau argument is Rather dated, don't you?
And we all know about the ladies and their caring/mothering instincts.
As to philanthropists, I gather you think they all do what they do for self interest, which is a very cynical position to take.
These are facts.
And so is my realistic opportunism.

 

[Moriarty]

I think the Hobbs/Rousseau argument is Rather dated, don't you?
And we all know about the ladies and their caring/mothering instincts.
As to philanthropists, I gather you think they all do what they do for self interest, which is a very cynical position to take.
These are facts.
And so is my realistic opportunism.

The argument is dated, but is it unfounded?
Has anyone debunked either view?
Until one can definitively say that humans act completely selflessly or unselfishly then the argument has to continue.
By nature Humans have the ability to problem solve.
One has to determine whether problem solving for the individual or the general population hinders society or it is a benefit.
Not wanting to give an example lol..
But it always rears it's head.
What is religion, faith, ideology, individualism as faith.
Ideas eventually become actions.. hence..
Pretty sure you don't need me to tell you about idealism, personal or group being a gateway to both the greatest inventions and the most horrific crimes.

Always remember the old Maxim, "because one can do a thing, does not mean one should".. applies to both personal and social life.
All anyone has is a moral compass, without that we get lost in a sea of storms because we can no longer see the stars that guide us.

 

[Dong]

Yes Yes yes but...what has this to do with realistic Opportunism?

 

[Dong]

Hygiene helps but 'separateness' is the way!