Is this smart or stupid?

Maximus Zeebra said:

Thanks for bringing this thread to a whole new level of intelligent debate. Thanks for your post bashing. Please don't sink to the level of personal attacks..

If you don't understand the thread, then why are you here at all?:doh


Ps. People like you with silly comments angers me.. Thanks a LOT.

Click to expand...

That's one way not to answer the question

Maximus Zeebra said:

Wow.. Now I just want to ignore you. I am not even going to mention that I think you are a terrible human being for saying these things.

Click to expand...

oops.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Why not be smart and avoid situations where you need to kill someone who is trying to kill you.. Wouldn't that be smarter?

Click to expand...

try to outrun a bullet and let me know how it goes.

Maximus Zeebra said:

So you are one of those who can never see the context in favor of petty argumentation and debate. This thread wasn't about my personal moral..

Click to expand...

you think atomic bombs are dumb because they destroy human life. that is your personal moral conviction.

Maximus Zeebra said:

-I never said weapons are dumb

Click to expand...

your criterion for "dumb" is "could one day put an end to human life." I assumed this applied to both a-bombs AND h-bombs. silly me.

Maximus Zeebra said:

-I never asked for opinion about smart and stupid

Click to expand...

um, what? the title of your thread, sir.

Maximus Zeebra said:

PS. Actually read the thread next time before you answer it.

Click to expand...

oooh, burn.

emdash said:

try to outrun a bullet and let me know how it goes.

Click to expand...

Personally I am smart enough to avoid situation where I need to outrun bullets or kill someone to avoid being killed. But thats just me I guess(I can preemptive your next strike here), only me and no other humans.

emdash said:

you think atomic bombs are dumb because they destroy human life. that is your personal moral conviction.

Click to expand...

Now finally you quote me on something I actually said. And yes I think the creation of a device that can kill our entire species is pretty dumb. Did I mention that it has a countdown timer? No one actually knows when it will go off, but eventually and most likely it will. But thats a whole other debate. Lets celebrate the 60th anniversary of the nuclear bomb at least, and then think back to all the good times we had with blades and gunpowder in various forms.

emdash said:

your criterion for "dumb" is "could one day put an end to human life." I assumed this applied to both a-bombs AND h-bombs. silly me.

Click to expand...

Yep, it would be pretty dumb to exterminate ourselves.

emdash said:

um, what? the title of your thread, sir.

Click to expand...

The title implies yo have to read the first post to be able to answer is THIS smart or stupid. You cant know what this refers to without reading the first post.

emdash said:

oooh, burn.

Click to expand...

Seriously, do it. I challenge you to it. "This" refers to a very philosophical question which is obviously badly described in the first thread judging from all the misunderstandings in the thread. :mrgreen:


I will try to say ask it in simpler way...
1. The main question is "Are you smart or stupid if you achieve something that is dumb & stupid with clever & smart methods".
2. To make this a meaningful question you have to think of the "goal/achievement" as DEFINITELY stupid, to do this you can associate it with an experience or something you find stupid.
3. You have to imagine a situation where the "final goal/achievement" is DEFINITELY stupid, but where the methods of achieving that goal is DEFINITELY smart and clever.
4. You have to not think of an actual scenario, but a hypothetical scenario where 1&2&3 are definite factors, but where an "association" is optional to grasp the question asked in 1.
5. You have to remember that the question doesn't refer to any specific case or actual scenario, but that it refers to a hypothetical and philosophical question.
6. Then you can go ahead and answer the question.


My bad the first thread was a bad description. Can a moderator please delete it and insert instead the description above? 1-6.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Are you smart or dumb if you achieve something that is dumb & stupid with clever & smart methods?
Lets say the "goal" is something completely stupid that only a moron would think about, but the "methods" for achieving it is enormously clever and smart..
Is the person then dumb for failing to realize that the result is dumb or is he smart for actually achieving it in a smart and clever way?


ONLY two options.Feel free to debate it as much as you want tho, but don't complain about the options, choose one of them.

Click to expand...

Hahahahaha How can anyone take this seriously and even reply to it. It is fun though.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Are you smart or dumb if you achieve something that is dumb & stupid with clever & smart methods?....

Click to expand...

It would be STUPID, especially if it was done with an action of government.

Want to see the ULTIMATE classic example to prove it?

I would expect all of you to have heard of Milton Friedman, one of America's great champions of liberty and the author of the book, Free to Choose.

On a web site several years ago, I read that in the 1940's, he had a position in the Roosevelt administration that submitted ideas to generate more revenue to finance WWII. It has been said that Friedman was the inventor of tax withholding.

Was it a clever idea to generate revenue? Of course. But was it a clever idea to improve the future of a free America? Absolutely not. And our government is much bigger and badder because of it.

dragonslayer said:

Hahahahaha How can anyone take this seriously and even reply to it. It is fun though.

Click to expand...

Wow.. Ive seen you in 3 posts today and in all those posts you are trolling the thread. Nice to see that you don't break with tradition and actually have some intelligent input instead. :mrgreen:

I remember reading a children's book to my nephew once. It was about a Chinese emperor who is getting old (fictional story).

The emperor was looking for an heir, and told the people that the first person who can solve his riddle will become the next emperor. The riddle was simple. There was a log with a tiny hole thru the center of it. The objective is to figure out a way to pull a string of thread thru it, without breaking the log. A thread and needle wouldn't work because the needle would be too short, and the hole is kind of twisted and curved (it isn't just straight thru the center). The task itself was pretty stupid. I mean, why would anyone need or want to thread a log? It's useless and worthless, right?

Well, what ended up happening was that a young man tied the piece of thread around an ant, and put some honey at one end of the log and lured the ant from the other end. Ta-da! It was pretty clever. But the task itself remains pretty idiotic. Though the demonstration of problem solving resulted in the young man becoming the future emperor. So is this young man stupid or smart? I'm inclined to say smart.

Lightdemon said:

I remember reading a children's book to my nephew once. It was about a Chinese emperor who is getting old (fictional story).

The emperor was looking for an heir, and told the people that the first person who can solve his riddle will become the next emperor. The riddle was simple. There was a log with a tiny hole thru the center of it. The objective is to figure out a way to pull a string of thread thru it, without breaking the log. A thread and needle wouldn't work because the needle would be too short, and the hole is kind of twisted and curved (it isn't just straight thru the center). The task itself was pretty stupid. I mean, why would anyone need or want to thread a log? It's useless and worthless, right?

Well, what ended up happening was that a young man tied the piece of thread around an ant, and put some honey at one end of the log and lured the ant from the other end. Ta-da! It was pretty clever. But the task itself remains pretty idiotic. Though the demonstration of problem solving resulted in the young man becoming the future emperor. So is this young man stupid or smart? I'm inclined to say smart.

Click to expand...

He proly learned how to tie strings around ants so they couldn't run away while he used a piece of glass to burn them with sunlight

Jerry said:

He proly learned how to tie strings around ants so they couldn't run away while he used a piece of glass to burn them with sunlight

Click to expand...

Ahh, another great example. Burning of the ants is a pretty stupid thing to do, but burning them from diverted sunlight is pretty clever. Again, I'd say smart man!

Lightdemon said:

Ahh, another great example. Burning of the ants is a pretty stupid thing to do, but burning them from diverted sunlight is pretty clever. Again, I'd say smart man!

Click to expand...

It earned him the throne :mrgreen:

Lightdemon said:

I remember reading a children's book to my nephew once. It was about a Chinese emperor who is getting old (fictional story).

The emperor was looking for an heir, and told the people that the first person who can solve his riddle will become the next emperor. The riddle was simple. There was a log with a tiny hole thru the center of it. The objective is to figure out a way to pull a string of thread thru it, without breaking the log. A thread and needle wouldn't work because the needle would be too short, and the hole is kind of twisted and curved (it isn't just straight thru the center). The task itself was pretty stupid. I mean, why would anyone need or want to thread a log? It's useless and worthless, right?

Well, what ended up happening was that a young man tied the piece of thread around an ant, and put some honey at one end of the log and lured the ant from the other end. Ta-da! It was pretty clever. But the task itself remains pretty idiotic. Though the demonstration of problem solving resulted in the young man becoming the future emperor. So is this young man stupid or smart? I'm inclined to say smart.

Click to expand...

But the end result was smart, so of course it was smart.
What if the guy had done it because he was given a choice by the current emperor, "if you cannot do it your best friend will rot in jail until the day he dies, if you find a solution then you can go to jail for 20 years instead".. Then the end result would be negative for him but the solution smart, would he then be dumb for doing a smart thing to end up in jail(which would be stupid)..?

But interesting view unlike some people in this thread who is just making unintelligent comments(and trolling). Thanks!

Maximus Zeebra said:

But the end result was smart, so of course it was smart.
What if the guy had done it because he was given a choice by the current emperor, "if you cannot do it your best friend will rot in jail until the day he dies, if you find a solution then you can go to jail for 20 years instead".. Then the end result would be negative for him but the solution smart, would he then be dumb for doing a smart thing to end up in jail(which would be stupid)..?

But interesting view unlike some people in this thread who is just making unintelligent comments(and trolling). Thanks!

Click to expand...

You and your personal attacks....hey, you want to troll, I can troll with the best of them and not get in trouble, let's dance :mrgreen:

Maximus Zeebra said:

Personally I am smart enough to avoid situation where I need to outrun bullets or kill someone to avoid being killed. But thats just me I guess(I can preemptive your next strike here), only me and no other humans.

Click to expand...

so you don't consider self-defense to be a valid excuse for killing someone?

Maximus Zeebra said:

Now finally you quote me on something I actually said. And yes I think the creation of a device that can kill our entire species is pretty dumb. Did I mention that it has a countdown timer? No one actually knows when it will go off, but eventually and most likely it will. But thats a whole other debate. Lets celebrate the 60th anniversary of the nuclear bomb at least, and then think back to all the good times we had with blades and gunpowder in various forms.

Click to expand...

please refer to my signature.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Yep, it would be pretty dumb to exterminate ourselves.

Click to expand...

so you are saying that weapons are dumb. why did you deny it?

Maximus Zeebra said:

The title implies yo have to read the first post to be able to answer is THIS smart or stupid. You cant know what this refers to without reading the first post.

Click to expand...

I read the first post, buddy. I read the entire thread, actually, before I even posted once. I've noticed it is a common practice on discussion boards to accuse someone of not reading the original post when they reply in a way that you don't like or didn't anticipate.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Seriously, do it. I challenge you to it. "This" refers to a very philosophical question which is obviously badly described in the first thread judging from all the misunderstandings in the thread. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

"this" refers to a philosophical question, yes, but people's understandings of what is smart and what is dumb are subjective. you may think it is dumb to develop a weapon in a clever manner, but I think it is smart. that is because "smart" and "dumb" are opinion words. you can justify your opinion by saying that bombs kill people, but I can justify mine just as easily by responding that using bombs instead of live troops to end the war in japan was in the allies' best interest.

Maximus Zeebra said:

I will try to say ask it in simpler way...
1. The main question is "Are you smart or stupid if you achieve something that is dumb & stupid with clever & smart methods".
2. To make this a meaningful question you have to think of the "goal/achievement" as DEFINITELY stupid, to do this you can associate it with an experience or something you find stupid.
3. You have to imagine a situation where the "final goal/achievement" is DEFINITELY stupid, but where the methods of achieving that goal is DEFINITELY smart and clever.
4. You have to not think of an actual scenario, but a hypothetical scenario where 1&2&3 are definite factors, but where an "association" is optional to grasp the question asked in 1.
5. You have to remember that the question doesn't refer to any specific case or actual scenario, but that it refers to a hypothetical and philosophical question.
6. Then you can go ahead and answer the question.

Click to expand...

I understood the hypothetical nature of your original post. I chose not to respond to it because I prefer to deal in absolutes. I can think of a scenario to support either side of the argument, which is why I was not able to consider the question as purely philosophical, with no associations, and vote in the poll.

emdash said:

so you don't consider self-defense to be a valid excuse for killing someone?

Click to expand...

Sure its valid. But if its smart or not depends on why you have to use self defense killing in the first place. If its because you are in a warzone just to visit something there and have to use self defense to kill people, then its your fault and pretty damn stupid. But on the other hand if you are just out shopping in the US and some robbers rob the store you are in and aim a gun at you to kill you and you happen to have a gun with you and kill them first, then its smart.
In my opinion, yes.

emdash said:

so you are saying that weapons are dumb. why did you deny it?

Click to expand...

Nope, again you are trying to misquote me here. I never said that. But a weapon which can easily exterminate all life on the planet we live on is dumb, just like shooting yourself in the foot is dumb, or putting a gun down the pants and blowing off your own balls and prick is dumb.

emdash said:

I read the first post, buddy. I read the entire thread, actually, before I even posted once. I've noticed it is a common practice on discussion boards to accuse someone of not reading the original post when they reply in a way that you don't like or didn't anticipate.

"this" refers to a philosophical question, yes, but people's understandings of what is smart and what is dumb are subjective. you may think it is dumb to develop a weapon in a clever manner, but I think it is smart. that is because "smart" and "dumb" are opinion words. you can justify your opinion by saying that bombs kill people, but I can justify mine just as easily by responding that using bombs instead of live troops to end the war in japan was in the allies' best interest.

Click to expand...

I wasnt referring to any actual scenarios in my thread. but since there was so many misunderstandings I was trying to associate dumb and smart with something in a few posts.. That in itself was a dumb mistake, since you and me are now using time debating completely irrelevant and annoying stuff.

emdash said:

I understood the hypothetical nature of your original post. I chose not to respond to it because I prefer to deal in absolutes. I can think of a scenario to support either side of the argument, which is why I was not able to consider the question as purely philosophical, with no associations, and vote in the poll.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that information, couldn't you just have said that in the first place? Now we don't need to talk to each other more for awhile. :mrgreen:


Grrrr. :lol:

Jerry said:

You and your personal attacks....hey, you want to troll, I can troll with the best of them and not get in trouble, let's dance :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Ohh, did you take that as a personal attack and a reference to yourself? :shock: :roll:


:mrgreen:

Maximus Zeebra said:

But the end result was smart, so of course it was smart.
What if the guy had done it because he was given a choice by the current emperor, "if you cannot do it your best friend will rot in jail until the day he dies, if you find a solution then you can go to jail for 20 years instead".. Then the end result would be negative for him but the solution smart, would he then be dumb for doing a smart thing to end up in jail(which would be stupid)..?

But interesting view unlike some people in this thread who is just making unintelligent comments(and trolling). Thanks!

Click to expand...

No matter what the end result is, he still figure out a way to do it. That is smart. What's even more impressive is that not only was the solution clever, it was simplistic.

Look at skiers. Who in their right mind, would want to slide down a friggin mountain covered with snow at dangerous speeds?? But we can! because some person possessed enough intelligence to come up with a zany idea like that.

Talk about zany ideas... Look at ancient Olympics. Men competed NAKED, while running! Can you believe that? Supposedly it helps them perform better. Personally I find that hard to believe, but I guess they didn't have the luxury of spandex.

What I'm saying is that all of these things are pretty stupid things to achieve, but to figure out a way to achieve them, that in and of itself is smart.

Lightdemon said:

Talk about zany ideas... Look at ancient Olympics. Men competed NAKED, while running! Can you believe that? Supposedly it helps them perform better. Personally I find that hard to believe, but I guess they didn't have the luxury of spandex.

Click to expand...

It's a bitch to run in a Toga.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Sure its valid. But if its smart or not depends on why you have to use self defense killing in the first place. If its because you are in a warzone just to visit something there and have to use self defense to kill people, then its your fault and pretty damn stupid. But on the other hand if you are just out shopping in the US and some robbers rob the store you are in and aim a gun at you to kill you and you happen to have a gun with you and kill them first, then its smart.
In my opinion, yes.

Click to expand...

so killing is not always dumb. you're changing your story. yesterday I was a terrible human being for implying that any killing could ever be justified or "smart."

Maximus Zeebra said:

Nope, again you are trying to misquote me here. I never said that. But a weapon which can easily exterminate all life on the planet we live on is dumb, just like shooting yourself in the foot is dumb, or putting a gun down the pants and blowing off your own balls and prick is dumb.

Click to expand...

gross.

Maximus Zeebra said:

I wasnt referring to any actual scenarios in my thread. but since there was so many misunderstandings I was trying to associate dumb and smart with something in a few posts.. That in itself was a dumb mistake, since you and me are now using time debating completely irrelevant and annoying stuff.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say irrelevant.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Thank you for that information, couldn't you just have said that in the first place? Now we don't need to talk to each other more for awhile. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I didn't say it in the first place because it didn't seem worthwhile to answer the OP with "I don't know." I was responding to a part of the discussion that I actually have a concrete opinion about.

Tucker Case said:

It's a bitch to run in a Toga.

Click to expand...

You're such a country bumpkin! I happen to have it on good authority that people of those times didn't all wear togas, that is a common misconception. Many people in that era wore leather breastplates, leather tassel skirts, and leather high boots.

emdash said:

so killing is not always dumb. you're changing your story. yesterday I was a terrible human being for implying that any killing could ever be justified or "smart."

Click to expand...

Not ALWAYS, but usually. You got the difference between the two ways I described self defense?
I am not changing my story at all. I think its dumb to kill other people, the exceptions are very few.

I said you were a terrible human for saying the following things, which "self defense" is enormously toned down from.

emdash-yesterday said:

it's smart to kill someone who's trying to kill you.

Click to expand...

Like I said, it depends why the need is there in the first place to kill in self defense.

emdash-yesterday said:

it's smart to kill someone who's a danger to society.

Click to expand...

Rrrrr, catwoman? You just go around killing people because you think they pose a danger? Who makes you a judge of those things?

emdash-yesterday said:

it's smart to kill an animal before you eat it.

Click to expand...

Its smarter to just buy it processed in the supermarket. :mrgreen:

emdash-yesterday said:

it's smart to kill fleas, roaches, rabid dogs, certain bacteria

Click to expand...

Hmm, you ever did that? How often do you see rabid dogs anyways, are you from Fiji? You often have fleas? Ive seen roaches once, thats when I lived in Flordia. They have roaches in the Canary Islands as well, but they are outside, why would I kill it for being outside? You hunt roaches? thats just weird.

emdash-yesterday said:

, babies you don't want

Click to expand...

You put "babies you dont want" alongside fleas, roaches, rabid dogs, bacteria, and agricultural pests. Wow. It was shocking enough to see that yesterday, but to see it again today I am really starting to wonder about certain things..
Its smart to kill babies you dont want? Isnt it smarter to just use pills or something? Do you actually kill babies you dont want? I could NEVER kill a baby.. Have you ever seen a baby? How in the world can you kill such adorable creatures?

emdash-yesterday said:

, agricultural pests...need I go on?

Click to expand...

Yes please, it would be interesting and scary to see the full list I believe. :shock:

emdash-yesterday said:

my point was that "killing" in general is not automatically a bad thing, and in certain cases it could even be considered a more worthwhile investment than say, flight.

Click to expand...

Well, killing passivly like you kill bacteria when brushing your teeth is not the same type of killing I am talking about. But do you really hunt rabid dogs, criminals and roaches and kill them? And you kill babies?

Maximus Zeebra said:

Not ALWAYS, but usually. You got the difference between the two ways I described self defense?
I am not changing my story at all. I think its dumb to kill other people, the exceptions are very few.

Click to expand...

again, is it "dumb" or is it "wrong?" there's a difference.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Rrrrr, catwoman?

Click to expand...

rrrrr, death penalty? I know, I know, americans are so barbaric.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Its smarter to just buy it processed in the supermarket. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

arguable.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Hmm, you ever did that? How often do you see rabid dogs anyways, are you from Fiji? You often have fleas? Ive seen roaches once, thats when I lived in Flordia. They have roaches in the Canary Islands as well, but they are outside, why would I kill it for being outside? You hunt roaches? thats just weird.

Click to expand...

I'm not from fiji but I've read to kill a mockingbird, and you have to kill those SOBs before they kill you.

my cat gets fleas every summer, yes, and although I treat her every three weeks you do come across the occasional flea. I could just let it go, I suppose, but I usually drop it in a glass of soapy water.

most regions in the united states have roaches, in my experience. I've lived in three different parts of the country and they all have them, and they don't just stay outside. they like kitchens. my house I live in now doesn't have any that I know of.

Maximus Zeebra said:

You put "babies you dont want" alongside fleas, roaches, rabid dogs, bacteria, and agricultural pests. Wow. It was shocking enough to see that yesterday, but to see it again today I am really starting to wonder about certain things..

Click to expand...

I'm glad. the point was to make you wonder.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Its smart to kill babies you dont want?

Click to expand...

popular opinion says yes.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Isnt it smarter to just use pills or something?

Click to expand...

hey, that's above my pay grade.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Yes please, it would be interesting and scary to see the full list I believe. :shock:

Click to expand...

50 Living Creatures Whose Death emdash Promotes:

50. serial killers
49. roaches
48. crickets
47. agricultural pests
46. terrorists
45. cows
44. chickens
43. turkeys
...
3. anyone trying to kill american troops
2. anyone trying to kill innocent people
1. anyone trying to kill emdash

now I feel like bob dole, and emdash isn't even my real name.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Well, killing passivly like you kill bacteria when brushing your teeth is not the same type of killing I am talking about. But do you really hunt rabid dogs, criminals and roaches and kill them? And you kill babies?

Click to expand...

yes, I love hunting. baby hunting is not as challenging as criminal hunting, but more satisfying.

Babies taste best when they are sauteed in garlic. Mmmm mmm mmm! :mrgreen:

Tucker Case said:

Babies taste best when they are sauteed in garlic. Mmmm mmm mmm! :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I dip them in drawn butter.

Sweet and sour sauce for my babies.....damn Vietnamese people....

Hatuey said:

Sweet and sour sauce for my babies.....damn Vietnamese people....

Click to expand...

Curried baby is also quite nice, but I love Indian food.