The continuation of a very old series names "Stationary traveller". This one is somewhere between serious and a joke. And we see and hear enough jokes everyday.
One of them: The steady regulation of our lives in the name of "health" and security. But apparently they forgot that there is also a mental health. So, here is the joke "Smoking area" of Freiburg's railway station in Germany. Really, a wonderful regulation, and of course my smoke knowns that it is not allowed to spread out of that yellow rectangle! Physics obey diplomatic stupidity! ;-)
I hear that the same hysterical groups are being formed against alcohol. It's so dangerous too, and you know, they care if I live longer! ;-) (Without the possibility to choose for myself, that is!)
Those shallow minds seem to want to convert the world to some oh so clean kind of Hollywood paradise where the hypnotized have perfect healths and perfect lookings and perfect teeth and perfect everything. Except one thing. Mind!
As long as drinking isn't unlawful, cheers! I hope you'll visit me in jail when they arrest me for drinking and smoking. ;-)
But did anybody read anything of Cheilon? Or of Tyrtaios? Or did we take the time to examine and comprehend the fact that Socrates' life was in fact the life of a Spartan in Athens, even during the war against Sparta? The citation is easy: "I know one, that I know nothing", but where did this cognition-theoretical conclusion came from? And it is a logical conclusion and not some kind of "personal humbleness". It is not some wish to appear "nice" and polite to others but a *necessity* of formal logic, which was extended much later by Popper in the sense of the principle of falsification of any scientific theory, that deserves the name. So, where did that come from? Did that pop out of nothing in the mind of Socrates? Or does it have to do with "Gnothi seafton" -> recognize thyself, that Cheilon discovered as a prerequisite, a necessary (though not necessarily also sufficient) condition for *any* cognition at all?
But of course to search for such things in libraries instead of searching them in wikipedia, and to spend nights and days, and weeks and months of no sleep until you get some answer is indeed "unfeasible" according to our new ages. And Linda's smile is also much sexier. Who cares about some (disabled) philosopher of Sparta when Linda's tail waves so nicely in front of the camera, ey? ;-) (Yes, he was disabled right from his childhood having one leg shorter that the other - strange ;-)) And when Holywood makes movies about those brave 300 but never about the wise 300, upon the thoughts of whom we all live today, what can one expect other than thinking about physical perfection and good looks?
The problem is not that we overbreed, Wolf. The problem is that we *underthink*! A bot more study would do us really good, I guess.
I don't think that they will use the argument of some hypothetical high costs later on for passing the regulation of flushing embryos that have some disease, Wolf. This is indeed one of the real reasons behind that, but I don't think that this will be their offivial argumentation for passing such a regulation. I assume they will find something about the usual "life-worthy" life and the like, as if somebody could really define what that is. (Of course expect Linda, she *knows* what it is! ;-)) It reminds me of defining the intelligence quotient before knowing what intelligence is. ;-)
I don't have any kids, Wolf! I tried to adopt some of those souls that never got a chance for anything, but unfortunately the authorities said that I don't have enough experience for taking that responsibility. It is true, I don't have any experience at all. And I wonder how much experience anybody can have when he/she suddenly gets a baby.;-) (If it is the *own* baby it seems we have automatically experience! ;-)) But it is better for me to not influence any children at all. They would likely become either drinking mathematicians or smoking terrorists! ;-) Or perhaps both! No, no, it's good as it is now.
The historical research, and I mean *historical* and not the usual trash in PM-magazines, neither confirmed nor rejected the "rolling the infants downhill" yet. Unfortunately we still can't say anything definite about that. There are quasi-historical documents about that but no real sources. Even Herodot refers to that by "writing his listening from the listeners of those who saw that", but this is not real historical evidence. There *is* also some hint towards some kind of not yet clarified "ritual" or something similar since there *has* been found a place under Mt. Taygetus with a slightly higher spatial density of bones of children, but the damned thing is that they show no fractures as they should, in case they were thrown down the mountain. So we must search further.
On the other hand, the résumé of the exclusively "militaristic" Sparta, as taught in schools in Greece and elsewhere, is much like a fable for generating admiration for that "breaveness", "honor", etc. Apart from Plutarch who writes that "devotion to the intellect is more characteristic of Sparta than love of physical exercise." (still a weak hint) we have the *available* works of an armada of philosophers, poets, etc. in ancient Sparta.
A "Nick"!!?? Wow, Gustavo, I must say... I wishe I really had my own style but what makes up a "Nick" for you? I don't see anything that is so immediately recognizable.. :-/
Its already happening. If you cant have children you can select for IVF. Right now they are considering to flush the embryos that have in them the disease of Duchenne and breast cancer. It is not had to imagine to specify some more DNA genes that generate high cost of treatment. Linda genes are to be protected bcse they generate a new generation of people that follow the new God and his preaches on TV ( Linda shows , tell sell ). Besides the spartans eliminated high cost of health by rolling the infants downhill, the strongest surviving. Some chap called Adolf had also some ideas about selective breeding.
In short, just as we are not depending on the help of the other persons, we can judge and eliminate.
Once on an island, alone, needing help to grow food, the looks and health in genes from the other are not so important anymore.
It seems we have overbreeded. BT do you have kids ;-) hahahah
Exactly, Wolf! It's fear and punishment! Another "holy bible" ;-)
The purely mathematical implication of all that perplex-multiplexed set of directives, paragraphs, regulations, cross-references, etc, is... that it doesn't work. The more complex it gets the stronger contradictions it will produce. It's no wonder that it contradicts itself by handling the symptoms and making it all even worse, as you said. It has to be this way necessarily!
The deepest deepest cause under the symptoms is that the human still isn't really allowed to be human ("Anthropos" = the one that looks upward). It should be the inner convinction that we shouldn't throw garbage in the forest, and not the fear of punishment. But as long as these tactics of fear and punishment are applied we are not going to get a single chance to evolve to Anthropoi! We remain a herd.
Even the raising number of executions (another word for murdering;-)) didn't lower criminality. (You know which land I mean, ey? ;-)) Quite the contrary, criminality rates grew. Instead of opening more schools, instead of making the mental development important *and* possible to all individuals - especially in the formative years, instead of including any human in the process of philosophy, the weight has been totally given to anything that subtracts this from personality, converting thus humans to mindless sprectres. We have 87687 shows of Linda apettizing us for some stupid prizes, and 1.5 shows where some good author reads a good poem. We have endless commercials showing us the brand new car as *the* entrance to paradise, and we wonder why the misleaded will use *any* means in order to possess it.
To stay in the example of smoking and any other "drug". First of all we know hundreds of them. Some of them were regulated and so they are called "delights", like wine. The discovery of drugs was much much much earlier than the discovery of soap! Animals like using them too. It seems that it is a universal need at some evolution stadium. But prohibiting will not change anything. (We had that already, didn't we?)
The question is not how to make an even more brutal law and raise fear, but rather to create human beings that don't need any pre-constructed paradise - be it my tobacco or Linda's prizes. It is how to create humans that make their own paradise independently, on the process of achieving mind and thus real freedom.
Diogenes still searches with a torch in the middle of the day for: Anthropos! ;-)
Yes Nick, I will pay you a visit ! The starnge thing is all laws and regulations try to control the symptoms and not do prevention to stop the cause. Fear/punishment rules.
0 
