99.9% of humanity is disposable

I think you're totally right, OP, and this is something that relates to a thought I've been having after the Manchester bombing. While suffering and death are terrible, most of normie society privileges the suffering and deaths of the "young", and especially "women and girls", but common sense says that most men are more developed as individuals, have at least in general overcome more of their animal nature than women, as have adults in comparison to children.

Really, an 8 year old getting blown up should be seen as far less of a tragedy than an adult man in the prime of his life being forced to hold an inane job.

The thing is - death brings us all to the same level. It doesn't matter how much any individual person achieves, or how brilliant their thoughts are, or what they accomplish... all of those things are the result of fate, biology, and chance - and one person's fat, biology, and chance is tied directly to the same factors in any other individuals' life. So no individual person can really brag about their accomplishments or thoughts.

>>37229923
>What makes a human being different from an animal?
Absolutely nothing. The difference is our mirror neurons activate more strongly when we see a human. So we treat them differently than other animals.

>>37229923
i'm thinking the extraordinaries are the kind of mutations that evolution spits out in the event of a massive population collapse a few of the specialized survivors would be the repopulators

but you figure most of these aberrations live and die alone and uncapitalized on but with language and technology and such they can leave weird ideas around instead of babies

>>37230064
>Really, an 8 year old getting blown up should be seen as far less of a tragedy than an adult man in the prime of his life being forced to hold an inane job

The worst part is how we have been conditioned to accept our fate.

File: 1039px-Hans_Holbein_the_Younger_-_The_Ambassadors_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (273KB, 1039x1024px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1039x1024px

>>37230064
You're right, but I believe that the solution to the meaningless of life is to have a legacy that will effect all of humanity, even if the name of a person is forgotten, the fact they existed did serve a greater purpose. The only legacy a normal person can have is to reproduce, but it's inevitable that at some point the lineage will die. The two things which can be created in life which survive after death is ideas, orders and physical objects. We remember the Bayeux tapestry but do not care for the soldiers fighting in it.

>>37229923

>strawmen everywhere and reductionism to the point of absurdity.

And

>Lookit all the sheep.
>None of them accomplished anything.

Except maybe the building and maintenance of an entire fucking civilization. I'm a dumb grunt, but the roads I've built and the steel I've worked is the absolute antithesis of being a lazy cow in a field all day, chewing cud.

People like you, who see no value are mistaken.

They've too proud and egotistical to contribute anything because they think it's beneath them, therefore they project their lack of worth and accomplishment onto the world around them.

>>37229923
I agree with you. But the more people there are the higher chance some autist is born that invents something revolutionary.

>>37229923
GO GO GO GO GO OP
When you get the call for self-actualization you HAVE to fucking answer it. It is so easy not to and so many idiots and idiot-like non-human phenomena will stand in the way, but you have to blow through it, because nothing has value from your frame of reference when you have no value.

Also to provide a counterpoint, the difference between a human and an animal is that a human dreams of being something more. Even the "statistics" that you detest at one point wanted, but failed, to be something else. The potential will continue as long as we do, and even if billions fall, they'll probably reproduce and create a few thousand who don't, which makes them contributors to the future so don't be so quick to disrespect them. They did the hard, mindless labor to make the present possible. They took on the greatest burden, mistakenly.

>>37229923
>Am I the 0.01%?

Are you rich af?
Is your last name Rothschild?
No?

Then your one of the 99.9999% of loosers.

>welcome to being a statistic

>>37230242
I am not saying that you are worthless nor that I have any more value in my life than you do. You certainly have value, but if you died, your employers would simply replace you. It's my personal belief that the only way to escape this mundane reality is to pursue a grand legacy.

>>37229923
All nonwhites are disposable desu

All of us contribute, that is what society is about, don't be so dispiteful, even little things count to build something great

>>37229923
>What makes a human being different from an animal?
Humans are animals. But yeah, intelligence is what sets us apart from the other animals.

>Am I the 0.01%?
You're almost certainly not. As for the other 99.99% I wouldn't call them disposable, at least a subset do something productive that supports the others. For example you wouldn't have sent anyone to the moon without a lot of tax dollars.

>>37230422

Ah. I see.

From a corporate perspective I certainly am.

and that's a relevant observation, because we live in the age of corporations.

It's not an easy maze to get through-- mainly because success is simply another trap. Legacies can be counterfeited, and achievements can be stolen, history rewritten. Escaping mundane reality is somewhat of a meme-- you'll always have to come back to it sometime.

But my tone was hostile, and hides the fact that I hope you accomplish your aim. Some grand legacies go from zero to sixty, others are built over long years, and some happen by accident.

Will you have children?

File: Screenshot_20170131-121725.png (440KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 1080x1920px

>>37230242
You make a good point. I think there is validity to both arguments ITT.

Dumb grunts are not just merely expendable. But there certainly is a hierarchy of ability that naturally presents itself. The natural order should be allowed to develop itself.

In democratic societies, everyone is given equal say although not all people are inherently equal. There are obvious differences in intelligence and aptitude for certain societal functions. The "x" factor that makes us human gives us our worth, but also gives us a scale of use and functionality.

Therefore I do not think is right to give a person more political power than they are capable of weilding.

The great must be allowed to rise up much in the way capitalism allows those with the aptitude to dominate free markets.

However there is the problem of ethical authority. The great are not always moral.

>>37230304
I don't deteste them, I am more having a go at the people in that 99.9% who never dreamed, there are many people out there who are simply blank slates. I understand the importance and I know that civilization is dependent on them, I believe that people who want to achieve have as much value as people who really did achieve.

I'll throw in my 2c

>>37229923

Individual identity is part of everyday life, but lacks importance when looking at the course and future of human history. The visions of society that end up manifesting are a collective effort that is out of any one person's control but still contains nothing but human desires. There are countless forgotten individuals who have played pivotal roles in shaping humanity, and 100,000 years or more from now even those we remember today will be forgotten on an individual level. However, the world being as it is today is contingent on every single person who has ever existed living out their life exactly as they have lived it. This means they are not as disposable as you think.

The whole programming narrative is a weird one too, since just as you put emotions down as 'part of the program', the creative efforts and philosophies of accomplished individuals can be viewed through the same lens.

>>37230205

Conscious entities are what give life its meaning, as there is no objective meaning. An isolated monk living in his corner of the world can create all the meaning he wants to life and it will be real in the subjective sense. The only difference a legacy leaves is a sort of echo that propagates the meaning one gave down the generations, though this meaning is often distorted and always finite in its echoed duration. A legacy can therefore delay the death of meaning brought to life by someone, but this delay is not forever.

Don't be such an edge lord, sorry for the meme answer. Most of humanity doesn't care that they are but animals. Most people don't really want To be conquerer or a leader that badly, and a lot of those people in history were just at the right place and the right time. We can still live and enjoy the beauty of the world and life, and she that beauty with others.

>>37230536

In an era of corporations the value of human life becomes the value of cattle.

No nations or people, no families or kin. This is the world we are headed towards.

Why is anyone valuable? Because people love them. To a corporation I am a replaceable cog, but to my father and mother I am their son.

Delusions of grandeur cause people to think that their skills alone make them valuable, in reality this is far from the truth. Most people are easily interchangeable if you only take their skills into account.

Really, it's not the legacy you leave or the skills you possess that are valuable, it's the connections you make with others that make human life worth something.

Not that other anon but just expanding on your point.

>>37230536
Thank you for understanding, I work in retail at the moment and all I am to the company is just a robot, often at work I question my own value as a pawn for some businessman.

I really want to become something more than just a tool for the elites, I don't plan on having children and may not even get married. I really just want some sort of meaning for myself. I am glad you hope I'll succeed, I probably won't but I hope at least I will have some sense of purpose.

>>37230103
what's your favourite thesaurus anon?

>>37229923
It's actually 100% that's disposable

>>37229923

ITT: a worn, tired argument made by only the most bored of psuedo-intellectuals

when are you going to kill yourself? because i would definitely be willing to bet that you're in that 99.9% bub

>>37230748
i didn't even use a thesaurus on that post and though my favorite is probably triceratops i usually use dictionary.com

File: 1491956388634.png (825KB, 698x646px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 698x646px

>>37230455
>larry the cable guy and jeff dunham isn't disposable

>>37230791
Depending on perspective, it can be 0%. To soil, we're all a bunch of nice nutrients that are not all that disposable and are entirely useful.

>>37229923
>Am I the 0.01%? I do not know, that will be determined when I die. But I hope not to be a statistic.
said 100% of humanity