[Theiato]

A bit of context: My best friend for the last 10 years is at basic training for the Air Force, and has been out of state for a long time. I've recently realized that this has caused me to have nobody to argue with and none of the regular friends I have left will invest in a conversation with me knowing that I'll just start arguing with them.

In light of this, my girlfriend told me to go find some other ENTPs to talk to, so can somebody please argue with me? I've got hours of time that I can devote to the argument. I would prefer an argument about something like gun control but I will argue about anything. I've found myself reminiscing about an argument with my friend that must've gone on for four hours about the best way to treat a jellyfish sting. I'll have some more of that, please.

 

[fullofbull58]

Say something I can disagree with, and I will be more than happy to oblige . :happy:

 

[Theiato]

The concept of intellectual property is obsolete, it makes people try to make one creation that they can ride for the rest of their life and stifles the creativity of people that might write something that infringes on copyright laws but is superior to the original work.

 

[hela]

I almost ripped your post apart out of love.

Seriously though, you can't just come in here whining and give us nothing to go on. Bring your Ne out to play.

 

[toffee]

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I don't know much about gun control. But I'm all for the right to bear arms. I don't believe guns kill, but people do. I believe in the idea of having a well-armed grassroots militia (lol) where boys and girls/men and women know their way around firearms and other weapons, to protect their families as needed.

OTOH, guns seem like overkill for everything else. They seem harsh and unfair when it comes to hunting. They seem heavy-handed when it comes to foreign policy. And they are a cold, hard killing machine that for the most part, should be kept locked in the gun safe, except for practice and emergency.



I personally like to 'discuss' things with my INTJ and ENTJ boys, because they bring good points to the discussion and the ENTJ tends to get riled up by his INFJ mom. But I don't get as much as I'd like either. I like to debate euthanasia, abortion, prolife, Christianity and religion, nature vs nurture, relationships issues/styles, and personality typing.

 

[Theiato]

Also, gun control is pointless because it works on the misconception that effective guns must be modern and manufactured professionally, when you could build a very dangerous weapon for less than the price of the cheapest new firearm with very little expertise. If you restrict professionally made guns that do have many restrictions on them, those who wish to arm themselves will just resort to building a firearm with none of these controls, and provides the additional misconception that only certain people can acquire guns, which is interpreted by criminals as the public at large are unarmed.

 

[Voxavious]

The concept of intellectual property is obsolete, it makes people try to make one creation that they can ride for the rest of their life and stifles the creativity of people that might write something that infringes on copyright laws but is superior to the original work.

You're wrong on two accounts. Property, intellectual or otherwise, equates to safety. Without safety, progress stagnates because all effort is going into protecting what you already have. In this case, once an artist knows his creations (representational of an investment) are safe, then he is free to explore new possibilities. Also, there are plenty of ways to improve on an idea without crossing the boundaries of idea-stealing. In fact, taking a "nothing new under the sun" attitude, every new idea is an extension of a previous one. However, did Star Wars copy Star Trek because Star Trek came out first and also happened to have spaceships and "warp drive"? No, original ideas exist in that the creator adds their own special flair to existing ideas. That does not mean we copy other people's flair.

If people aren't smart enough to differentiate their work from other's, then they don't deserve to be creators!

Which brings us to the actual discussion: at what point does our particular flair lift off to become original to us, and how much leaning on the source material ground us to un-originality and idea stealing?






I am devil's advocating just for you! You're welcome!

 

[Stickman]

I don't know the numbers, but in europe there are far less gunowners than in the US and there seem to be less killings too.
Explain.

 

[MegaTuxRacer]

No you don't.

 

[Stickman]

No you don't.

Well, tell me.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Europeans are more stable socially.

 

[Theiato]

You're wrong on two accounts. Property, intellectual or otherwise, equates to safety. Without safety, progress stagnates because all effort is going into protecting what you already have. In this case, once an artist knows his creations (representational of an investment) are safe, then he is free to explore new possibilities. Also, there are plenty of ways to improve on an idea without crossing the boundaries of idea-stealing. In fact, taking a "nothing new under the sun" attitude, every new idea is an extension of a previous one. However, did Star Wars copy Star Trek because Star Trek came out first and also happened to have spaceships and "warp drive"? No, original ideas exist in that the creator adds their own special flair to existing ideas. That does not mean we copy other people's flair.

If people aren't smart enough to differentiate their work from other's, then they don't deserve to be creators!

Which brings us to the actual discussion: at what point does our particular flair lift off to become original to us, and how much leaning on the source material ground us to un-originality and idea stealing?






I am devil's advocating just for you! You're welcome!

Ah, but copyright laws have gotten to the point that if someone starts to make money off their intellectual property, they can use that money to drive competition down by miring poorer competitors in legal fees, making bogus cases over their IP. Being able to rest on your laurels for the rest of your life because nobody can use your idea without paying you doesn't drive creativity, it stagnates it.

If you can make more money than someone by doing what they do, only better, then while that person loses out if they don't adapt to your threat, the creative product will be better!

 

[Theiato]

I don't know the numbers, but in europe there are far less gunowners than in the US and there seem to be less killings too.
Explain.

This is more of an economics problem. The EU is richer than the US. We generally don't compare the two but their populations of the two are rather close.

Additionally, look at cases like Iceland vs. Japan. They have nearly the same incidence of intentional homicide (Japan has a bit more than Iceland) While Japan has 0.6 privately owned guns per 100 civilians, while Iceland has around 30 privately owned guns per 100 civilians.

 

[Olmed3011]

Perhaps somebody should look into Newtons 3rd law before they continue pouring guns into society.

As if the right to defend yourself has reduced numbers of shootings..

Ok, the bait is out..

 

[Neobick]

I think the argument about gun control basically boils down to the fact that people that are mentally ill can aquire guns way to easily. Let's see. With stricter gun control people who suddenly freak out(after years of being upstanding lawabiding citizen) would generally have to use knifes instead of guns, which is bad, but the fact of the matter is, you can't easily kill 12 people in an hour with a knife.

Criminals would still obtain guns, that's true, but criminals in general mostly kill each other. Some might attempt a robbery or freak out. Still I don't think it makes that much of a difference(otherwise the relatively small economic difference between EU and the US would be statistically negligible).

Arguments that proclaim that gun ownership increase public safety are questionable at best. While it might have saved a few lifes, I don't consider the argument significant enough to really matter(see above).

I don't think gun ownership per se is the problem, rather the glorification of gun use. It's not even considered necessary evil in the states, it's considered a good thing that people feel so threatened in society they feel the need to walk around with a gun. That's horrible.

(The Iceland vs Japan argument is null and void because Island is basically a little village without much poverty and without big cities. Hardly comparable to one of the most urbanized countries in the world, infact the fact that they are so close should be an argument for gun control!)

 

[currentlybusy]

For the sake of an argument.

A completely altruïstic society (or world in because we wouldn't need a society anymore) CAN work!

Anyone?

 

[Neobick]

For the sake of an argument.

A completely altruïstic society (or world in because we wouldn't need a society anymore) CAN work!

Anyone?

For insects maybe. Otherwise the dream will fail because of the inner rift between cooperation and competition in human nature. We are programmed to fight each other over difference. As long as this need for competition exist we can never escape from it. It will be a part of the equation that determine our society. it's an reflexion of human nature, not apart from it. We are society, that's the reason we're never going to build an utopia(if we would call an anthill a utopia).

 

[currentlybusy]

For insects maybe. Otherwise the dream will fail because of the inner rift between cooperation and competition in human nature. We are programmed to fight each other over difference. As long as this need for competition exist we can never escape from it. It will be a part of the equation that determine our society. it's an reflexion of human nature, not apart from it. We are society, that's the reason we're never going to build an utopia(if we would call an anthill a utopia).

What do we fight over? What differences?

 

[Neobick]

What do we fight over? What differences?

Etnicity, language, cultural values, sports teams, resources, sex.....

edit: Loyalty to ones ideals are, ironically the biggest reason we aren't going to have an altruistic society without an omnipotent altruistic dictator(Jim Jones or Jesus)