Yes that is correct

people want to get money so that they can have an “enjoyable life” very few indeed dedicate themselves to a virtue or an ethics above pleasure

“enjoyable life” as defined through pretty much the entirety of written human history consists of sex and play

So yes humanity is demonstrably composed of egoist consuming hedonists

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> So yes humanity is demonstrably composed of egoist consuming hedonists

Okay. How does this advance the discussion? Obviously then that means opposing that means being anti-human.

▲

chimpanzee 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There's no advancement of the discussion to be had.

If I may play his game:

He writes to boost his own ego. By way of making his claim, he seeks to appear wise and wizardly, for who else but he could have made such an astute observation and present it with such confidence; it must certainly be true and he must certainly be better than us.

And who would make such a claim, but the one who is pure enough to see through the muck and see the truth of the claim? He must not be one of the egoist consuming hedonists! He must be outside of them to have seen them!

Or not, perhaps he is one of these egoists and he knows it, and will happily admit it. And by doing so, he will raise himself up even further. For he knows his faults and he is not ashamed to have us know them too. We shall soon see.

In the end, he will soon have more sex. (He already got the attention.)

	▲	enejje 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		He’s a weirdo who’s literally a nobody in real life. He needs a reality check. So does that crisscross dude tbf. Comical to read the bluster in their posts. Like who are you? You’re literally no less common than the rest of us.

▲

AndrewKemendo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s necessary to recognize the limitations of the individual’s and the system they comprise

If it is required to take action in the world as a person or anything that has the capability to do things then by function there is energy required to take action

If the actions of that population are detrimental to the global population, because local measurement of global externalities is ignored, then you have a population that is self-destructive simply because it cannot communicate or coordinate across all of the places that’s having impacts

The systems you currently live in are antihuman…yet entirely composed of humans acting for their own individual gain without the capability of considering the collective whole

Is it anti-human to suggest that existential threat that stems from a total failure of the biological organism to coordinate at the scale that it’s individual impacts have ?

Is it antihuman to claim that the population does not have the capability of being able to counter its own accelerating self-destructive behavior?