Twenty Days

[Katy North]

While I agree that it would be nice to solve the world's problems, what good would come from basically heaven on earth?

If humanity had nothing to strive for, what would we become? A world of couch potatoes who don't have to worry about obesity? A world of straight A Harvard college graduates who never had to study for a test? A world of rich people who no longer need to know the meaning of charity? A world of young immortals who no longer experience death or loss?

What would be our motive for advances in science, politics, or even advances in art and literature?

I too would turn down the 20 days of wishes followed by death... I'd much rather have 20 years of struggle in this glorious mess of humanity... doing as much as I can to change the world for the better. Maybe someone could choose their wishes carefully enough to eradicate hardship while keeping us humans human, but I don't think I would qualify.

[Babbalanja]

While I agree that it would be nice to solve the world's problems, what good would come from basically heaven on earth?

If humanity had nothing to strive for, what would we become? A world of couch potatoes who don't have to worry about obesity? A world of straight A Harvard college graduates who never had to study for a test? A world of rich people who no longer need to know the meaning of charity? A world of young immortals who no longer experience death or loss?

What would be our motive for advances in science, politics, or even advances in art and literature?

I too would turn down the 20 days of wishes followed by death... I'd much rather have 20 years of struggle in this glorious mess of humanity... doing as much as I can to change the world for the better. Maybe someone could choose their wishes carefully enough to eradicate hardship while keeping us humans human, but I don't think I would qualify.

You do realize this is a parlor game, not a plan of action, right?

Personally, I think there will always be hardship as long as there are humans. The human condition is the dread of death and uncertainty, which can never be wished away. But that doesn't mean that economic exploitation, poverty, oppression and disease are good things.

Regards,

Istvan

[The Atheist]

Firstly, it would make everything too easy; you'd never feel a sense of accomplishment.

Pol Pot wasn't much into achievements, but achieved immortality ok.

Secondly, humans need misery; its essential to our concept of self-definition.

But we have the Cold Ale thread for that!

Thirdly, even after you'd cured cancer, abolished poverty e.t.c, people would still be lining up to ask you to make wishes on their behalf, which would get very dull, very quickly. Finally, absolute power corrupts us all - after a while, you'd start to abuse that power, no matter how noble your original intentions were!

It's not so much "wishes" as suddenly coming up with brilliant ideas. No supernaturalism involved.

Also, I think 20 days isn't enough for absolute corruption.

I'd need 40 for that.

I don't think I could live - forever, or even for the weekend - with the knowledge that I'd nailed Sarah-Jessica Parker. Even with immortality on offer, I'd die of embarrassment.

You must be either blind or young.

Old blokes like me like SJP. I remember the first time I saw her - in a tv show called A Day in the Life. I thought she was the most beautiful woman I'd ever seen at that stage and have been in lust with her ever since.

No worries for you anyway - she's mine!

And you gotta love "humans need misery; its essential to our concept of self-definition" as an excuse for not doing anything good for the world before you die.

That is a sad indictment indeed.

I don't buy a bar of the "we need to know misery to appreciate happiness."

Doesn't work for babies and I don't believe it at all.

While I agree that it would be nice to solve the world's problems, what good would come from basically heaven on earth?

Curing cancer and beating hunger wouldn't make it heaven on earth.

[MarkBastable]

You must be either blind or young.


I'm 51 and I have twenty-twenty, since the Lazik.

I also have standards. I mean, really. Not only is SJP plain as a gate, but she plays that woman who thinks that shoes denote character. She's almost as repulsive as Stevie Nicks - though obviously not quite.

[The Atheist]

I'm 51 and I have twenty-twenty, since the Lazik.

Ask for a refund!

Stevie Nicks, I'll give you - she's a fat druggie.

[BienvenuJDC]

Twenty Day Option - I would take it and: establish a system of government that would ensure the perfect balance so that no radical regime could ever take power, the perfect balance between federal, state, and local, balancing the free market with the proper government guidance so that the economy would continue with smooth transition between cycles, where the liberal and conservative members could always work together. On day two, I would work as an ambassador to set this pattern of government in every country eradicating oppression and radicalism. On day three, ending world hunger through efficient processes...day four, establishing the research facilities that ended the uncured diseases...day five, discovering the way to harness the earth's energy to supply the cleanest power source...day six, engineering the greatest infrastructure that has ever been known in order to be able to defend against natural disasters...day seven through day twenty I would dedicate to the spread of the religion that I believe to be true...and if people chose to reject it, I would respect their choice. Day 21...spend the rest of my eternity with my God.

However......my life is not according to my choice...for I have those who are depending on me to be there to help raise them through their lives...so, I am sorry, but my life belongs to them, and I won't be able to do all of those things. To sacrifice my life, and take it from my daughters would be selfish on my part...only they can give it up.

[soundofmusic]

I'm not sure I'd take it, even if you could wish yourself out of the 20 days thing. I think that having your every wish granted would be pretty miserable. Firstly, it would make everything too easy; you'd never feel a sense of accomplishment. Secondly, humans need misery; its essential to our concept of self-definition. Thirdly, even after you'd cured cancer, abolished poverty e.t.c, people would still be lining up to ask you to make wishes on their behalf, which would get very dull, very quickly. Finally, absolute power corrupts us all - after a while, you'd start to abuse that power, no matter how noble your original intentions were!

You are a fine young man Lokasenna, with a good moral outlook and work ethic I don't think I'd do much more for the human race than I am right now. I would perhaps give a bit of money to certain causes but I would not want to put into motion something that we already have difficulty with in America; where the discovery of ways to make people live longer and treat life threatening illness is causing a crushing financial blow to the economy, and causing overcrowding.
I have never found personally, that I have had to work for something to enjoy it; actually, I like things better when I do nothing for them. I have never found that gifts make many any more corrupt than what I am. If a corrupt person receives money, he will become more corrupt. If a good man receives money, well, who knows...

[soundofmusic]

It's hysterical that only the original poster even mentioned doing good things (like curing cancer and eradicating world hunger) before the twenty days are up. Everyone else is worried that twenty days of fulfillment would be boring for them after a while. And you gotta love "humans need misery; its essential to our concept of self-definition" as an excuse for not doing anything good for the world before you die.
Nice bunch.

You are an excellent politician, you are explointing everyones weaknesses without making an effective argument or recomending a viable solution

I don't think I could live - forever, or even for the weekend - with the knowledge that I'd nailed Sarah-Jessica Parker. Even with immortality on offer, I'd die of embarrassment.

You must be either blind or young.

I'm 51 and I have twenty-twenty, since the Lazik.
I also have standards. I mean, really. Not only is SJP plain as a gate, but she plays that woman who thinks that shoes denote character. She's almost as repulsive as Stevie Nicks - though obviously not quite.

I wouldn't worry, it seems that plain Sarah with her rather large nose has chosen the effeminant, but very nice man to have a lovely family with. She goes to work, makes a good income, suports a husband who has an inferior income and gives the American public what they want to watch: a bimbo that loves shoes.
Stevie Nicks is a very talented and beautiful woman, and has accomplished a great deal in her lifetime, despite many personal hardships.

[MarkBastable]

Stevie Nicks is a very talented and beautiful woman, and has accomplished a great deal in her lifetime, despite many personal hardships.

That is one view. There are others.

I, for instance, do not dislike Stevie Nicks merely because she sings like a whistle in a plughole. I dislike her for her style - she thinks she's a faerie elf but she looks like a transvestite gnome. I dislike her for her vapid, groundless philosophising. I dislike her for her contrived, solipsistic lyrics and for the fact that she believes she's writing poetry. I dislike her for her cultivated air of floaty, ethereal otherworldliness - which consists mainly of wearing dresses with wizard-sleeves in which she waves her arms about like a four-year-old trying to be a tree. But mainly I dislike her for her unshakeable and conceited conviction that she's any good at anything apart from lending some post-acid masturbatory glamour to an otherwise talented but unphotogenic rock band.

I hope that's clear. Thank you.

Tomorrow - Judy Garland: what a terrible waste of time.
Friday - Jim Morrison: shameless charlatan or self-deluding narcissist?

[Katy North]

Curing cancer and beating hunger wouldn't make it heaven on earth.

Touche, Mr. Atheist, Touche. Though I must mention that I meant for the word "heaven" to mean "Ideal place" and not "God's country".

[Apathy]

reminds me of faust...
I would take the twenty days, only so I could read every book ever written. It has always frustrated me that even if you dedicated your entire life to reading you would never be able to read even a decent portion of the world's literature

[Babbalanja]

I think eradicating disease would be a snap compared to making society itself more sane.

I'd make sure the economy were geared toward filling human needs and not just creating wealth. No more exploitation, no more vested interests, no more environmental havoc. And when the government can't be influenced by powerful lobbyists or moneyed interests, it can protect the populace from the predations of financial scam artists. Furthermore, health care and the arts won't be subject to cost-benefit analyses that don't benefit society in the long run.

And education would be geared toward making people understand the difference between knowledge and wishful thinking. Any mode of inquiry that can't admit error isn't a true mode of inquiry. Any claim made in society has to be able to be subjected to analysis and criticism. Therefore, goodbye, propaganda, pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, superstition, and religion.

Regards,

Istvan

[BienvenuJDC]

I think eradicating disease would be a snap compared to making society itself more sane.

I'd make sure the economy were geared toward filling human needs and not just creating wealth. No more exploitation, no more vested interests, no more environmental havoc. And when the government can't be influenced by powerful lobbyists or moneyed interests, it can protect the populace from the predations of financial scam artists. Furthermore, health care and the arts won't be subject to cost-benefit analyses that don't benefit society in the long run.

And education would be geared toward making people understand the difference between knowledge and wishful thinking. Any mode of inquiry that can't admit error isn't a true mode of inquiry. Any claim made in society has to be able to be subjected to analysis and criticism. Therefore, goodbye, propaganda, pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, superstition, and religion.

Regards,

Istvan

Great thoughts!

[soundofmusic]

That is one view. There are others.

I, for instance, do not dislike Stevie Nicks merely because she sings like a whistle in a plughole. I dislike her for her style - she thinks she's a faerie elf but she looks like a transvestite gnome. I dislike her for her vapid, groundless philosophising. I dislike her for her contrived, solipsistic lyrics and for the fact that she believes she's writing poetry. I dislike her for her cultivated air of floaty, ethereal otherworldliness - which consists mainly of wearing dresses with wizard-sleeves in which she waves her arms about like a four-year-old trying to be a tree. But mainly I dislike her for her unshakeable and conceited conviction that she's any good at anything apart from lending some post-acid masturbatory glamour to an otherwise talented but unphotogenic rock band.

I hope that's clear. Thank you.

Tomorrow - Judy Garland: what a terrible waste of time.
Friday - Jim Morrison: shameless charlatan or self-deluding narcissist?

Would you please post a piture of yourself in normal dress; I've never met the head of the rock star fashion police. It might also be nice to have a list of your accomplishments and current bank balance; so that we can compare them to Miss Nicks.

Just saw your picture; okay, you might look a little better than Stevie in drag...Maybe you could grow your hair a bit and do a keith Richards; If you have a voice you could wear a crown and velvet robe and do Freddy Mercury, ....The point is, none of these people made it because of their voice; they made it because they had attitude and some bizaar idea that none of us came up with first....oh, you might try madonnas pasties, too

[MarkBastable]

When I was seventeen, I was watching a music show on TV at home and I happened to mention that I thought Englebert Humperdinck was crap.

My father said, "You wouldn't mind having his money," as if that were a crushing and unanswerable rebuttal of my critical stance regarding the mono-browed crooner of Please Release Me.

What I didn't say then, but I can say now, is, "Nope, I certainly would not mind having his money. You'll get very little argument from me on that score. Now - to get back to the issue at hand - he's totally crap, isn't he?"

The thrust of my dad's argument - and yours, soundofmusic - is that no one less successful is any position to criticise someone more successful. No one who has made no money as a singer can criticise someone who has made lots of money as a singer. No critic, in effect, can criticise anyone who's done anything that the critic hasn't done. This, it seems to me, is a pretty untenable basis for appreciation of the arts.

Still, let's say we're all going to adopt it - who, would you say, is qualified to express an opinion about Stevie Nicks? Apart from yourself, obviously.