"One of the luckiest people in the history of human kind" ....really? Whilst luck plays a part in everyone's life, does his talent, determination, intelligence, hard work etc.. not count for anything?
[/QUOTE]
no, if you were born in 1845 in Russia, for example[/QUOTE]
Like Rimsky-Korsakov? Or Tchaikovsky?
bucsateflon · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Like Rimsky-Korsakov? Or Tchaikovsky?[/QUOTE]
First of all, one major element, the "time" aspect. To qualify for the "luckiest people in the history of human kind" you have to be born at the end of WW2 or very close to it... not gonna go into details why is that.
now lets see your stupid example Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky born in 1840 died at 53 years old of "cholera from drinking unsoiled water at a local restaurant".
does he fit on the list for "luckiest people in the history of human kind"?
cmsdrums · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]cmsdrums wrote:[/b]
"One of the luckiest people in the history of human kind" ....really? Whilst luck plays a part in everyone's life, does his talent, determination, intelligence, hard work etc.. not count for anything?
[/QUOTE]
no, if you were born in 1845 in Russia, for example[/QUOTE]
Which is the exact point I made in my post by saying all of us here are lucky by virtue of "WHERE and WHEN we're born..."
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Like Rimsky-Korsakov? Or Tchaikovsky?[/QUOTE]
First of all, one major element, the "time" aspect. To qualify for the "luckiest people in the history of human kind" you have to be born at the end of WW2 or very close to it... not gonna go into details why is that.
now lets see your stupid example Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky born in 1840 died at 53 years old of "cholera from drinking unsoiled water at a local restaurant".
does he fit on the list for "luckiest people in the history of human kind"?[/QUOTE]
Riiiight, so you arbitrarily come up with some standards and move the goalposts whenever the results don't suit your preconceptions, got it.
So, born at the end of WWII it is. Never mind the inflated living standards of some privileged groups throughout history, they don't qualify. Why? Because bucsateflon says so. Move over, social history. The alt right oracle's fantasies are way better than real historiography.
Stick · Member since
Happiness is relative, luck isnt. Everything good in life is because of luck. All the good things you can bring to life to further your goals is because of luck. You did not create yourself and everything you become after you are born is based on how lucky you were at birth. Time, place, abilities, type of upbringing, emotional and physical development. Everything is luck.
Also, humans like us have been around for at least 200.000 years. Billions of humans have walked this earth already your own luck is just how you yourself interpret it. Some correlate it to happiness, some correlate it to processes they don't understand. But if you see good as luck, which it is seeing how the factors involved in life are infinite, than everything is all about luck.
bucsateflon · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Riiiight, so you arbitrarily come up with some standards and move the goalposts whenever the results don't suit your preconceptions, got it.
So, born at the end of WWII it is. Never mind the inflated living standards of some privileged groups throughout history, they don't qualify. Why? Because bucsateflon says so. Move over, social history. The alt right oracle's fantasies are way better than real historiography.[/QUOTE]
I really, really believe your brain does not function right. you are as they say.... mentally handicapped !
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Riiiight, so you arbitrarily come up with some standards and move the goalposts whenever the results don't suit your preconceptions, got it.
So, born at the end of WWII it is. Never mind the inflated living standards of some privileged groups throughout history, they don't qualify. Why? Because bucsateflon says so. Move over, social history. The alt right oracle's fantasies are way better than real historiography.[/QUOTE]
I really, really believe your brain does not function right. you are as they say.... mentally handicapped ![/QUOTE]
Resorting to insults after you've had your ass handed to you. I'd expect no different.
Thomasquinn is one of the most intelligent people you will ever speak with in your life. If only you didn't suffer from Dunning Kruger effect, you'd understand the point he made.
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
First of all, one major element, the "time" aspect. To qualify for the "luckiest people in the history of human kind" you have to be born at the end of WW2 or very close to it... not gonna go into details why is that.[/QUOTE]
Plenty have argued that there are many points in human history that were the best times to be alive - the beginning of the industrial revolution, the Renaissance, the formation of Agrarian societies, etc.
You clearly haven't thought this through. Or you're just not as smart as you think you are.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Stick wrote:[/b]
Happiness is relative, luck isnt. Everything good in life is because of luck. All the good things you can bring to life to further your goals is because of luck. You did not create yourself and everything you become after you are born is based on how lucky you were at birth. Time, place, abilities, type of upbringing, emotional and physical development. Everything is luck.
Also, humans like us have been around for at least 200.000 years. Billions of humans have walked this earth already your own luck is just how you yourself interpret it. Some correlate it to happiness, some correlate it to processes they don't understand. But if you see good as luck, which it is seeing how the factors involved in life are infinite, than everything is all about luck. [/QUOTE]
Nicely done.
Indeed, the universe is random and unsympathetic. So much boils down to sheer luck.
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Stick wrote:[/b]
Happiness is relative, luck isnt. Everything good in life is because of luck. All the good things you can bring to life to further your goals is because of luck. You did not create yourself and everything you become after you are born is based on how lucky you were at birth. Time, place, abilities, type of upbringing, emotional and physical development. Everything is luck.
Also, humans like us have been around for at least 200.000 years. Billions of humans have walked this earth already your own luck is just how you yourself interpret it. Some correlate it to happiness, some correlate it to processes they don't understand. But if you see good as luck, which it is seeing how the factors involved in life are infinite, than everything is all about luck. [/QUOTE]
Nicely done.
Indeed, the universe is random and unsympathetic. So much boils down to sheer luck.
[/QUOTE]
Did http://www.queenlive.ca appear magically on the internet because of sheer luck?
Roger may have been lucky, but would Queen have existed or become successful without Roger's talents, efforts and valuable influence?
Stick · Member since
You clearly dont understand what is meant here by luck.
bucsateflon · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Plenty have argued that there are many points in human history that were the best times to be alive - the beginning of the industrial revolution, the Renaissance, the formation of Agrarian societies, etc.
You clearly haven't thought this through. Or you're just not as smart as you think you are.
[/QUOTE]
If I say the earth is round, you go against and say the earth is flat.
That shows how stupid you are making yourselves look like retards, you are succeeding in going full retard, no doubt...
I am talking about "the top luckiest people in the history oh human kind"
and your imbecilic counter response is "the formation of Agrarian societies" and that other moron says a man dead at 54 from cholera is a good example also.
Are really that idiotic? I think you are.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
If I say the earth is round, you go against and say the earth is flat.[/QUOTE]
That's rich, coming from someone who moved the goalposts earlier when proven wrong.
[QUOTE] [b]bucsateflon wrote:[/b]
I am talking about "the top luckiest people in the history oh human kind"
and your imbecilic counter response is "the formation of Agrarian societies" and that other moron says a man dead at 54 from cholera is a good example also.
Are really that idiotic? I think you are.[/QUOTE]
Well, let's recap:
You said to qualify to be in the "top luckiest people in the history of human kind, you have to be born at the end of WW2 or very close to it."
I provided a rational counterargument to challenge your position that 20th century celebrities are at the top of the food chain, because basic understanding of epistemology and sociology says there are many ways to define "lucky" in historical context.
Instead of thinking this through and providing a rational rebuttal, you called me "full retard."
You certainly have the potential to be intelligent, but you seem to be more interested in calling people names than learning something. Good luck with that.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
Did http://www.queenlive.ca appear magically on the internet because of sheer luck?
Roger may have been lucky, but would Queen have existed or become successful without Roger's talents, efforts and valuable influence?[/QUOTE]
Indeed not. But everything is ultimately a combination of things we can and cannot control.
Queenlive.ca entailed a fuck ton of work on my part, but here is an incomplete list of things that had nothing to do with me:
-the invention of recorded audio
-the invention of radio
-the existence of Queen and all of their influences
-the invention of cameras
-the existence of photographers
-the invention of computers
-the invention of the internet
-being born in a country, a time in history, and into a decent enough family where I have the time and space to pursue such interests
-my health
Any one of these things doesn't happen, and there's no website.
bucsateflon · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
You certainly have the potential to be intelligent, but you seem to be more interested in calling people names than learning something. Good luck with that.
[/QUOTE]
