4 ms·

You say it yourself. The "order of magnitude" is different. It's still present everywhere and always will be. Even places like Iceland, one of the least corrupt

You say it yourself. The "order of magnitude" is different. It's still present everywhere and always will be. Even places like Iceland, one of the least corrupt societies in the word has corruption: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Iceland http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Iceland Show me a single case of any society having never had corruption.

Retra 12y ago
What you are arguing is either wrong or tautological. What is the relevance of the fact that nobody can get rid of all corruption? How do you even know it's a fact, except by some appeal to history? You might as well be arguing that humans can't possibly fly because up until 1903 nobody had. "The Write brothers will surely fail! Show me a single case of anybody having ever flown." Corruption is an extremely difficult problem to combat. But what reason do you have to say that it can't be solved? Maybe you should produce an example of some corruption for which there can be no possible manner of correcting. The ease and at which you've adopted this attitude of cynicism and helplessness is not making the world a better place, nor does it provide an example of good decision-making or maturity. It's classic FUD.
- mahranch 12y ago
  > How do you even know it's a fact, except by some appeal to history? Does nature create perfect humans? If your answer is anything but yes, then it's a fact that corruption is a part of nature, much like thunderstorms or a sun rise. > But what reason do you have to say that it can't be solved? Because it's inherent to our nature. Can you stop people from loving one another? Do you think that's possible? If your answer is anything but "Yes", then you have your answer on corruption. It's exactly the same thing. Trying to eliminate something that humans have been doing since our existence isn't something that can be solved with naive optimism. The answer isn't to eliminate, but to mitigate and minimize its effects. It's very similar to the war on drugs. You're never going to stop people from doing drugs, so you work to minimize their usage - legalize it and regulate it so you can minimize the damage.
  - Retra 12y ago
    >Does nature create perfect humans? If your answer is anything but yes, then it's a fact that corruption is a part of nature, much like thunderstorms or a sun rise. This is complete bullshit and you should know better. Nature also created smallpox, if you'll recall. But we killed that just fine. You're a part of nature, and you'll die too. > Trying to eliminate something that humans have been doing since our existence isn't something that can be solved with naive optimism. Like flight? I'm not advocating naive optimism. I'm advocating a rational exposition of possible solutions, and you are stubbornly obedient to your own expectations of preferred attitude in a way that has nothing to do with solving problems. And don't try to use meaningless examples like 'perfect human' and 'love' to argue about corruption. Until you've got some firm grasp on what corruption is in a way that can be consistently communicated, you are doing nothing but trying to define yourself to be correct.
    - mahranch 12y ago
      > Nature also created smallpox, if you'll recall. But we killed that just fine. You're a part of nature, and you'll die too. You're not comparing apples and apples. You're comparing apples and oranges. If you want a more accurate comparison, it would be like if humans wiped out disease completely. And we're not even close to that. In truth, it would be impossible. Diseases will adapt and evolve to fight whatever cures we can throw at it. We can minimize and mitigate their effects, however. > Like flight? Do you think you could stop every human on this planet from loving? Again, if your answer is anything but "yes", then you're self-admittedly wrong. A hypocrite. You can't eliminate something that is fundamental to human nature. It's silly and naive to even consider it. > And don't try to use meaningless examples like 'perfect human' and 'love' to argue about corruption. Why not? You're trying to eliminate something that is inherent to our very existence. Ok, so you don't want to use "love". Then how about laughter. Do you think it's possible to eliminate laughter if, for whatever reason, we wanted to get rid of humor? It's a rhetorical question. No, you can't get rid of humor. And no, you can't get rid of corruption. They're the same exact thing. They're part of us. And always will be.
      - Retra 12y ago

Retra 12y ago

What you are arguing is either wrong or tautological. What is the relevance of the fact that nobody can get rid of all corruption? How do you even know it's a fact, except by some appeal to history? You might as well be arguing that humans can't possibly fly because up until 1903 nobody had. "The Write brothers will surely fail! Show me a single case of anybody having ever flown." Corruption is an extremely difficult problem to combat. But what reason do you have to say that it can't be solved? Maybe you should produce an example of some corruption for which there can be no possible manner of correcting. The ease and at which you've adopted this attitude of cynicism and helplessness is not making the world a better place, nor does it provide an example of good decision-making or maturity. It's classic FUD.

mahranch 12y ago
> How do you even know it's a fact, except by some appeal to history? Does nature create perfect humans? If your answer is anything but yes, then it's a fact that corruption is a part of nature, much like thunderstorms or a sun rise. > But what reason do you have to say that it can't be solved? Because it's inherent to our nature. Can you stop people from loving one another? Do you think that's possible? If your answer is anything but "Yes", then you have your answer on corruption. It's exactly the same thing. Trying to eliminate something that humans have been doing since our existence isn't something that can be solved with naive optimism. The answer isn't to eliminate, but to mitigate and minimize its effects. It's very similar to the war on drugs. You're never going to stop people from doing drugs, so you work to minimize their usage - legalize it and regulate it so you can minimize the damage.
- Retra 12y ago
  >Does nature create perfect humans? If your answer is anything but yes, then it's a fact that corruption is a part of nature, much like thunderstorms or a sun rise. This is complete bullshit and you should know better. Nature also created smallpox, if you'll recall. But we killed that just fine. You're a part of nature, and you'll die too. > Trying to eliminate something that humans have been doing since our existence isn't something that can be solved with naive optimism. Like flight? I'm not advocating naive optimism. I'm advocating a rational exposition of possible solutions, and you are stubbornly obedient to your own expectations of preferred attitude in a way that has nothing to do with solving problems. And don't try to use meaningless examples like 'perfect human' and 'love' to argue about corruption. Until you've got some firm grasp on what corruption is in a way that can be consistently communicated, you are doing nothing but trying to define yourself to be correct.
  - mahranch 12y ago
    > Nature also created smallpox, if you'll recall. But we killed that just fine. You're a part of nature, and you'll die too. You're not comparing apples and apples. You're comparing apples and oranges. If you want a more accurate comparison, it would be like if humans wiped out disease completely. And we're not even close to that. In truth, it would be impossible. Diseases will adapt and evolve to fight whatever cures we can throw at it. We can minimize and mitigate their effects, however. > Like flight? Do you think you could stop every human on this planet from loving? Again, if your answer is anything but "yes", then you're self-admittedly wrong. A hypocrite. You can't eliminate something that is fundamental to human nature. It's silly and naive to even consider it. > And don't try to use meaningless examples like 'perfect human' and 'love' to argue about corruption. Why not? You're trying to eliminate something that is inherent to our very existence. Ok, so you don't want to use "love". Then how about laughter. Do you think it's possible to eliminate laughter if, for whatever reason, we wanted to get rid of humor? It's a rhetorical question. No, you can't get rid of humor. And no, you can't get rid of corruption. They're the same exact thing. They're part of us. And always will be.
    - Retra 12y ago