How can people believe anyone "deserves" anything?

Or that mankind "deserved" to survive long enough to figure a way out of the Stone Age in the first place.

But I suppose that almost answers its own question. They figured out pretending to be civilized (people "owning" this and "deserving" that and the label for that is this and your name is this) is the way to not be savage.

The difference, I suppose, is between pretending and believing.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

A parent can pretend their child "deserves" a reward for cleaning their room or to be punished for stomping their pet kitten to death but it's not real. The universe doesn't care about the kitten, about the room, about the child or about the parent.

You think you "deserve" to be alive right now? *beep* you, *beep* your ego and *beep* our entire species.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

The problem with you, Matt, as I see it is that you combine macro issues of the universe with micro issues of mankind. The universe as a whole couldn't care less if one small planet in the western spiral of a reasonably sized galaxy ceased to exist. But that's a long stretch from saying we don't need oxygen to survive. Some things such as "deserve, should, must, etc are subjective, but that doesn't mean they're completely fictitious concepts.

In the kingdom of the blind, you're the village idiot.

But that's a long stretch from saying we don't need oxygen to survive.
WE DON'T "NEED" ANYTHING TO SURVIVE BECAUSE WE DON'T "NEED" TO SURVIVE. WE DON'T "NEED" PERIOD.

WE WANT TO SURVIVE HENCE WE WANT OXYGEN TO SURVIVE AS LONG AS WE CAN'T SURVIVE WITHOUT IT.

THE CONCEPT OF "NEED" ADDS NOTHING TO THAT EXCEPT BOOSTS THE HUMAN EGO.

Some things such as "deserve, should, must, etc are subjective, but that doesn't mean they're completely fictitious concepts.
CONCEPTS ARE NEITHER FICTITIOUS OR NON-FICTITIOUS. THEY'RE CONCEPTS!

"NEED" IS A FICTION, WANT ISN'T. "DESERVING" TO SURVIVE IS A FICTITIOUS STATE, "NEEDING" TO SURVIVE IS A FICTITIOUS STATE, WANTING TO SURVIVE IS A NON-FICTITIOUS STATE.

For [bleep]'s sake, I hate my species. You're all egotistically insane. Seven billion of you, [bleep]ing insane.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

Good lord man, at least argue according to your own arguments.

You say "In order to survive, you don't need oxygen", and "in order to walk, you don't need legs."

Your own parameters define the discussion around "in order to walk", "in order to breathe".

So yes, I say for the thousandth time you've heard it: according to YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, you need those things IN ORDER TO do those things.

Good lord man, at least argue according to your own arguments.

You say "In order to survive, you don't need oxygen", and "in order to walk, you don't need legs."
WRONG. I SAY you dont "need legs in order to walk on legs" and you don't "need oxygen in order to survive" because you can just NEVER WALK and DIE FOR LACK OF OXYGEN because NEEDING IS A FICTIOUS STATE.

Does the difference compute to you now?

So yes, I say for the thousandth time you've heard it: according to YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, you need those things IN ORDER TO do those things.
I hate you for being another egotistically insane human. I want you and me and our entire species to go extinct 'cause we're drooling morons.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".

Clearly you aren't willing to accept the slightest concession to your theory. I seriously can't tell if you believe anything you say or you're just too far gone to talk to. So let me reiterate.

Yes, when we say we need oxygen to survive, that means not dying. It means remaining alive. Unless you know a way to survive and die at the same time, you're clearly just arguing for argument sake. You're literally a Monty Python sketch.

And as for referring to others as an egotistically insane human, "Pot, kettle. Shake hands."

In the kingdom of the blind, you're the village idiot.

Yes, when we say we need oxygen to survive, that means not dying.
Surviving means NOT DYING? Thank you so [bleep]ing much, Sherlock, I was confused. (That's sarcasm by the way)

It means remaining alive.
Thank you so [bleeping] much twice over. (That's more sarcasm)

Unless you know a way to survive and die at the same time, you're clearly just arguing for argument sake. You're literally a Monty Python sketch.
How is surviving and dying at the same time relevant to any of my points, oh wise one? (I'm gonna go out and limb and say I think I'm being a tad sarcastic here)

In the kingdom of the blind, you're the village idiot.
Yes, I'm an idiot on the Planet of The Idiots and I want us all dead. (Noo sarcasm whatsoever)


EDIT: Oh, and it's not a theory or a hypothesis, I consider it a fact just like I consider it a fact that I am not a brain in a jar being fed sensory information to believe my surroundings are real.

"Need" is just a fiction. As is "should", "must", "value" and "importance".