Corvus

Yes, I got that.

Captain Fatbastard Mayhem thought that pointing out the irony in saying, "Trump is childish, plus he has small hands...teehee" is the equivalent of ''all humour = immature humour". I corrected him, why boo?

Laughing at people's physical characteristics or superimposing their head on that of a child is funny if you're 7. You can call 'satire' an adult *genre* if you like, though.

Nope. Humour can be childish or it can be mature and sophisticated.

The irony of people calling Trump immature while laughing at a lego meme and the size of his hands....

...Except yours right?

I think we're in agreement. The things we do should be done because they are worthwhile and meaningful. And sometimes things are worth fighting for. It seems though that many others here focus on the insignificance of the earth when viewed from space which just is more consistent with the nihilist interpretation than the way you're looking at Sagan's statement.

But, I thought we should just all get along? What about tolerating points of view other than your own?

Right, I figured the environment or Trump would elicit a response. Aside from merely asserting that we can't afford to f*ck the earth up, what is your case for why that is important in the history and scope of the cosmos? You see Sagan's speech as a call to apathy, whereas it's a call to care and conservation. You're view on it say more about you than what it says about Sagan.

"What's needed is a bit of perspective. Realise that the world really is just an insignificant speck, so we may as well just all get along. It's the only world we have, at the moment. No need to wage unnecessary wars in the name of your imaginary friend, or your desire for endless expansion of your dominion. " - Myles Mahew. So, "don't be a jerk we should all get along, while I insult every Jew, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or everybody who doesn't share my view that gods are imaginary friends". When people say we should all get along and don't be a jerk, I suspect what they really mean is that "Everybody should be more like me, and value the things I value". Myles here's seems to think it's okay to be a jerk to religious people, because he doesn't value such things, and that belies his pretense of virtue. Everybody believes some things are worth fighting for and everybody thinks it's okay to be a jerk to those who deserve it. Pretending otherwise is to deceive yourself.

I don't think the little dot theory puts anything into perspective. It's used to subjectively dismiss things deemed unimportant by those who use it, but it can really used for anything. So environmentalism: Who cares whether a tiny blue dot in the grand universe has panda bears or not? Politics: Who cares that a country on a tiny blue dot is run by an orange man called Trump, yet the same people who are now advocating for getting along spend a year whining about the dude in the Donald Drump thread. Who cares that some potato headed criminal ran a country called South Africa on a tiny blue dot in a grand universe yet most of you are glad to see him gone. Who cares what you think on a tiny blue dot in an infinite universe? See? The tiny blue dot thing, isn't an argument it's a self-serving dismissal.

Hang on, there. You're assuming your opinion is worth responding to, but in the grand scheme of things, your opinion being part of the earth is also small fry, right? What I see from all you guys is basically that any point of view that differs from your own must be seen as part of a small speck of dust, yet the things you value, that is of some importance. Otherwise you wouldn't bother defending it, would you?

Lol. So much back-pedalling. So the profound wisdom that you all are so impressed with is essentially, "don't be a jerk"? This is the problem with Sagan's statement. At worst it's self-defeating and at best it's worthlessly trivial. How many of you guys thought being a jerk was what one ought to be prior to being enlightened by Sagan?

Okay, so the wars that should be fought are to protect what is just, and the ones that shouldn't be fought are unjust wars. Nothing to do with how small the earth appears from a distance then, yes?

What? So just because earth looks like a dot from really far away it makes willing to fight and die for what one believes to be right, meaningless? Does Carl Sagan's opinions about meaning also become less significant when considered from far away? What a stupid remark.