It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Because we all know to some extent every single one of us is responsible for the world we live in.
They believe wealth is a zero-sum game, that when one gets rich it means another is getting poor. They believe the rich get rich off the backs of others. These are false beliefs.
The title of this book, Nonzero, refers to the concept of the "non-zero-sum," which comes from game theory. Looking at human history--and for that matter the whole history of life on earth--through the lenses of game theory can change your view of life. At least, that is a premise of this book. What exactly is meant by "change your view of life"? That is a question with a book-length answer. But there is enough material on this website to give you the general idea.
Meanwhile, some examples of non-zero-sum things: arms control negotiations, trading gossip, the relationship among genes on a genome, and such transactions as buying a car, buying a book....
But I don’t think a “materialist” account of religion’s origin, history, and future—like the one I’m giving here—precludes the validity of a religious worldview. In fact, I contend that the history of religion presented in this book, materialist though it is, actually affirms the validity of a religious worldview; not a traditionally religious worldview, but a worldview that is in some meaningful sense religious.
It sounds paradoxical. On the one hand, I think gods arose as illusions, and that the subsequent history of the idea of god is, in some sense, the evolution of an illusion. On the other hand: (1) the story of this evolution itself points to the existence of something you can meaningfully call divinity; and (2) the “illusion,” in the course of evolving, has gotten streamlined in a way that moved it closer to plausibility. In both of these senses, the illusion has gotten less and less illusory.
Does that make sense? Probably not. I hope it will by the end of the book. For now I should just concede that the kind of god that remains plausible, after all this streamlining, is not the kind of god that most religious believers currently have in mind.
The left loves the rich they just hate arrogant assholes whole think just because they inherited money from daddy that makes them the privileged class and better than everyone
originally posted by: neo96
Well the left did create the death tax which takes half over everything inherited.
If anyone thinks they are better than everyone is LEFTISTS.
Which applies to only .2% of the largest and wealthiest people at their time of Death.
You're mixing together different forms of taxation. The lottery taxes have nothing to do with the Death Tax. We don't pay out Lottery Winnings to a dead person.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: ketsuko
Oh please. My own greed? I'm not making any f*cking money off of you or anyone else so enough with the accusations.