Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 3 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 71% |
Arguments: | 3 |
Debates: | 0 |
Well you obviously did not know the meaning behind my statement. You're first mistake was you false presumption that I mean 'weak' as in 'someone who cannot take care of themselves'- which you clarified with your false analogy that included an evolutionary necessity and predisposition (taking care of a child).
But to clarify I meant 'weak' as in unable to take care of themselves (e.g. a disabled person). This excludes children as the care for a child is necessary for evolutionary progress.
There is a reason people get to point where they cannot reproduce and they get old and die. And people try there hardest to prevent that by giving the best care to these individuals (and its not for you illusory meaning 'wisdom'. You know, as well as I, that most people care for elders for the simple reason of emotional attachment. Essentially the fallacy your expressing is wishful thinking.
Maybe in the case of Einstein one will try there best to keep him alive so he could illuminate more physical laws, but this is obviously a rare case.
Protecting the weak does kind of refute the notion of evolution.
Before I exhaustively explicate on what causes global warming please clarify, you're joking right?
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |