McGill University concluded last year after studying a couple of those hospital bugs that the biggest culprit in hospital superbug transmission is high pressure water taps. These commercial oxygenated high pressure taps are installed more and in most commercial buildings. So McGill University is going to work on replacing all their faucets and increasing the ratio of bathrooms to paptients, in order to reduce transmission.
Other superbugs are direct consequences of GMO and synthetic pesticides. There are many causes. But each and every one of the multiple causes is compounded by population density and secondly, not to be forgotten, building insulation. As modern H.sapiens with modern homes, those of us living in colder climes are experiencing an onslaught of diseases which are related to our filthy indoor air conditions. We are animals, we need clean circulating air... but somewhere along the religious pathway of dominion over nature and separation of human from the "evil animals", that was forgotten.
Yes TNT, insulation poses lots of issues, from asbestos fibers on early insulators to trapped debris which harbors bacteria, allergens and mold, all detrimental to human health.
Also many roof insulations techniques trap dust and debris, to become a fire hazard in itself, even though the fiberglass or wool insulation itself is reasonably fire resistant.
Such is one of many hazards humans have created for themselves.
Sadly, I am VERY familiar with super bugs. MRSA in particular. A major reason for these super bacteria is the overuse, as a food additive, in raising factory farmed animals. The conditions in these massive concentration camps is so filthy, the air so rich with ammonia fumes and the stench of feces, and the crowding so extreme, that these animals require constant antibiotics. The drugs also speed growth.
Then, a careless attitude toward cleanliness and hand washing, filthy hospital room walls, the curtains around each bed, and medical instruments, like blood pressure cuffs and stethescopes, all contribute. The hospitals have policies in place to reduce their liabililty in deaths resulting from their active transmission of these bugs. They test entering patients, to prove they already were infected. They NEVER test patients leaving the hospital. Why? Because, that would show they caught the infections while in the hospital.
Oh, I forgot. It is because of our over-population that we raise animals in this unhealthy, unethical way.
Which is why I got irritated when a certain person came around with their high and mighty talk of purpose is to "do good", when the definition of "good" is so entirely subjective. And what is "good" for the few is deleterious for so many.
TNT666 - you are so wonderful. Thanks very much. I agree that good is subjective. In fact there could be a discussion on exactly what the meaning of "good" is. Many thanks for your intelligent responses. Appreciate it.
The curmudgeon thanks you :)
Thank you GOD'aye for your thoughtful responses here. I agree about antibiotics being overused.
When tackling a question such as "What is the meaning to life?", it would do us well to understand what exactly we mean by purpose, for every word has multiple meanings in all its different contexts. A person may or may not be cognitive of the distinctions between the ideas referred to by this word, so any position must clarify its terms to enhance comprehensibility. There are 2 dichotomies which I will be focusing on:
Next, I will briefly explain the different ways in which purpose may be used.
So to answer the question: Can our lives have purpose(A/B)? Absolutely. But can our lives have purpose(C)? This is a distinction of paramount importance. One must realize the extent and confines of their conclusion, for if they have worked out a problem using some limited conception of purpose, and then adapt it to encompass and breathe life into a purpose that exists in itself, then he has just committed a semantic shift fallacy perhaps even without his knowledge. On paper it may all appear the same, but someone proclaiming to have found purpose must have some conception of what that "purpose" is, and that conception makes all the difference. Some people tend to drop their intellectual guard after some time, perhaps weary of being unable to grasp what they seek, that they start to confuse purpose(A) or purpose(B) for purpose(C). They may even be satisfied in their abilities to choose some worthy goal to live their lives for, or consciously work towards being a model citizen in some arbitrarily chosen system to follow. I risk controversy for saying what I'm about to say, but it is not wrong to do either, even whether that system be a system of God or some system of naturalism drawn from scientific principles such as Evolution as inspiration (such as a system backed by Christopher Hitchens). Neither are wrong. But I do believe in intellectual honesty -- as long as a person recognizes and accepts that his purpose is either purpose(A) or purpose(B), but not purpose(C), and be honest and forthcoming about that revelation, then I should also accept that in the face of overwhelming unknowns and absurdities it becomes necessary to adopt a "purpose", whatever it may be, or face eternal stagnation wrestling with a spectral problem that may as well be epistemically impossible to solve.
Many thanks Jonathan. What a wonderful piece of writing. Very well written.
Important that I update this - so the new members can see it.
Jonathan Chang's response gets to the heart of the problem. Certainly, I can have a purpose in the sense that I can make myself useful participating in the community, contributing to knowledge, raising and caring for my family, etc. But can I have a transcendental 'purpose in itself'? I am not so sure.
When I was a Christian, my ultimate 'purpose in itself' was to get home to heaven. (Truly a terrible, selfish motivation for doing good things.) But I never really considered the logical progression: What would my purpose become once I got there? What happened once my body and soul were transported into utopian space? What purpose COULD they serve in a place that is by definition free of all problems and suffering? My priest would have told me my purpose in heaven was to glorify God, but that seems awfully narcissistic on his part.
It seems to me that even the religious lack a Kantian Purpose with a capital 'P,' perhaps even more so than some humanists.
For my part, I have never heard a better answer to this conundrum than this verse:
"Look at the flowers, so faithful to what is earthly
to whom we lend fate from the very border of fate
and if they are sad at all about the fact that they must whither and die
perhaps it is our vocation to be their regret." (Rilke)
Flowers have a biological purpose, absolutely. A narrative purpose, briefly, if we impose one on them. And an ultimate Purpose, unlikely.
I doubt we humans are so terribly different.
The closest thing to an ultimate, sacred purpose we have is tucked into the last line, and it is, in fact, not a sacred purpose but a poetic one: Perhaps it is our vocation to practice and extend our human consciousness.
"Perhaps it is our vocation to be their regret."