The best and worst human that ever lived
- Thread starter rainforests1
- Start date
Blobbenstein
.......
Positive or negative contributions to mankind and other animals, but it would have to be judged based on the limitations put on them by the societies in which they lived.
Obviously the best and worst would be opposite in most cases. The best:
Vegan who doesn't support any forms of animal cruelty, including less-talked about issues like pesticides.
Very good environmentally with a small family or no family.
One who looks at humans as individuals rather than groups.
No prudish tendancies.
No anger problems.
Mostly pacifist leanings.
I'm sure there are others, but off the top of my head that's what came to mind.
Vegan who doesn't support any forms of animal cruelty, including less-talked about issues like pesticides.
Very good environmentally with a small family or no family.
One who looks at humans as individuals rather than groups.
No prudish tendancies.
No anger problems.
Mostly pacifist leanings.
I'm sure there are others, but off the top of my head that's what came to mind.
Honestly, no. Not in this contest. They're not likely to have as much impact. If they did, they would no longer be ordinary.
Clueless Git
Plant powered
Best human ever would have to be a toss up between between Genghis Khan and Hitler. That being for their unswerving dedication to improving the human gene pool.
Worst human ever would be dedicated to self service with absolutely ZERO concept of being of service to others.
No idea who the worst human ever is/was but there's a 1/7 chance they were/are a descendant of Genghis Khan and they almost certainly work(ed) in banking.
Worst human ever would be dedicated to self service with absolutely ZERO concept of being of service to others.
No idea who the worst human ever is/was but there's a 1/7 chance they were/are a descendant of Genghis Khan and they almost certainly work(ed) in banking.
Blobbenstein
.......
yakherder
老外
Ghengis Khan would be a tossup. Yes, he made great progress on reducing overpopulation, and relied on horse archery that, though not animal friendly, did not rely on oil. But he was also pro rape, which was kind of unnecessary.
yakherder
老外
Actually I think it's pretty much impossible to define. Some of the most well intentioned people in the world either lack the ability to produce results or are only able to do so with the aid of the above mentioned evils.
The problem is we know very little about previous leaders' animal rights policies so that makes it hard to judge. You have to consider everything a person stood for, so human rights is just one small part of it. There have been billions and billions of humans throughout history. I'm sure there are many people worse than the bad guys and better than the good guys that we hear about purely from a character standpoint.
Paul1
Newcomer
There's much more to it than this but to make my thoughts on this subject short:
Good people sacrifice themselves to benefit others, bad people sacrifice others to benefit themselves.
Good people sacrifice themselves to benefit others, bad people sacrifice others to benefit themselves.
I thought Hitler almost was killed fighting in a war. George HW Bush and John McCain fought in wars, but both had bad qualities. Timothy McVeigh was in the military. Where do they all fit into this?
Paul1
Newcomer
You have to look at their complete lives, I guess. Once given enough power, what did they choose to do?
