Why are they Celebrities?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well.....that's good...and yo don't need them to decide for you.....maybe they make you feel better. Who knows.

Anyways....be hojnest...how often did you watch a movie (TV or Home) in the last year? And what do you think all in all you payed for it?

Originally posted by Fishy
Are you so sure? Have you ever been sad or happy after hearing a song. A song can influence your entire mood and often does. Ever decided to do something after seeing a movie on a certain subject? A lot of people have... They are not doing something because the movie star says "Do this and do that" but because the movie the actor plays in makes them think about certain things. Movies can influence the minds of billions. They can make people accept or hate things, they can make people like or hate things. A great movie about the torturing of prisoners would make a lot of people wonder about prison guards and might even start a riot about it. A great movie about how good prisons are put in a realistic picture might make people believe that.
Its what happens with movies. Its what they do. They influence people, whether they like it or not.

What epiphany did "Mary-Kate and Ashley's Beach Vacation in France" give you? 😛

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What does "TV or Home" mean?Is my mood influenced by music? Not especially no. It's actually more the opposite. The only truly challenging films are usually independently made - in which the actors are paid a pittance compared to what they normally receive (which only goes to further emphasise societies misplaced values) - rarely does a big studio actually produce something of great merit other than entertainment value. They are statistical outliers rather than the standard fare for which movie stars get paid fortunes. Even then it takes a whole lot more than a "great movie" to convince me of anything. But hey, I'm a highly cynical person.

What epiphany did "Mary-Kate and Ashley's Beach Vacation in France" give you? 😛

Sorry I must have forgotten to use my head...I meant TV or Theatres.

"Mary Kate and...." hmm I think that changed my live in a way that I will never watch a movie by them again....so it influenced my live (I actually haven't seen it just giving a possible influence)

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What does "TV or Home" mean?Is my mood influenced by music? Not especially no. It's actually more the opposite. The only truly challenging films are usually independently made - in which the actors are paid a pittance compared to what they normally receive (which only goes to further emphasise societies misplaced values) - rarely does a big studio actually produce something of great merit other than entertainment value. They are statistical outliers rather than the standard fare for which movie stars get paid fortunes. Even then it takes a whole lot more than a "great movie" to convince me of anything. But hey, I'm a highly cynical person.

What epiphany did "Mary-Kate and Ashley's Beach Vacation in France" give you? 😛

Well you might not be influenced then but countless of other people are... And I never even see that movie nor do I want to. Still the point remains, a lot of people are influenced by movies and music. That makes the people that make the movies and music important to society. And thus worth a lot of money.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Sorry I must have forgotten to use my head...I meant TV or Theatres.

"Mary Kate and...." hmm I think that changed my live in a way that I will never watch a movie by them again....so it influenced my live (I actually haven't seen it just giving a possible influence)

Originally posted by Fishy
Well you might not be influenced then but countless of other people are... And I never even see that movie nor do I want to. Still the point remains, a lot of people are influenced by movies and music. That makes the people that make the movies and music important to society. And thus worth a lot of money.

Still those two are rolemodels for some people so that makes them worth something. Although nothing to most people with a brain. Just goes to show how much people don't have a brain.

And i'm not going to argue with bardock, we agree on this.. There really isn't any use to continue this debate if we have nobody to debate against.

I know you don*t pay for them on TV I DVDs you b ought or Videos or whatever .....and four movies......now lets say twenty million others did pay for four movies too.....pretty big amount of money (and four is an extremly low level) But anyway Movies and with that the Celebrities were worth aboot 30 bucks for you this year tht is a big amount of money, it adds up.....especially since you probably pay that on a yearly bases..now on the other hand how muich did you pay for the Nurses in your hospital in the last year........

Besidxes if you watch a Movie at the TV..yous till bring them money bevcause of comercials and what not....but it is a rather easy to understand and working system....

Why are you still measuring everything in terms of how much people pay for them? There's a big difference between monetary value of a profession and the value a profession provides to society, it's benefit to humanity, how productive it is, the wealth of knowledge encompassed within. There's a whole other level of value professions such as doctors, nurses, teachers, scientists have that an actor doesn't - and yet in monetary value an A-list actor probably earns 150+ times what a teacher does in a year, for a single movie. I know you're going to argue that movies impact influence people's lives etc. and are worth something to those people - but answer this then: Which would have a greater impact on humanity (humanity as a whole not Orlando Bloom fangirls or Jessica Alba fanboys) - if all the doctors were to drop dead in one day, or if all the A-list movie stars were to drop dead?

If you answer "movie stars" then society really really has misplaced values.

I just wish those actors who are being paid obscene amounts of money actually had some talent... 🙁

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Why are you still measuring everything in terms of how much people pay for them? There's a big difference between monetary value of a profession and the value a profession provides to society, it's benefit to humanity, how productive it is, the wealth of knowledge encompassed within. There's a whole other level of value professions such as doctors, nurses, teachers, scientists have that an actor doesn't - and yet in monetary value an A-list actor probably earns 150+ times what a teacher does in a year, for a single movie. I know you're going to argue that movies impact influence people's lives etc. and are worth something to those people - but answer this then: Which would have a greater impact on humanity (humanity as a whole not Orlando Bloom fangirls or Jessica Alba fanboys) - if all the doctors were to drop dead in one day, or if all the A-list movie stars were to drop dead?

If you answer "movie stars" then society really really has misplaced values.

The doctors of course...

But that does not change a thing...

We have plenty of doctors and plenty of movies. But we need to stay entertained we need to keep those movies. We pay far more for a doctor then we do for a movie. But there are more doctors then there are moviestars. In total we pay the moviestar a lot more then a doctor just because tens of millions pay that single star and only a thousand pay that single doctor.

If that one movie star would die it would make a greater impact then if that one doctor would die. Simply because more people know the movie star.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Actually they do....because they are wioth that amount of money to someone. The communistic ideal of equality is a scary scenario, why should everyone have the same...maybe I am crazy but Christian Bale that entertained me a good 2 hours in the batman movie is worth my ten bucks while some beggar on the streets of Delhi just isn't...if he is worth that for you great...go ahead...give him your money....but it's a free universe and I don't think I should be forced to adapt your set of values.

It's a "free" universe huh? Well using your own logic..what's to stop me from taking your movie money if I believe my life to be of more value than yours?

The style of thought demonstrated above and in Bardock's initial post is libertarian. The problem with the libertarian political idealogy is that everyone's value system is different. With no central moral code to go by, each individual is free to impose their values at the expense of taking away anothers. A true liberatarian society is conducive to producing an anarchic one.

Which leads us back to the initial question..

Why are movie stars celeberaties?

Answer: Because most modern societies are based on Libertarian idealogies. These idealogies value individuals who have much in the way of externals. Most in this type of society are always attempting to reach this delusional-self centered state of worth..and "celebrate" those who are able to achieve it.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
It's a "free" universe huh? Well using your own logic..what's to stop me from taking your movie money if I believe my life to be of more value than yours?

The style of thought demonstrated above and in Bardock's initial post is libertarian. The problem with the libertarian political idealogy is that everyone's value system is different. With no central moral code to go by, each individual is free to impose their values at the expense of taking away anothers. A true liberatarian society is conducive to producing an anarchic one.

Which leads us back to the initial question..

Why are movie stars celeberaties?

Answer: Because most modern societies are based on Libertarian idealogies. These idealogies value individuals who have much in the way of externals. Most in this type of society are always attempting to reach this delusional-self centered state of worth..and "celebrate" those who are able to achieve it.

What keeps you from that?...well maybe y shotgun or the people that have the same state of mind than you...I don't say that you can't take my money I can say though that I don't want and that I will do whatever I can so you won't.......misunderstanding my ligic here, eh?

The thoughts indeed arte libertarian...the problem you stated though is not true....and it is not true because we have our own morals every one has their own.....but they are guided by rules.

I guess by the way you talk aboot libertarian you are a socialist...maybe you do have a morals....but they suck.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
What keeps you from that?

The laws and the punishment that I receive upon breaking them. A society's laws are authoritative "value systems" imposed onto the individuals that live within it.

True libertarians believe that there should be no central value system that governs a culture, and that an individual should be able to freely govern themselves.

well maybe y shotgun or the people that have the same state of mind than you...I don't say that you can't take my money I can say though that I don't want and that I will do whatever I can so you won't.......misunderstanding my ligic here, eh?

No misunderstanding here. The scenarios that both of us have given would be typical ones in an anarchic/libertarian society. "Everyman for himself" and "Survival of the fittest" being the only moral codes abided by.

The thoughts indeed arte libertarian...the problem you stated though is not true....and it is not true because we have our own morals every one has their own.....but they are guided by rules.

Rules are moral codes. There is no distinction between the two. Some moral codes have authority over many, like the ones used to govern a nation.

I guess by the way you talk aboot libertarian you are a socialist...maybe you do have a morals....but they suck.....

Not a socialist..just an independent-dependent thinker. Independent when it comes to the choices I make, and dependent upon the outcomes of the choices once they've been made.

Celebrities are celebrities becuase they have a job that naturally puts them at the fron of mainstream entertainment. When millions of people know who you are, its tough not to be famous. It has nothing to do with whether or not they deserve such fame.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Soldiers....NOW...THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING UP TO.......

you really should go read up some real war literature books and go find out the truth behind all that propaganda 🙄

^to add to that guy,they also make themselves so completely at the mercy of us,it's like they expose their work to us,their hearts,and don't know what to expect - acceptance,or rejection.

like how,after opening up your heart to a girl you've yearned for for so long,you put yourself at her mercy - you either get her or you get a broken heart.and i personally feel,after going through so much to put themselves out there,they go deserve something.if what they give is really worthy,they ought to be given more.cause they're doing what the average person only dreams of,but does nothing about.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
The laws and the punishment that I receive upon breaking them. A society's laws are authoritative "value systems" imposed onto the individuals that live within it.

True libertarians believe that there should be no central value system that governs a culture, and that an individual should be able to freely govern themselves.

No misunderstanding here. The scenarios that both of us have given would be typical ones in an anarchic/libertarian society. "Everyman for himself" and "Survival of the fittest" being the only moral codes abided by.

Rules are moral codes. There is no distinction between the two. Some moral codes have authority over many, like the ones used to govern a nation.

Not a socialist..just an independent-dependent thinker. Independent when it comes to the choices I make, and dependent upon the outcomes of the choices once they've been made.

Exactly, not I am keeping yoyu from that...go ahead...do as you please.....but maybe you should consider the consequences.

This is not true.....what you are talking aboot is anarchist, close but different. Libertarians belief that there should only be a weak government, as much freedom as possible, but there have to be laws to keep everything stable.....few laws indeed...but some.

Again wrong understanding of libertarian (now you probably will claim to be a professor on that or something, I don't care, I know what I and people that consider themself real liberals belief.) And what I am saying is not what happens in a liberal society, but what is human nature, survival of the fittest is the true natur of humans and the system they got opressed in changes...not their own behaviour.

No sir, there is a big difference between morals codes and rules. Moral Code is soething that society or each individual makes up but they don't have to be kept, there won't be the same consequences as if rules are broken. Rules, or in a government laws, are now the real deal, they might be based on these fictional morals, but most probably they are just another way of keeping everything the way the government wants. Now if rules are broken you will get punished, that's what libertarians agree to, just the Moral Code is not existant it is a fake, everyone can have their own morrals as long as they keep the riules of the government.

Haha, you are funny......we talked aboot forms of government and you answer with ...wll....whatever your answer is supposed to imply. I guess you thought it sounded good, but really, didn't you just state the wya every huan must think, naturally?

Do Tinkerbell and Bitbit "deserve" the exorbitant amounts of money their respective idiot owners, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, spend on them?

Chihuahuas = ugliest dogs ever.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Do Tinkerbell and Bitbit "deserve" the exorbitant amounts of money their respective idiot owners, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, spend on them?

Chihuahuas = ugliest dogs ever.

Yes, also they are dogs I will try to make the line clear to you.

Stupid Dog - worth million dollars to - Paris Hilton .- worth billion Dollars to - her father - worth billion dollars to - the customers of his hotels .....

Other stupid Dog - worth million dollars to - Britney Spears - worth billiuon dollars to - her stupid fans that usually are between 12 and 15 - worth some money to - their parents - worth some money to there employers or customers .....

Round and round it goes and no one knows, but the system flows......it is beautiful

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, also they are dogs I will trty to make the line clear to you.

Stupid Dog - worth million dollars to - Paris Hilton .- worth billion Dollars to - her father - worth billion dollars to - the customers of his hotels .....

Other stupid Dog - worth million dollars to - Britney Spears - worth billiuon dollars to - her stupid fans that usually are between 12 and 15 - worth some of money to - their parents - worth some money to there employers or customers .....

Round and round it goes and no one knows, but the system flows......uit is beautiful

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So you're still measuring everything in terms of monetary value? And still refuse to accept that the monetary value placed on the profession "Paris Hilton's dog" is inflated, much like the value of profession "Idiot" (Paris Hilton) is inflated, much like the value of profession "movie star" is inflated. Thus "deserve" is an inaccurate word to describe the amounts of money they receive for the quality and quantity of work that they do.
You haven't answered my question. What is more detrimental to humanity - if every A-list movie star were to drop dead tomorrow or if every doctor on the planet were to drop dead?

So you still take some transzendent system of value as logical and don't just take it as what it really is, the value of one person for something else.......

Money really doesn't play a role in it...no one deserves oney...money juist is....nothing more.....it is not positive or negative it is juist a cold hard fact......If Paris Hilton, loves her dog really a lot she can use everything she has which often is based on the value of other people for her, on that stupid thing.

It's not that the Dog deserves the mo0ney more than a starving kid, nreithe4r of them actually deserves anything if you don't connect it with value....that is the only real definition of deserve, because all others are fictional and made up by some moral code that a few agree to but that surely isn't Metaphysical.

What does "transzendent" mean?
You still haven't answered the question.