Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
crimes against humanity
#1
why do they persist?

these crimes persist, unlike others, with the full endorsement of religion...which prides itself on the opposite.

why must we treat each other like shit?
it would be very cost-effective to stop doing that.

but we can't.
we're addicted to being shit-heads, evidently.
to everything...
not just each other.

we're shitheads to the ocean.
the color of that skin doesn't matter.

it's the freedom to be a shit-head that matters.


evidently.

why can't we not be shit-heads?

at recodger, for the most part, we've managed to hone-in on our inner shit-head.
or accept it, to some extent.

look at how many times T.A. has forgiven me! and sparky. and princess di!
Christ, she's one tolerant bitch, eh what fellas?

i've even irked g-man one time.
he forgave me.

that's all it takes, in me mind...

there has to be some affection.
to allow forgiveness.


how is that possible?

fuck if i know.

i had a small breakthrough, years ago, when I decided to study horse flies.
(a beastly fly that is fast as hell, and wants to take a bite out of your flesh.)

i don't know if it was irony fucking with me, or the universe at large...

but as soon as i wanted those fuckers to land on me, and bite hard,

they wouldn't come near me.

so, did i accidentally invent a new insect repellent?

(all i wanted to do was study the horse fly.)
Reply
#2
the underlying unspoken premise of that post has to be repugnant to the pedantic materialist atheistic lurkers here...but will any of them test my gently implied hypothesis?

Of course not.

vibes don't exist...and life can't pick up on it.

unless it's your ol' lady, flirting with a friend you brought home that night.
Reply
#3
(06-18-2018, 11:04 AM)stanky Wrote:  why must we treat each other like shit?

Evolution.

It's pretty hard to overcome four billion years of deep-cell encoding. We climbed to the top of the evolution ladder by shitting over or killing every species on the planet (apart from vermin, who love us) and each other.

You're not going to overcome that during Sunday brunch.

Give it a few more centuries of education and enlightenment.

Oh, that's right, we don't have the luxury of those centuries...
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#4
I think what you have Stanky is a failure to compartmentalize.  

Not implying that you are oversimplifiying things (well, yes I suppose I am) as with many human traits it's perhaps not wise to apply a binary assessment to behaviour.    Good/bad isn't always at issue.
We should treat motives according to what drives them,  not simply judge them to be basic character traits.  Individuals react differently to various opportunities and threats. 
One size does not fit all.

As TA mentioned, evolutionary wiring comes into play.

Personally, I believe that the vast majority of people are well meaning, and wouldn't dream of doing deliberate harm to others in normal circumstances.

As with small a anarchy, a wonderful society can be produced by mutual support and kind and considered actions towards our fellows,  but .. and it's a huuuuge but ... both only work in small, and somewhat isolated, communities.   In small communities those with bad traits can be more easily either controlled, or expelled, that can't happen in larger more diverse groups, they don't cohere, they factionalize.

 All but socio/psychopaths are rewarded with fuzzy feelz for doing a good deed, and that is enough for most of us.
But apply some stress, especially in the form of perceived threat,  to people and they'll reconsider their situation, and reassess their ethical standards. 

They don't 'turn bad', they turn defensive.  A cursory glance won't reveal a violent or 'shitty' action as form of subconscious defence, but we need to look deeper than 'good/bad' to make a reasoned, and correct, judgement of the underlying character.

Much of the race based contention is a learned form of resentment.  The origins of the divide are long in the past so what drives it now is learned behaviour based on handed down resentment either for the treatment of ancestors or of having the guilt of past ancestral wrongs being placed on people who weren't even born then.

Humans have become very adept at blame allocation,  they clean out their own and lay it on someone else.  Anyone else will do. That too is a form of self defense.

Yes people do shitty things all the time,  we always have, it's not new and it's not even always deliberate.  
And yes we are blind to our own hypocrisy when it comes to religious approval of shitty actions, that too is not much more than a place to lay our blameful actions on god.  Religion is like one of those garbage disposal outfits who charge you to dump your unwanted junk there.  They "take care of your trash".
 
But I think most of our shittiness can be written off to the subconscious, primal, part of our wiring rather than to a consciously and deliberately thought out motivation. 

Education and 'enlightenment' can be applied to our logical wiring, but has close to zero effect on that old subconscious evolution wired part of our characters.

IQ doesn't control the subconscious, instinctual side of our thinking processes.  Over-riding that side of us takes a bit of effort which most don't have the time or motivation to do.  And to be honest, I don't think it's always the best move anyway.

I've said before that I don't believe that the right thing to do is always the best thing to do.  Some really bad decisions have been made with the best of intentions.

People adapt their behaviour to the prevailing circumstances, inability to do so is a distinct disadvantage. Peace and love are very poor weapons to wield in the jungle.
 
Only martyrs maintain that turn the other cheek ethic in the face of threat to their principles, freedom, territory, or lives,  and martyrs are only famous for the usually gruesome manner of their demise.
It is not an evolutionary advantageous trait.   just sayin'.

Maybe there are so many 'shitty' people around because all the 'good' ones have been knocked off for standing on their principles?   Evolution in action?  

The more of us there are,  the more that evolutionary tendency towards Darwinism will apply.  Increase the competition and a species will respond by hardening up, or dying out.

There's an unpopular train of thought that we'd still be wielding clubs and eating bananas if it hadn't been for wars.

So much of our scientific discovery has been funded by the necessity of finding better weapons to beat the other tribes that it's hard to imagine that much of it would ever have happened at all in a stagnant, if peaceful environment.

Somehow I don't think much of the above will be agreed with ... Angel
Reply
#5
(06-18-2018, 06:17 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Some really bad decisions have been made with the best of intentions.

The path to hell is paved with them, so I hear.

(06-18-2018, 06:17 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Maybe there are so many 'shitty' people around because all the 'good' ones have been knocked off for standing on their principles?   Evolution in action?  

I'm more of the opinion that the vast majority of people are just apathetic - as long as things don't affect them directly, they don't give a fuck.

Ergo, under the "All evil needs to flourish is for good men to do nothing" rule, that apathy is actually an enabler for the evil ones.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#6
Disagree with the point regarding scientific discovery. Of course, we're looking for better weapons. But there is a metric fuck ton of good, productive science that has been done and is being done that has nothing to do with making weapons and/or war.

We're a curious lot and we will do science regardless of a warlike or peaceful environment.
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#7
(06-18-2018, 06:49 PM)The Atheist Wrote:  
(06-18-2018, 06:17 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Some really bad decisions have been made with the best of intentions.

The path to hell is paved with them, so I hear.

(06-18-2018, 06:17 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Maybe there are so many 'shitty' people around because all the 'good' ones have been knocked off for standing on their principles?   Evolution in action?  

I'm more of the opinion that the vast majority of people are just apathetic - as long as things don't affect them directly, they don't give a fuck.

Ergo, under the "All evil needs to flourish is for good men to do nothing" rule, that apathy is actually an enabler for the evil ones.

Yes I'll pay that apathy point. But it's a passive neglect rather than a deliberately harmful intent. Apathetic people are lazy thinkers, not necessarily bad or shitty thinkers.

(06-18-2018, 06:52 PM)sparks Wrote:  Disagree with the point regarding scientific discovery. Of course, we're looking for better weapons. But there is a metric fuck ton of good, productive science that has been done and is being done that has nothing to do with making weapons and/or war.

We're a curious lot and we will do science regardless of a warlike or peaceful environment.

All science though Sparks is funded by somebody. The days of the rich man funding his own scientific hobby experiments is long past.

Which parts of science are unconnected to any hint of political/military input? Even those which appear to have been hijacked for their use as weapons were funded by someone. Who funded nuclear research? And why? just f'rinstance.

I'm not claiming there are no examples I'm just having trouble thinking of any scientific research not funded by someone who has no thought that it may lead to power or profit. Edjakate me.
Reply
#8
LHC is a great example (pure research). Most medical research (profit motive here of course). Just about all space and planetary research and probes (pure research, exploration, national pride). Well, there's always a motivation to do any of this stuff, I just can't agree that a very large percentage is of the weaponeer variety.
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#9
(06-19-2018, 01:58 AM)sparks Wrote:  LHC is a great example (pure research).  Most medical research (profit motive here of course).  Just about all space and planetary research and probes (pure research, exploration, national pride).  Well, there's always a motivation to do any of this stuff, I just can't agree that a very large percentage is of the weaponeer variety.

Not just material weapons Sparks, space research had it's greatest boost during the cold war as political/propaganda weaponry.  When the cold war was replaced by a warmer one using real weapons,  space research went on the back burner.  Coincidence?

Way under speed on the LHC's purpose in banging electrons together,  someone must have a theory that finding out what happens when they get mashed  will produce something useful. 

Anyone know what that useful result is hoped to be???   Bet ya if it produces any form of energy more usefully different than it took to make they'll pack it in a can and drop it on somebody or sell it very expensively.

I'm  a big fan of finding out how the universe ticks but how important is it to most people? 
They use the products of scientific knowledge but what are the chances that people who were well fed and leading a peaceful bucolic life would save up their pennies to send it away to fund a bloke who had an idea that there was a molecular structure defining each element.   Eyes would have glazed over and air crosses drawn over a suspected alchemist.

But if he told them he was sure he could make better steel with some experimentation with higher temperatures and some metallic conjuring to produce superior swords to the ones the warlord over the hill had they'd have given him those pennies willingly.

.... just doing that annoying analogy thing to fill in some time again.   Blush
Reply
#10
(06-19-2018, 07:58 AM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  
(06-19-2018, 01:58 AM)sparks Wrote:  LHC is a great example (pure research).  Most medical research (profit motive here of course).  Just about all space and planetary research and probes (pure research, exploration, national pride).  Well, there's always a motivation to do any of this stuff, I just can't agree that a very large percentage is of the weaponeer variety.

Not just material weapons Sparks, space research had it's greatest boost during the cold war as political/propaganda weaponry.  When the cold war was replaced by a warmer one using real weapons,  space research went on the back burner.  Coincidence?

No coincidence.  Taking the high ground does have a subtle connection with blowing each other to kingdom come, but not like assembling a nuclear device does.

Way under speed on the LHC's purpose in banging electrons together,  someone must have a theory that finding out what happens when they get mashed  will produce something useful. 

Expanding our knowledge of conditions in the very very early Cosmos.  No bombs allowed.

Anyone know what that useful result is hoped to be???   Bet ya if it produces any form of energy more usefully different than it took to make they'll pack it in a can and drop it on somebody or sell it very expensively.

If such a thing were to come to light out of LHC research, I've no doubt we'd first put it to it's worst possible use.  My point remains that this isn't why we built the thing.

I'm  a big fan of finding out how the universe ticks but how important is it to most people? 
They use the products of scientific knowledge but what are the chances that people who were well fed and leading a peaceful bucolic life would save up their pennies to send it away to fund a bloke who had an idea that there was a molecular structure defining each element.   Eyes would have glazed over and air crosses drawn over a suspected alchemist.

But if he told them he was sure he could make better steel with some experimentation with higher temperatures and some metallic conjuring to produce superior swords to the ones the warlord over the hill had they'd have given him those pennies willingly.

.... just doing that annoying analogy thing to fill in some time again.   Blush

I get that.  But damnit, I'm supposed to be the cynical one!
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)