• The Dark Side 💕 Welcome Guest 💕
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads Urgent Hotlines
    Bereavement Mindfulness
    Suicide Support Anger Management
  • TDS Moderators: AlphaMethylPhenyl | paranoid android

to live is to die

The two concepts that are truly human and oppose our baser Instincts and I suppose separate us from other animals are mercy and compassion. To my mind they are the most interesting bexause dont possess any qualities in survival of the race yet we all have these emotions.
 
The two concepts that are truly human and oppose our baser Instincts and I suppose separate us from other animals are mercy and compassion. To my mind they are the most interesting bexause dont possess any qualities in survival of the race yet we all have these emotions. Id better simmer down abit now ans give someone else a turn to talk.lol
 
bunge said:
Cheers captaincaveman im glad someone else is with me on the hitler point. It was getting real lonely with my arse out in the wind there! The collaspe of the soviet union is a great example of human nature overiding ideology. Capitalism kinda works because it follows the natural human instinct to want more. Although im aware ive massively oversimplified it!. Was Hollywood Costumes as camp as promised?lol
Click to expand...
Unfortunately having read hstory at a 'redbrick' uni the Nazis is still top drawer of studies. But when you read oif for six years, you get a bit jaded by the whole thing. Bunge the hollywood costumes was a tad camp but my lady loved it (I prefered Neo from Matrix's costumes, which is maybe more camp)
Your arse isn't in the wind, if I wanted to I could quote guys like Kershaw to back up what we're saying but a long day of bikram yoga and hollywood costumes I'm spent. But you're on the right track, in my view :)
 
But the definition of spite involves doing something out of envy, jealously, anger, and without the intent of justice. Spite is when you do something just to harm someone else, not to better yourself or a situation. In fact this is almost the exact opposite of justice, which implies that something is made right. Spite seeks to do the very opposite of this: wrong someone, for no true reason.

Justice is justice. Spite is spite.

To use a classic saying, spite is when you "cut off your nose" to spite your face. Despite the irreparable harm cutting your nose off does, you do it because youre "pissed" at your face. Theres no justice involved whatsoever. Its not about perception in this case, its about the literal definition of the word and act. Spite is spite. Justice is justice. Two totally different things, no matter who is perceiving them.

You think the world ending would destroy peoples concepts of "good and evil", I think just the opposite. Sure maybe many would be singing a different tune, but those are also the people who are already moral opportunists. They are not truly in possession of grounded morals. Rather theyre based in whatever conventions they may be based in. Which, to me, is not a true moral anyway. I think if the world ended we'd se a lot more peoples morals come into play, especially striving AGAINST those people whos morals "disappeared" (never existed). Though this is pointless speculation, as civilization is not going to collapse tomorrow.

Some things are grey, and subjective. Other things are black and white as day, and objective. There exist these two worlds within our own. Its not as simple as "its all relative" or "none of its relative". It is, in fact, both.
 
Last edited:
captaincaveman said:
Unfortunately having read hstory at a 'redbrick' uni the Nazis is still top drawer of studies. But when you read oif for six years, you get a bit jaded by the whole thing. Bunge the hollywood costumes was a tad camp but my lady loved it (I prefered Neo from Matrix's costumes, which is maybe more camp)
Your arse isn't in the wind, if I wanted to I could quote guys like Kershaw to back up what we're saying but a long day of bikram yoga and hollywood costumes I'm spent. But you're on the right track, in my view :)
Click to expand...
well cheers anyway captaincaveman its good to know im not the only one who thinks likes me, especially that is well read! :-} the matrix costumes are pretty cool but thought they would have sold em all to BSSM club.lol DooMMooD u make some good points its getting and my meds are starting to turn my brain to mush so ill bow out and back with a good counter or not if there isnt one!lol
 
DooMMooD said:
A flaw in your argument is the concept of spite. Nature is cruel, but humans are uniquely capable of spite. Which not only defies nature, but in fact might be evil itself.
Click to expand...

nature is neither cruel nor wonderful, it just is. How can you judge it one way or the other? seriously? Humans aren't uniquely capable of spite, animals do it as well.

No animal in nature harms themselves or another just to "get back" at another animal is a simple way of putting it. Spite is uniquely human, and perhaps uniquely capable of being "evil" as a result, because it is a human construct. In fact spite might be purely evil. To harm yourself just so another doesn't have what they have? To hurt someone just because you are jealous of what they possess? No real logic behind it. Why shouldn't someone else have what they have?
Click to expand...


Certain primates do this very thing. Animals also fight for territory often killing babies, moms, and competition; it is survival; i repeat there is no such thing as evil. Just try and prove this in the P&S forum in the moral relativity thread.

Just food for thought. Not saying I'm even right, I welcome arguments against this point. Its just something to think about.


Its also oversimplifying things to say "Human nature is to want more" because this could not be further from my nature. I like helping people, not taking things from them. I am able to be "content" and not always after more.

I believe this is an issue lots of philosophers fail to take into account.

That perhaps there can be more than one human nature that is dependent on who you are? I think a lot of peoples arguments for/against certain "philosophies" make these sweeping generalizations. "Its human nature!" Really, have you been every human ever? Perhaps different humans want different things and think differently than you?
Click to expand...


have u seen every single metal expand while heated?

It is in our nature to be animals, to survive, to do what it takes to reproduce, since all living animals do this, we compete, we fight, we win, we lose and that is life and it is a fucking amazing thing about the universe.
 
DooMMooD said:
Just food for thought. Not saying I'm even right, I welcome arguments against this point. Its just something to think about.

Its also oversimplifying things to say "Human nature is to want more" because this could not be further from my nature. I like helping people, not taking things from them. I am able to be "content" and not always after more.

That perhaps there can be more than one human nature that is dependent on who you are? I think a lot of peoples arguments for/against certain "philosophies" make these sweeping generalizations. "Its human nature!" Really, have you been every human ever? Perhaps different humans want different things and think differently than you?
Click to expand...

All humans want to do what it takes to satiate their inner turmoil, whether its wanting more and more money/sex/drugs, etc, or in your case the way you make yourself content is by helping others. Maybe you dont crave physical things, but there is still something you desire: the gratitude of others. Maybe you dont perceive it that way, but subconciously that is what youre after. You said you liked helping people. If thats what drives your life and it suddenly went away, you would be looking for other means to get that same feeling of completeness. In that way you are the same as every other human being.
 
I think what we're boiling down to is the state of nature of humanity. I remember discussing this with a one time friend (not rl so who cares) but Hobbes said that man in a state of nature was 'nasty, brutish and short' while Rousseau had a romanticised view of man it its natural state. Fundamentally, I come down on the side of Hobbes, you need governance to stop the baser urges of mankind. Because without authority we would be killing ourselves. Bakunin, classical anarchist, viewed that you don't need so much state intervention (this is a very basic interpretation) but small communities keeping an eye on things (with no mass government). So the question is, are humans naturally good? No they are not.
 
I don't agree necessarily. I haven't read Hobbes or Rousseau in a while though.

I don't think more authority = less chaos

humans are naturally neither good nor evil, that is a false dichotomy. Humans just are.
 
Id agree with the above point, more authority doesnt equal less chaos because if it did then we wouldnt have crime. In fact if we look at history then it shows us that peoples who are over-governed will rebel against that regime.
George Orwell also noted this in 1984 with his 'nanny state' as did Aldous Huxley with Brave New World although I personally felt he lacked the 'grittiness' of Orwell. Orwell was very clued in to the brutal side of human nature. While Huxley was softer on the subject, side effect of mescaline experiments possibly?lol sorry if im slightly off subject guys, lack of sleep scattering my thoughts abit.:-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top