Why? Why do we hate and kill? How can a man lift a knife and kill another man? Why? How can a man aim a gun at another man and pull the trigger? WHY?

A man walks into a subway and looks at the faces of people that have no harm to him and blows himself up. Why?

A man takes a young child and rapes then murders the child. Why?

A man pulls the trigger and releases a bomb that kill 100 people. Then he goes home to eat and sleep. How does he do that?

A man struggles to cut another mans throat with a small knife. How can he do that with no concious?

A man works in their lab day and night to develop bacteria that can kill millions. He know that it will kill and yet he works through the night to achieve death by the millions and tells his wife about his "achievement". Why?

Are we animals that barely escaped the trees? Are we doomed to live the instincts of animals that we so arrogantly look down upon. What arrogance does man have to kill each other and laugh at animals who kill each other for flesh.

In the news every night......hate, murder, killings, terrorism, death by the one, death by the hundreds. Why? Can't help but to cry.....WHY? When are we going to escape the trees?

and,


Peace can never be achieved on any lasting basis without greater
understanding between people. When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human misery rather than avenge it?
-Eleanor Roosevelt


well,what can I type!!!

You have the term “Theodicy” which says that evil exists in the world but ultimately, God’s justice will prevail. This agrees with the statement “Truth crushed to earth will rise again.” But Theodicy says that it will rise and rise until “justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.”

Now, this is one viewpoint.

But, you have to think to yourself, if the tide of truth rises, when it subsides, is it not true that it’s opposite, the winds of hate will come in like a whirlwind? And so, for me, if truth crushed rises, hate crushed to earth rises as well. B)

What am I talking about? ouch clearday :wall:

I’m talking about a cycle; a cycle where people promote their truth. But as they promote their truth there is another side that says what is virtuous to you is vicious to me. Deep hatred cultivates within the minds of people and cultures, as a result of not having their voices heard. B) This hatred is passed on from generation to generation. It festers and grows. The messengers from these groups are silenced by varying power structures, and they are often killed and again, what happens is their followers develop an anger that cannot be tempered. And the cycle of one group’s truth being promoted which becomes another group’s hatred and bitterness—this cycle continues and instead of creating a world that shares a “we are together reality”, the “us against them mentality” prevails... <_<



regards.

Nice analysis, Clearday B)

So have we evolved? We have evolved from Neandertal to Current human, but have we evolved again since?When will we evolve again?

Lets look at the first civilazations in the Center: Mesopotamia and Egypt. Both had made great acheavments compared to thier more animal-like predecessors, but they would also seek to control and dominate through violence and terror, and the Key: to take more than they need.

Now lets look at the west: The only areas in the Americas that had "civilazation", were in central america. They committed human sacrifices, and were brutal to eachother as wouldn't be seen for 1000 years. Yet they built these magnificent and Flawless timekeeping pyramids.

Flash now to the "uncivilized" north and south Americans. They couldn't even make a sword from metal, but they were gentile, understanding, compassionate and would only fight or kill forwhat they needed, not more. Values that today again we find are civilized. And charastiristics much closer to "animal" forefathers.

So again have we evolved? We haven't evolved, we have sidesteped our "normal ways".

Primarily I believe this is because of competition of diminishing resources. When, at the first time, there were more demand than recourses, that is precisely what made that "sidestep". Now all of a sudden, in that sphere of influence, all bets were off, and everyone should grab what they could while they could and save some for later because you didn't know when you might get it again. This poduced Control organizations (gangs, kings, priests), and subjects (less powerfull/fortunate), and the rest is history...

You have the term “Theodicy” which says that evil exists in the world but ultimately, God’s justice will prevail. This agrees with the statement “Truth crushed to earth will rise again.” But Theodicy says that it will rise and rise until “justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.”

Now, this is one viewpoint.

But, you have to think to yourself, if the tide of truth rises, when it subsides, is it not true that it’s opposite, the winds of hate will come in like a whirlwind? And so, for me, if truth crushed rises, hate crushed to earth rises as well. B)

What am I talking about? ouch clearday :wall:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Are you attributing mans actions to "good and evil"? Do you bleieve that Satan made man build ovens to dispose mans hate?





I’m talking about a cycle; a cycle where people promote their truth. But as they promote their truth there is another side that says what is virtuous to you is vicious to me. Deep hatred cultivates within the minds of people and cultures, as a result of not having their voices heard. This hatred is passed on from generation to generation. It festers and grows. The messengers from these groups are silenced by varying power structures, and they are often killed and again, what happens is their followers develop an anger that cannot be tempered. And the cycle of one group’s truth being promoted which becomes another group’s hatred and bitterness—this cycle continues and instead of creating a world that shares a “we are together reality”, the “us against them mentality” prevails...

~~~~~~~~~~

An very interesting explanation for terrorism and hate between groups of people.

However.....

Does that explain a man killing their neighbor on the street? Does this explain a man working on weapons of mass destruction?

The desire for "more" or "me" does. These concepts are an evolution in itself. Like I said, this concept was probably sparked when cognitively aware humans realized a constraint on thier recources. Another thing is the abilyty to fester hate. No other species is capable of this. If somethins happens, other species deal with it and get on. Humans keep the shit forever.

People who are happy inside don't commit crimes, wheather they are rich or poor.

If we fight only for competition between limited resources, then our race is doomed. With an ever expanding population, this planet is runnigng out of the easily accessible stuff and soon, all hell should break lose.

I was thinking the other night, as oil grows scarcer, one of the easiest ways to get more oil is to grow it. Can you imagine what will happen to the world food resources when the rich countries exploit arable farmland to produce oil? The rich will drive around in their SUV's while the poor STARVE to death. After all, does a Canadian or American farmer care about feeding Africa when he can plant canola oil plants to produce oil for $200 a barrel? Actually, that world may be upon us within our generation.

I don't believe in good and evil. I don't believe in the Devil. I don't believe that hate and violence is political frustration.

I believe that man brain has allowed him to move ahead much faster then his ability to control his animal nature. While man has the capacity to reason, he does not have the capacity to subjugate all his emotions.

Let's look at the last 3,000 years. How have we changed? I argue that we have not changed one bit other then in technology. The Greeks warred on each other and the victor would ransack the conquered city and slaughter the inhabitants. What did the Germans do with the Jews in Greece? How different is the massacre of Rwanda from the massacre of the Crusades?

Who amongst us has not had a moment of such intense animal anger that under the right circumstances, we would do harm to another. Most (not all) the time, the only thing that prevents most of us from not reacting to a situation is the fear that we will pay consequences equal or greater then the ones we inflict. In fact, given the right surroundings and/or the right atmosphere, man has stripped away the veneer of civility and become the animal that he is. Witness the gas chambers.

Sure, we have periods of piece and tranquility but I argue that this is just a veneer to our true nature. We will need thousands of years of evolution before our animal nature subsides. I argue that we are just a few steps away from the tree and the journey to totally controlling our instincts has definitely not been achieved no matter what our conscious wants to believe.

In fact....

The epitome of mans furthering gap between his abilities and his animal nature is if one day, he destroys the human race.

Is that because they are not capable or because the are satiated? A lion will not go after pray if you place dead water buffalo in front of it.

Thats exactly my belief. As long as people want more than they need, they will go to no end to satisfy those needs. This is the doom of mankind. Its not good or evil, it is our adaptation.

The N & S Americas are a perfect example. They were isolated, had vast amounts of space and resources, and subsiquently lived peaceful and happy lives. They warred between eachother, but they never seeked to futher warfare or let it play the central role in their societies.

What were the Conquistadors doing when they went to the Americas? Looking for resources. And there you see what a competition driven culture will do to a subsistance driven culture, and the brutality that follows.

The Amazon basen had more than 3mio citizens when the Spaniards got there, and about 100.000 after.

You continuously use animal in a bad way. Animal would be a compliment to most people. When you speak of that anger, it is instictual. In my cases anyway. Animals will only use that instictual anger for defenve/subsistance while "humans" will use that anger for hyper subsistance/profeting.

Again, like I said, it comes down to "Me", and "More".

Posted on Jul 23 2005, 07:23 PM

Why should it? Why should it kill a live one when there is already a good one there?

I don't know what satiated means. But I think its self explanitory. If one is happy/content, that is reason enough, its not a matter of being capable or whatever. Anyone is capable of doing aything...

We will evolve when Gene Roddenberry's dream of unification is actually realized. If it is realized...

What do we mean by the term "evolve"? Evolve compared to what? as what? as organisms? as characters? as civilisation?

I don't thing it's a matter of evolution what you're talking about...
As spieces we are what we are and we have a series of unique (to our environment) characteristics that we can't just forget... our character calls for neverending expansion.. we seek for more knowledge, more power, more resources, more of everything... our nature is somehow "greedy"... there is no good or bad to that.. we define what is good and what is bad... and i'm not that sure that we are so "animal" as we want to believe.. we share nothing with the animals in mentality...

So are we evolved with respect to what?

Well the problem is that mankind has created an artifical enviremont, safe and well from what our ancestors were used to in the forests and steppes. But we still have our primal instincts in us. These instincts contribute for our sinfull deeds. I believe its in every person to commit such atrocities, because its in our instinct to kill and survive.

But I dont condone it, since almost every person has the ability to think for themselve to a certain extent.

Yesterday i saw an interesting documentory about Armed Forces, how they train soldiers to associate killing with their instincts for survival. Shooting becomes a reflex instead of a thought process.

Although I would be pleased if the soldiers guarding my nation would behave like this, it still makes you wonder if it is the right thing.

Cid wrote;

Accepting the influence of human instinct on our lives, does not equal deterministic reductionism, but yes Cid, simply adds a component which we can use to understand and explain some part of our behaviour.

Killing people far away from home is also more acceptable than violence at home. This has not only to do with geographic distance, but with a perception of "otherness", this can be skin colour, religion, nationality or social class creating "otherness" by manipulating perception is always a good way to make aggression acceptable when it is needed dearly for political purposes.

Males with a high alpha potential can either join a “tribe” or its modern day equivalent, a gang, or join the army or police corps. The army and sports are the only parts of modern society where men can still live their primal instincts as they were designed for by nature. Even in modern societies care is taken to keep the army as one of a few escape routes out of poverty and a way out for male (and female) aggression. For those who find out that they are born in a social group devoid of chances to reap the benefits and glory of the modern society, becoming a “warrior” at least gives them some sense of identity. In the army and in gangs (now also terrorist groups) , before men are allowed to join the "hunting group", they have to prove their skills for which they invent all kinds of often painful initiation rituals...


I have read an article about behaviour of human;lets look close please;

As you see, the main part of above formula s "uncertainty",it changes in every manner,environment,situation....
Our instincts are our companions through our entire life and should be regarded as being of equal importance for our survival as is our ratio.




regards.

It's not about instincs cid and clearday... it's about character.. instincts can help you survive, character plots your way through life, gives you a heading... i.e. greed is a characteristic, not an instinct.. thirst for knowledge and exploration too... philosophy as well...
such characteristics are those that "shape" human societies and civilisations..

relativity...

Thats correct. Everyone is talking about insticts. The only instict we have is to survive and protect. Anything more, and how its aquired, comes down to character. This is where humans and animals differ at the root level, they don'e have the character beyond the instinct (I mean character to "further" themselves). And character, at the root level is determined mostly by availability of resources to him or his forefathers...

Well its Spartan's thread, but I figured with respect to humans that did not want more than they need.

The way I see it, I reckon the problem is largely psychological in nature and to be more specific it deals with emotions. Hate, anger, fear, love, compassion, they are all feelings.

I don't believe that it is possible to eradicate the bad emotional side of the human being. If we do, the good feelings will also be wiped out. And that is more scary to me. Imagine how much larger would the toll be if there were no emotions to stop us from doing certain things. Sure hate would not exist either, but gain is still there to be pursued.

Have we evolved as a species? Has our ability to reason surpaseed our primal instincts of survival. The debate can take a moral/theological direction or a scientific direction.

I was watching my nephew horde his toys in a corner and if you went near his toys, he would confront you. Since he does not speak, he is hardly effected by "philosophical" debates about sharing. It's HIS horde of toys and you better stay away. Hording can not be anything but an instinct. Gather around you to "survive".

I starte to wonder how long will it take for "teach" him that his hording instinct is "wrong". His mother is well on the way of making him a politically correct little Canadian but his evil uncle (moi!) is teasing him about taking his toys. The more aggressive I become in "stealing" his toys, the more angry he becomes. Again, nothing but instinct.

This is what started the "have we evolved" question. Since I can not believe rational man can cut peoples head off with a pocket knife, then there must be something more basal then "evil". For man to do that, their primal behavior has to step in and overcome their ability to reason. Thus the thread.

Are emotions bron from intincts?

Is "hate", "fear" and "anger" a means of survival?

Is "love" a means of procreation?

Is "compassion" a survival instinct?

It seems to me that you are talking about emotions as if they are some learned traits. I say that they are nothing more then glorified primal instincts.

My understanding of your use of "character" is that it's a learned behavior through social interaction.

So when man do savage acts, is it their society that has failed to impart the correct "character"? Does character serve as a moral cage to instincts?

No.. that's personality.. this is something learned or better "shaped" through social interaction.. many times comes in direct opposition to someones character too...

Character is something that you're born with.. you have it and you have to learn how to live with it... accept it and respect it cause you just can't change it...

You probably know the story with the frog and the scorpion that wants to cross the river.. in the story the scorpion asks the frog to help him cross the river by letting him sit on his back.. the frog refuses because is affraid that the scorpion will sting him, the scorpion reasons back that if he does something like this then both will die since he can't swim... the frog finally accepts the deal with the scorpion, and while crossing the river the scorpion stings the frog...
The frog while dieing asks the scorpion why did he sting him, now he will die too.. it's not logical..
And the scorpion replyies that it's not a matter of logic, he is a scorpion and he must sting him, it's his character...

that's an example of character as i see it... only in humans character is something far more complex than in animals.. and not unique.. each human can vary in character..

Feeling on the other hand are practically instincts for me.. animals expiriace feelings too, it's not something human... they can love, hate, fear..
Instincts are common to all spieces... and all members of a spieces have them.. all humans fear, all love, all want to survive.. unless something wrong... Instincts represent what we need...

So character is not instinct nor personality.. character is let's say the ID of everyeach one of us.. what makes us different... it represents what we want... it doesn't address a need like the instincts and you can't change it like the personality... we try to control it but we usually fail.. infact even if we control it again it's a failure since we go against what we want..

I am sure we all know the "phenomenon", where love fades out in approx 7 years. It is thought that this time is the time required for a child in the wild to grow enough so as to be beyond the danger of dying of a childhood dicease.