I know this sound bizarre but I think that we all have sociopathic and empathic ancestors. Do you disagree? I am almost certain that one of your decedents was a rapist and that is why you are here today.
I am not saying it is a good thing but I think it is true, do you disagree?
Perhaps if we go back far enough we'll discover that sex was not preceeded by "courtship". By today's standards most sex then was rape. But the purpose of coerced sex was sex; today it is violence.
But the purpose of coerced sex was sex; today it is violence.
There's something fundamentally wrong in this assertion, JL.
0 Replies
Frank Apisa
2
Reply
Sat 23 Mar, 2013 01:46 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
I know this sound bizarre...
That part I certainly agree with. I does sound bizarre.
Quote:
... but I think that we all have sociopathic and empathic ancestors.
That part I am pretty sure I agree with. You seem to be a truthful person...and if you say you think that...I have no particular reason to doubt it.
Quote:
I am almost certain that one of your decedents was a rapist and that is why you are here today.
Life has often been rather mean...and I do not think it unreasonable to make a guess that one of my decedents was a rapist. And if any of the many births leading up to my being here was the result of a rape...then it accounts for me being here.
Quote:
I am not saying it is a good thing but I think it is true, do you disagree?
I agree that is is not a good thing...and I agree (for the reasons stated above) that you apparently think it is true.
Life has often been rather mean...and I do not think it unreasonable to make a guess that one of my decedents was a rapist. And if any of the many births leading up to my being here was the result of a rape...then it accounts for me being here.
Life has been often mean and just by reading some scriptures we can come to the understanding of how some people thought.
Listening to that guys voice is even more grating than reading the Bible.
In any case, the video is correct that Bible is a very violent book...and describes a very unhealthy god.
Anselm attempted an ontological proof of the existence of god by positing that god is that which nothing greater than can be conceived.
Seems to me that Anselm screwed up...big time. Anyone who cannot conceive of something greater than the god Anselm was trying to "prove" existed (the god of the Bible)...simply is not very good at conceptions.
0 Replies
vikorr
1
Reply
Sat 23 Mar, 2013 05:36 pm
@reasoning logic,
I'm wondering why the question was even raised in the first place. It's said like there is something wrong with sociopaths - but many of them are just different.
The issue is that the word sociopath/psychopath is entwined with serial killer / conman / animal torturer / etc...but that is only a percentage of them. Another percentage of them function quite well in society, can be quite charming, and can be very good at business, and they can make the hard decisions that others do not wish to make.
I even recall saying to OmsigDavid that he was likely a sociopath (as he exhibits plenty of traits of one)...only to be yelled down by, err, I think it was Satanta (while David, unsurprisingly, didn't seem to care)....who (Setanta that is) couldn't comprehend that sociopaths cohabit society quite normally. Now I'm not particularly surprised by the blind mindest of seeing sociopathy as an insult, an insult, and nothing but an insult (it does after all, have those previously mentioned associations)...yet in my view, the genetic side of the condtion actually serves a purpose in human survival, and is just, different.
I'm wondering why the question was even raised in the first place. It's said like there is something wrong with sociopaths - but many of them are just different.
Surly they are different than empathic people.
Quote:
The issue is that the word sociopath/psychopath is entwined with serial killer / conman / animal torturer / etc...but that is only a percentage of them.
From my understanding I agree 100%
Quote:
Another percentage of them function quite well in society, can be quite charming, and can be very good at business, and they can make the hard decisions that others do not wish to make.
I can see this to be true in a capitalist society that is against the teachings of social behavior, as social responsibility is "socialism" and that capitalism is not antisocial.
Capitalism teaches that if your mother is either environmentally challenged or intellectually challenged that she has a lesser value than you if you are more witted or more productive.
I personally think that your mother should be valued the same as you if she gives all that she is able to give.
I do not think that there will ever be a utopia but why shouldn't your mother be rewarded the same pay as you if she is intellectually inferior than you but contributes to society the best that she knows how?
0 Replies
Kolyo
1
Reply
Sat 23 Mar, 2013 07:29 pm
It's possible a rape took place somewhere in my family tree, but why would I focus on that as the reason for why I've come to exist? You might as well point out that if my mother had been named Claire instead of Ruth, she would never have met my father and I would "never have been born." There were more than a billion little events which led indirectly to my being born, but so what? SOMEONE would have been born, possibly someone very like me, even if men hadn't been raping women in the year my progenitor raped my progenitrix.
The thread reminds me of a scene from a movie called Storytelling, released in 2001. I can't find a clip, but the gist of it is there's this Jewish mother and son. Her parents come from Europe or something. They get started on the topic of whether the family knows any Holocaust survivors, and the mother mentions one of her own parents. Then someone at the dinner table -- they are having dinner as a family -- says, "gee if it hadn't been for Hitler we'd all be European!" Then the son, who's kind of out-of-it, points out that if it hadn't been for Hitler, his parents would never have met. "When you think about it," he says, "if it hadn't been for Hitler, none of us would ever have been born!" He is then sent to his room without any dinner.
Thank you for sharing your view points even though I am unable to relate I will continue to try and understand your points of view.
0 Replies
JLNobody
1
Reply
Sat 23 Mar, 2013 07:54 pm
@Kolyo,
This reference to the infinite range of necessary causes reminds of the logical likelinood of different historical outcomes had Helen's nose been an inch longner.
By the way, sociopaths not only lack the capacity for empathy--an important point since compassion is the foundation of sincere altruism--they also lack consciences, the best foundation for social control.
0 Replies
izzythepush
1
Reply
Sun 24 Mar, 2013 12:18 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:
I am almost certain that one of your decedents was a rapist and that is why you are here today.
You're also certain that all rapists are sociopaths, which clearly is not the case.
Perhaps if we go back far enough we'll discover that sex was not preceeded by "courtship". By today's standards most sex then was rape. But the purpose of coerced sex was sex; today it is violence.
so the feminists claim, but they have no data and dont want any. however you are correct that the standards of the day must be used so the question is hard to answer. we continually judge our ancestors by our standards, which is fucked up and wrong.
0 Replies
reasoning logic
1
Reply
Sun 24 Mar, 2013 04:28 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
You're also certain that all rapists are sociopaths, which clearly is not the case.
Do you know of a rapist that was not being antisocial in the act? What do you call him horny?
It is very possible for a rapist to only be thinking about getting what he wants, that he has no desire to do vilience or to hurt anyone, that the damage is collateral. The feminists will have none of that though, they need us to all assume that the harm that comes to women is intended and is bred from hostility towards women. They however can prove none of their story.
0 Replies
G H
2
Reply
Sun 24 Mar, 2013 11:30 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
I know this sound bizarre but I think that we all have sociopathic and empathic ancestors.
Indeed. But no need to put the spotlight on a few "aberrant" ancestors. Much of the theft, violations, cruelty, bloodshed, betrayals and double-crosses of the past (in addition to the admirable "good stuff") that contributed to us being here -- and under these particular conditions, nationalities, subcultures and residencies -- was ordered, allowed, blessed, performed, made possible by the "sane" or empathy-equipped leaders and members of the general populations. Whether invading conquerors and immigrant rovers from whatever applicable "elsewhere", or the indigenous freedom-fighters of the times, each pushing up the degrees of the "immoral meter" in their respective eras. Thus, countries parading "a show of conscience" and capable of playing "policeman" with their big sticks, usually owe a big thanks to their foreparents having colored outside the lines of what is today considered proper conduct and ideological / ethical stances.
0 Replies
izzythepush
2
Reply
Mon 25 Mar, 2013 02:15 am
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:
Do you know of a rapist that was not being antisocial in the act? What do you call him horny?
You don't half say some daft things. It's possible to be selfish, violent and greedy without being a sociopath.
You are obsessed with sociopaths, and your definition of a sociopath is so broad as to be meaningless. You been banging on about sociopaths for a very long time, as long as I've been here at least. And in all that time you've yet to convince a single person.
It's time to move on, get another interest. This one is doing you no good at all.
You are obsessed with sociopaths, and your definition of a sociopath is so broad as to be meaningless. You been banging on about sociopaths for a very long time, as long as I've been here at least. And in all that time you've yet to convince a single person.
It's time to move on, get another interest. This one is doing you no good at all.
Are you trying to imitate how Martin Luther and others ridiculed Galileo?
Do you think that DSM or Orthodox understandings do not evolve?
Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is described by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR), as an Axis II personality disorder characterized by "... a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."[1] They have an "impoverished sense moral sense or conscience" and may have a "history of crime, legal problems, impulsive and aggressive behaviour." The antisocial personality disorder falls under the dramatic/erratic cluster of personality disorders.[2]
Quote:
You been banging on about sociopaths for a very long time, as long as I've been here at least. And in all that time you've yet to convince a single person.
So are you suggesting that I have been considering this subject longer than anyone you know? I wonder what might happen if you studied a different subject longer than others.
Would you please explain this fine line between a sociopath and a sane person so that I can understand it as well as you?
We could talk about the advantages of being a sociopath and the disadvantages but I am very interested in your views.
What do you think of this video?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace