Position on the human race

"But I live in a first world country and will probably never have to face war, deadly diseases, starvation and the other myriad problems that afflict the poor and unfortunate around the world. For me any case of true suffering will come from tragic freak accidents, for them it is a guaranteed occurance."

Oh, I got that. Yes, I understand your point - I disagree with it, since I believe that the normal exigencies the flesh is heir to DO cause great suffering to us, despite not being of the ilk more common in some other countries - but I wasn't thinking you thought you would never stub your toe! Lol! We just have a different view on some things, is all - I do think you underestimate your likelihood of suffering a lot from such things as illness and grief, for instance - even people in rich countries do a lot of that.

As I said, it would be interesting to see what you think about all this in 20 years - but, nevertheless I hope you are correct in your estimation about your own life - or perhaps eorl is right about that one - dunno.

0 Replies

Quote:

I believe in this for complicated reasons which I can't explain right now 'cause Superman is on TV. Cheers.

Perhaps we should run through it later then.

0 Replies

The reasons I believe in what I've said is partly because of personal reasons, but mainly because in seeing how my feelings have changed over time, I really think that these feelings are only a matter of association and thus can not be called upon to guide us. Neuroplasticity, I think, holds that we can condition ourselves to change the associations of these feelings.

0 Replies

I'm more interested to find out why "white skin" has anything to do with his discussion.

0 Replies

Eryemil wrote:

Fate hasn't been as kind to me, yet you talk with a bitterness and spite towards humanity that I could never fathom, it doesn't become you Anti.

I'm tired E... I don't mean physically and now, though I am exceptionally since I just woke up after an hour of sleep. I'm tired of hearing about the thousands of people I can't help, as much as I want to. It's hard not to feel angry when you're powerless. I just can't deal with everyday hearing a few thousand more people have died from some pointless war and there being nothing I can do to stop it.

Quote:

What you call suffering I called normal everyday life for many years.

I'm sorry. I wish that didn't have to happen to anyone, least of all someone like you. This is what bothers me, how can I not hate someone who would make someone like you suffer?

Quote:

Your philosophy is just not realistic, civilization is fairly young, we achieved so much in so little time, and we're growing and evolving faster each day.

Maybe I expect too much from us too soon, but this is the world I have to deal with and I can't comfort myself with the thought of centuries from now.

Quote:

It's easier for you to forgive, you're forgiving what was done to you. I have to forgive them for harming -you- and that's a much harder thing to do. For me anyway.

0 Replies

Just because there are some people that harm others, that's no reason to become bitter Anti.

You are only harming yourself and not helping anyone.

0 Replies

Ray wrote:

seeing how my feelings have changed over time

Much as our logical reasoning changes when we learn new data? Don't be so harsh on your poor emotions. They used to be your entire brain and run everything, just because you've got a cortex now is no reason to be mean to the lymbic system. Wink

Quote:

I really think that these feelings are only a matter of association and thus can not be called upon to guide us.

No no, they don't -guide- us. They're the end goal which we use logic to guide ourselves towards. That's what I'm saying, but we can't ignore our emotions without giving up all reason to exist.

0 Replies

Eryemil wrote:

Just because there are some people that harm others, that's no reason to become bitter Anti.

You are only harming yourself and not helping anyone.

Yeah but if I can get bitter enough then maybe I won't feel the responsibility to fix everything anymore....

0 Replies

You'll also lead a very sad existence. Two wrongs don't make one right, and trading one kind of pain for another is not worth it. Stick to the old familiar one. Very Happy

0 Replies

Quote:

eorl wrote:
Antibuddha, I think I must be a little overly optomistic, but then I think that is logically the most productive and useful approach to take anyway.

I disagree. The world needs optimists who can get things done, yes, but it equally needs cynics and pessimists to prepare for the worst case scenarios that may never even come. You tend your oar and I'll tend mine.

Actually I agree with you there, I often find myself having to take that very position. ('cause I'm so smart Wink

) The competetive commercial world is so hung up on everyone having a positive attitude that they don't want cry out "waterfall!!" when they really should. As you suggest, they won't even want to consider the chances there will be one on the river ahead.

Quote:

I Disagree. Darwin spoke of natural selection, artificial selection is equally powerful. However... to genuinely give up war I believe we would require artificial selection to be introduced. Though that's really another topic (which maybe I should start a thread for).

hmmm, it's possible to see "artificial selection" as a sub-set of natural selection (in the same way that cities with people and "introduced" animals are perfectly natural parts of "nature"). To further my point, there are already people applying natural selection to the next generation, but they are generally not Nigerian farm workers.

0 Replies

Quote:

Much as our logical reasoning changes when we learn new data? Don't be so harsh on your poor emotions. They used to be your entire brain and run everything, just because you've got a cortex now is no reason to be mean to the lymbic system.

Logical reasoning remains, but datas that effect my knowledge may change. The truth however remains the same, and reason is there to guide. Emotions may have been a part of my brain at that time but it is not "me" as I see it and it is not something to devote myself towards.

Quote:

No no, they don't -guide- us. They're the end goal which we use logic to guide ourselves towards. That's what I'm saying, but we can't ignore our emotions without giving up all reason to exist.

Umm, I'm saying that we should use our reason to guide our emotions, if that's what you're saying I think we are in agreement here. However I don't have emotions as a priority.

0 Replies

Ray wrote:

Logical reasoning remains, but datas that effect my knowledge may change.

Likewise your emotions remain the same and those circumstances which trigger individual reactions may change...

Quote:

Emotions may have been a part of my brain at that time but it is not "me" as I see it and it is not something to devote myself towards.

You yourself said that emotions vary whereas logic is driven towards a singular unvarying truth. How is it possible that logic could be you when its ideal form can not be distinguished from that of others?

Quote:

Umm, I'm saying that we should use our reason to guide our emotions, if that's what you're saying I think we are in agreement here.

Somewhat yes. We're both saying the same things yes, however I'm saying an additional point which you do not appear to agree with. If it helps clarify what I believe we are debating is....

* Emotions are the only thing which can provide purpose and meaning within our lives.

Quote:

However I don't have emotions as a priority.

I suspect that you do without realising it, though I may be wrong. What precisely do you hold in priority above emotions?

0 Replies

Ray

But is it possible to dissociate reason and emotion?
No choice can be maid without emotional influence. And logical reasoning, in itself, leads us nowhere. There was logical reasoning in nazis theories.
I believe in critical reasoning, but that believe is already, in some point, an also emotional choice.

I would like you explained better your position about the difference between reason and emotion.

0 Replies

Val, just because the Nazi thought what they were doing was logical, it doesn't mean that it actually was. If there was indeed a master race, then it would be somewhat logical that the other races not be allowed to propagate, yet logical or not, I would still think it was wrong to kill so many people. Most of my judgement is based on emotion. ^^

0 Replies

Quote:

But is it possible to dissociate reason and emotion?
No choice can be maid without emotional influence. And logical reasoning, in itself, leads us nowhere. There was logical reasoning in nazis theories.
I believe in critical reasoning, but that believe is already, in some point, an also emotional choice.

I don't believe that Nazi theories are rational. It was motivated out of hate and pride. It might seem rational, that they try to use scientific datas, but many of these datas are mistaken and their so called logic leaves out a lot of essential things. Besides, according to Deontological ethics, people should treat other rational being as an end and not a means, and the Nazis violated that rule.

Quote:

I would like you explained better your position about the difference between reason and emotion.

Explanation:

Reason is the faculty that allow us to know (language is ultimately essential) and link ideas or identities together. Emotions, on the other hand, are motivators. Emotions are feelings such as anger, contempt, desires, etc. Most of the associations of these emotions are usually a result of conditioning experienced since babyhood. Thus, the associations of emotions are unguided, random, meaningless and can not be called upon to be followed blindly. Rationalization (false reasoning) of the emotions can be dangerous because it treats the emotional associations as something rational. Many emotions are leftovers of a primitive stage, a stage where anger was a major part of the lives of ignorant, struggling animals in the wild. I would also like to differentiate this faculty from the senses, physiological signals, and from consciousness.

So, there's my incomplete ideas with a lot of loopholes to pick apart...

Quote:

Likewise your emotions remain the same and those circumstances which trigger individual reactions may change...

Not quite true. The emotional associations may and do change. Neuroplasticity also holds that we can change our attitude and thus how we react to certain things.

Quote:

You yourself said that emotions vary whereas logic is driven towards a singular unvarying truth. How is it possible that logic could be you when its ideal form can not be distinguished from that of others?

I mentioned that "I" exist because of my rational faculty and what I mean by I is the awareness and the ability to choose. Without a rational faculty, I would probably be an animal uncaring of anything except what nature has randomly made me motivated toward. Yeah, well that's my view for now. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

Somewhat yes. We're both saying the same things yes, however I'm saying an additional point which you do not appear to agree with. If it helps clarify what I believe we are debating is....

* Emotions are the only thing which can provide purpose and meaning within our lives.

Hmm, yeah, I see our differences. To me, reason comes first.

0 Replies

Ray wrote:

Hmm, yeah, I see our differences. To me, reason comes first.

Ray, I don't think you're getting what I am saying.

Emotions - provide - purpose - and - meaning....

If reason does that as well (which would disprove my claim) then surely you can tell me.

What meaning or purpose has reason provided for you?

Not saying that reason can't be a purpose even your primary one but can it PROVIDE one. If so can you give me an example of a purpose provided by reason.

0 Replies

Here's a good "reason and purpose" for me.
http://www.engineering.ucsb.edu/~alomia/

0 Replies

Quote:

Ray, I don't think you're getting what I am saying.

Emotions - provide - purpose - and - meaning....

If reason does that as well (which would disprove my claim) then surely you can tell me.

What meaning or purpose has reason provided for you?

Not saying that reason can't be a purpose even your primary one but can it PROVIDE one. If so can you give me an example of a purpose provided by reason.

The duties and responsibilities we possess is an implication of purposes provided by reason. I can see how primary emotions are linked to certain criterias of purposes, but imagine being a creature where emotions motivate the creature to cause harm to itself or to others. Is it a purpose then?

0 Replies

Quote:

...but imagine being a creature where emotions motivate the creature to cause harm to itself or to others. Is it a purpose then?

Yes it is... Purpose is not necessarily a good thing. I could be a killer, motivated by the pained scream of my victims. Do the pleasure I receive from their pain does not motivate me to kill more people? Does it not give me purpose?

Sense of purpose is one-hundred percent mental, but it's always motivated by emotion.

0 Replies

Position on the human race

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know