What is anti-social behaviour?

Altariel, you are a realist. To me it's a given that positions of political power are treated as opportunity structures for the acquisition of wealth (and more power). I remember how in 1973 in a small municipality in rural Mexico, a protestant candidate for president of the municipality won because people wanted someone who would not be crooked. They hoped that perhaps one who actually read the Bible would be honest (these were Catholic voters). The protestant won and spent his entire tenure honestly. When he left office he left without any material gains, but--he thought--with his honor and reputation intact. Poor guy. He spent the remaining years of life (he died ten years later of Parkinsons) in public shame, rarely leaving his house. People openly ridiculed him for not taking advantage of his opportunity to make money for himself and his family. It seems that corruption in Mexico is part of the culture. In the U.S. corruption is widespread, but more at the highest levels of power. At least it is not expected, and that is reflected in your outrage.
There is another kind of bribery, which we can go into if others wish. That is the selling of one's soul when one forgoes ethical independence for the sake of social approval.

JL, that was beautifully expressed, my friend, and so very easy to follow.

Altariel, welcome to A2K. You have just been greeted by a master who has never sold a soul. <smile>

Letty,


Yes, for me that WAS clear.

Altariel, you hang out with JL and me and you'll find out that anti-social behaviour is better shown in the reclusive nature of man. If that seems a bit diametrically opposed, it's because most individuals are accountable, but society is not. Why? because of what you cite. Bribery does not always take the form of money, Aussie.

for a fine example of anti-social behavior just take a gander at my avatar.

Sorry to disappoint you, Dys, but it looks downright lovable. Right, Diane?

What is anti-social behaviour?
Thank you all for the replies. We are often told 'Even an animal would not behave in such a way', (i.e. murder, torture, etc.) A tribe of chimpanzees, however, will attack another tribe to seize and eat some of its members. They need the protein. What I am getting at with this preamble is:did the humans of today descend from aggressive ancestors? Why did the descendants of the more peaceable humanoids not take over the world? And what mutant gene made us greedy and acquisitive? In a future world do you see genetic engineers working to change our basic natures or merely tinkering with unwanted physical attributes?

I think you make a mistake in thinkiing that greed is a genetic trait. (I personally don't think greed is an anti-social behavior but that's beside the point).

I doubt genetic engineers would be able to do anything with issues like greed because I think they are learned behaviors - not genetic.

Altariel

No, you're not a pessimist, that's how things appear to be.
Me, I'm waiting, waiting, waiting for the wheel to turn ... these are extremely ugly times we're living through right now. But (eternally hopeful!) eventually, following the inevitable revulsion & backlash, we will return to saner, more compassionate ways. That's my theory & I'm sticking to it! Otherwise it's all too horrible to contemplate.



(Whatever happened to peace, love & understanding, as sung in the song? :wink: )

Msolga, your optimism is to be cherished. It has both survival and progressive value. Aldous Huxley, who seems to be a pessimist to many (Brave New World and Island), made what I consider a realistic pronouncement: Given half a chance, mankind can be virtuous (this is grossly paraphrased; I don't have the actual statement).
Fishin, I agree that there is no single gene for greed. The pop sociobiologist's Selfish Gene is fanciful. I do believe, however, that without the CAPACITY to obtain and retain enough for survival our species would most likely not exist today. But the actual motivation to be greedy has psychological and perhaps cultural foundations. Some societies encourage greed and competition (e.g., Yanomami and Americans). Other societies discourage it (e.g., Hopi and Nepalese). Yet among the Yanomami and Americans we find individuals who are neither greedy nor aggressive, and among the Hopi and Napalese we find individuals who are more greedy and aggressive than the norm. But I think the evidence suggests that genes are not the most immediate determinants in either case.

I believe that.
We humans are so easily led.
Sooner or later, in the next phase, saner, wiser & more compassionate values will emerge from this dark time.
And it will be an almighty relief to us all!

From your mouth to G_d's ear.

Perhaps we should move this thread to "religion"?

(Sorry for the diversion, people. Please continue!)