A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

roydop
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by roydop » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:23 pm

1. The actions of the human species has put into motion a mass extinction event on the earth. This behavior more closely resembles the actions of a cancer than of a mammal.

2. The human species is a cancer.

3. The most obvious difference between humans and all other life is our use of thought and our internal dialogue.

4. Therefore Occam's razor indicates that thought is the cause of humanity's unnatural behavior.

Being that this explanation is the simplest and most obvious, as well as being logically consistent, it must be adopted as the accepted theory as to the cause of said unnatural behavior.

roydop
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by roydop » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:27 pm

The "I..." internal monologue is a misinterpretation of true Self. This misinterpretation has led to humanity's cancerous behavior. The way to go into remission is to transcend the "I..." thought process. This is the next evolutionary step of self awareness, which coincides with our extinction.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by FlashDangerpants » Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:24 pm

I am happy to report that this gloom laden argument is not a terribly well constructed.

The analogy to cancers is neither sufficient nor necessary. It's pretty much a given within evolutionary theory that mammals have replaced countless non-mammalian species within lots of ecosystems rendering many extinct in the process. There mere evolutionary success of mammals renders that part of your presentation unnecessary.

Even if mammals didn't have millions of years of out competing other organisms and extinguishing them in the process, the move from the analogy to "The human species is a cancer" depends for its sufficiency on nobody thinking of any important distinction between humans and tumours, which is fairly improbable tbh.

The most obvious difference between humans and other animals is ... well there are lots of them, so I am going to say it is the wearing of trousers. There is no possible way for you to force me to accept that something you consider the most obvious is actually the most obvious if I consider something else to be more obvious than your thing.

You can take your pick from... either Occam's razor does not actually say that the most obvious cause for a thing is therefore the cause of that thing... or Occam's razor is worthless because it does say that. I don't mind much either way, it doesn't do much on a good day and is mostly deployed in service of bad arguments.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4761
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:08 pm

Dear Roy,

I ain't goin' nowhere.

Sincerely yours, Henry 'Cancer' Quirk

roydop
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by roydop » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:07 pm

"It's pretty much a given within evolutionary theory that mammals have replaced countless non-mammalian species within lots of ecosystems rendering many extinct in the process. "

Every other species on the planet has evolved without causing it's own extinction, obviously. Let alone the extinction of every other species on the planet. Obviously. Think about this. I know I don't have to use the cancer analogy but sometimes it helps.

"The most obvious difference between humans and other animals is ... well there are lots of them, so I am going to say it is the wearing of trousers. There is no possible way for you to force me to accept that something you consider the most obvious is actually the most obvious if I consider something else to be more obvious than your thing."

Okay, what is the "thing" that distinguishes humans from all other life on the earth? It's thought and the internal monologue. I find this to be obvious.

So to me neither of your arguments carry any worth.

This still stands.

Atla
Posts: 2332
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by Atla » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:12 pm

roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:27 pm
The "I..." internal monologue is a misinterpretation of true Self. This misinterpretation has led to humanity's cancerous behavior. The way to go into remission is to transcend the "I..." thought process. This is the next evolutionary step of self awareness, which coincides with our extinction.
Even if you transcend the I, you are still left with billions of really dumb people who only care to one-up each other. Humanity would go from very nasty to nasty.

commonsense
Posts: 1144
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by commonsense » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:25 pm

roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:23 pm
1. The actions of the human species has put into motion a mass extinction event on the earth. This behavior more closely resembles the actions of a cancer than of a mammal.

2. The human species is a cancer.

3. The most obvious difference between humans and all other life is our use of thought and our internal dialogue.

4. Therefore Occam's razor indicates that thought is the cause of humanity's unnatural behavior.

Being that this explanation is the simplest and most obvious, as well as being logically consistent, it must be adopted as the accepted theory as to the cause of said unnatural behavior.
Firstly, thank you, FD, for your elegant rebuttal of the OP. Mine is as follows:

Re #1 above: all life on Earth faces extinction, including every mammal and every cancer. Any extinction is complete, else it would not be extinction. In this regard, human behavior resembles mammals and cancers equally.

Re #2 above: humans are SIMILAR to cancers in as much as they both face extinction. This is not to say that the human species is a form of cancer, possessing every aspect of cancer.

Re #3 above: true.

Re #4 above: if thought is the cause of extinction, then everything that faces extinction must possess the ability to think. And if that were possible, then #3 would contradict #4.

Re the conclusion above: this is not the simplest and most obvious explanation as it is no explanation at all. This is not logically consistent. There is no reason to adopt this as the accepted theory as to the cause of said unnatural behavior.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by Greta » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:40 pm

roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:23 pm
1. The actions of the human species has put into motion a mass extinction event on the earth. This behavior more closely resembles the actions of a cancer than of a mammal.

2. The human species is a cancer.

3. The most obvious difference between humans and all other life is our use of thought and our internal dialogue.

4. Therefore Occam's razor indicates that thought is the cause of humanity's unnatural behavior.

Being that this explanation is the simplest and most obvious, as well as being logically consistent, it must be adopted as the accepted theory as to the cause of said unnatural behavior.
Humans a cancer? No. Humans are, in truth, behaving very much like imaginal discs in metamorphising insects. Imaginal discs are not cancers or parasites either, but agents of change. Ditto humanity.

One billion years ago blue green algae precipitated an extinction event that killed about 90% of existing species (all microbes at that time) in what is called The Great Oxygenation Event. That event made multicellular life possible. The blue green algae was neither a cancer or a parasite but a change agent of nature, of the Earth.

I think the biggest difference between humans and other animals is that we can perceive the passage of time more clearly than other species. The advantage is akin to the trilobites taking over the Earth half a billion years ago because they were the first animal to enjoy clear vision. Other species cannot compete with such massive advantages. Dominance brings its own qualities as species are able to develop relatively unmolested, allowing for more rapid progress (the ricgh get richer ...).

Occam's Razor is more suggestive that human behaviour is just the latest innovation of nature rather than unnatural. Is anything outside of nature?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4761
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

go pound sand

Post by henry quirk » Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:11 pm

"The human species is a cancer."

Okay...so what?

#

"The way to go into remission is to transcend the "I..." thought process."

Okay...so what?

My point: some of us cancers are virulent...we won't go easily.

My point: some of us I-diseased wretches 'like' our disease...we won't transcend.

What're 'you' gonna do about it?

That is: when the bulk of humanity (or even just one guy) tells you to go pound sand, what's the plan for gettin' over the hump?

Everyone else wants to dismantle your position; me, for the sake of argument, I accept your position: I'm an I-ridden cancer, I ain't goin' nowhere, now what?

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:00 am

roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:07 pm
"It's pretty much a given within evolutionary theory that mammals have replaced countless non-mammalian species within lots of ecosystems rendering many extinct in the process. "

Every other species on the planet has evolved without causing it's own extinction, obviously. Let alone the extinction of every other species on the planet. Obviously. Think about this. I know I don't have to use the cancer analogy but sometimes it helps.
Humanity has not caused its own extinction. As proof of this I would point out that neither of us is a ghost. Further, in a big world with a very long history of animals dying out, it's probable that more than one species has caused its own extinction in that time, although we aren't likely to have reason to discuss those in the present tense, so you need to put some thought into your language here.

If the analogy is extraneous to the argument, it has no place in a logical argument. If you are smart, you will realise that and start again.
roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:07 pm
"The most obvious difference between humans and other animals is ... well there are lots of them, so I am going to say it is the wearing of trousers. There is no possible way for you to force me to accept that something you consider the most obvious is actually the most obvious if I consider something else to be more obvious than your thing."

Okay, what is the "thing" that distinguishes humans from all other life on the earth? It's thought and the internal monologue. I find this to be obvious.
My point was that you chose arbitrarily from a huge list of things that differentiate humans from other animals. You might as well have chosen hats or trousers. You are the one presenting what is claimed to be a logical argument, so make it logical. You can't do that by just having an opinion that one among many things is the best thing. You do it by either demonstrating that there is no other difference, or by providing a proper reason why that one is the single thing that matters. "I find this to be obvious" did none of that heavy lifting first time round, repeating it adds no value.
roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:07 pm
So to me neither of your arguments carry any worth.
If you want to claim the rigour of a logical argument, do the necessary work to link your premises properly to your conclusion in a necessary and sufficient manner. If you don't know how to do that, just drop the pretence and describe it as opinion. Don't get emotionally attached to an argument though, they are there to do work, not to be pets.

gaffo
Posts: 2320
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by gaffo » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:26 am

roydop wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:23 pm
1. The actions of the human species has put into motion a mass extinction event on the earth. This behavior more closely resembles the actions of a cancer than of a mammal.

2. The human species is a cancer.

3. The most obvious difference between humans and all other life is our use of thought and our internal dialogue.

4. Therefore Occam's razor indicates that thought is the cause of humanity's unnatural behavior.

Being that this explanation is the simplest and most obvious, as well as being logically consistent, it must be adopted as the accepted theory as to the cause of said unnatural behavior.
thoughts and HANDS - smart Dalphines(sp) lack the hand to ruin the environment.

Man did not ruin the enviroment from 1,000,000 ago to only 10,000 yrs ago, same man.

so there is more the picture as to why man only lately is ruining the world.

............

no matter, mother nature is more powerfull than man, she will remove us eventually, then another mammal will replace our folly to remvoed.

wash repeat.

roydop
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: go pound sand

Post by roydop » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:36 am

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:11 pm
"The human species is a cancer."

Okay...so what?

#

"The way to go into remission is to transcend the "I..." thought process."

Okay...so what?

My point: some of us cancers are virulent...we won't go easily.

My point: some of us I-diseased wretches 'like' our disease...we won't transcend.

What're 'you' gonna do about it?

That is: when the bulk of humanity (or even just one guy) tells you to go pound sand, what's the plan for gettin' over the hump?

Everyone else wants to dismantle your position; me, for the sake of argument, I accept your position: I'm an I-ridden cancer, I ain't goin' nowhere, now what?
I'm predicting that the human species is going to experience an unprecedented amount of suffering, due to the whole extinction thing. I'm sharing this information with those who wish to find the source of suffering and transcend it. If you enjoy suffering then please carry on.

roydop
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by roydop » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am

"Humanity has not caused its own extinction. As proof of this I would point out that neither of us is a ghost. Further, in a big world with a very long history of animals dying out, it's probable that more than one species has caused its own extinction in that time, although we aren't likely to have reason to discuss those in the present tense, so you need to put some thought into your language here."

Is it not a self evident fact that no other species existing on the planet has caused it's own extinction? Therefore, the fact that humanity is going to cause it's own extinction is the greatest aberrant behavior in the history of life on this planet. If one adds on the very real possibility that our species will cause the death of all life on earth... do you want a more convincing argument that humans are doing something terribly unnatural? Seriously if you can't see this then bye bye.

"If the analogy is extraneous to the argument, it has no place in a logical argument. If you are smart, you will realize that and start again."

The starting point is the assumption that humanity is acting as a destructive force, which is in opposition to natural law/balance. I use for an example of this unnatural behavior the cause of our own extinction. So technically I am making an assumption that our extinction is "locked in." If you don't accept that then you may have a problem accepting my conclusions.

"My point was that you chose arbitrarily from a huge list of things that differentiate humans from other animals. You might as well have chosen hats or trousers. You are the one presenting what is claimed to be a logical argument, so make it logical. You can't do that by just having an opinion that one among many things is the best thing. You do it by either demonstrating that there is no other difference, or by providing a proper reason why that one is the single thing that matters. "I find this to be obvious" did none of that heavy lifting first time round, repeating it adds no value."

And how do hats and trousers come into existence? Via thought.

Listen, if you can't accept/see that the most important thing that sets humans apart from all other life on the earth is thought, then you just need to leave this thread. I'm not going to waste any energy defending obvious positions/statements.

Can you stop thinking? Just sit there and don't think. How do I know you can't stop thinking for more than a few seconds? Just sit there for one hour and try to not think. Watch your mind. If you're objective and honest you will notice that you actually have little to no control of your own mind.

Intuitively, do you figure that, if this is the normal state of human consciousness, it's our thoughts that's causing the problem?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4761
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

"If you enjoy suffering then please carry on."

Post by henry quirk » Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:58 pm

Okay, I will.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: A LOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE CAUSE OF HUMANITY'S UNNATURAL BEHAVIOR.

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:33 pm

roydop wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am
"Humanity has not caused its own extinction. As proof of this I would point out that neither of us is a ghost. Further, in a big world with a very long history of animals dying out, it's probable that more than one species has caused its own extinction in that time, although we aren't likely to have reason to discuss those in the present tense, so you need to put some thought into your language here."

Is it not a self evident fact that no other species existing on the planet has caused it's own extinction? Therefore, the fact that humanity is going to cause it's own extinction is the greatest aberrant behavior in the history of life on this planet. If one adds on the very real possibility that our species will cause the death of all life on earth... do you want a more convincing argument that humans are doing something terribly unnatural? Seriously if you can't see this then bye bye.
What is self evident is that no current species is extinct. That is true by definition and includes both humanity and all other species. If you are unable to master the basics of present and past tenses you are in no position to condescend to me. It is in no way self evident that past species have never caused their own extinction, somewhere in history one would expect that some have through simple excessive grazing.

It is not at all a known fact that humanity is going to cause its own extinction, for all you know we may be about to get destroyed next week by a massive inescapable blast of cosmic radiation from a distant galaxy that strips the Earth of its atmosphere. Also for all you know, we may not be extinguished for millions of years yet.
roydop wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am
"If the analogy is extraneous to the argument, it has no place in a logical argument. If you are smart, you will realize that and start again."

The starting point is the assumption that humanity is acting as a destructive force, which is in opposition to natural law/balance. I use for an example of this unnatural behavior the cause of our own extinction. So technically I am making an assumption that our extinction is "locked in." If you don't accept that then you may have a problem accepting my conclusions.
You have many more problems than you recognise. It is entirely possible to accept your gloomy premise that humanity is already irrevocably doomed by its own hand without buying into the poor argument you provide as to the cause of this problem. You have no apparent grasp of how to relate premises to conclusions. I am assessing your argument for its logical quality, and it is here that it fails.
roydop wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am
"My point was that you chose arbitrarily from a huge list of things that differentiate humans from other animals. You might as well have chosen hats or trousers. You are the one presenting what is claimed to be a logical argument, so make it logical. You can't do that by just having an opinion that one among many things is the best thing. You do it by either demonstrating that there is no other difference, or by providing a proper reason why that one is the single thing that matters. "I find this to be obvious" did none of that heavy lifting first time round, repeating it adds no value."

And how do hats and trousers come into existence? Via thought.
They also come about due to the ability to hold sewing needles which derives from thumbs. So now thumbs are the obvious difference. Surely you could see that one coming?
roydop wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am
Listen, if you can't accept/see that the most important thing that sets humans apart from all other life on the earth is thought, then you just need to leave this thread. I'm not going to waste any energy defending obvious positions/statements.
You probably have no future in philosophy. I will not be commanded by you to just agree with you or leave, with the very greatest possible respect, you can fuck off with that attitude, I am never going to be impressed.
roydop wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:48 am
Can you stop thinking? Just sit there and don't think. How do I know you can't stop thinking for more than a few seconds? Just sit there for one hour and try to not think. Watch your mind. If you're objective and honest you will notice that you actually have little to no control of your own mind.

Intuitively, do you figure that, if this is the normal state of human consciousness, it's our thoughts that's causing the problem?
Try and sit there without having thumbs for an hour. Can't you see that you still had thumbs all the time? You must realise now it is your thumbs that are your problem. A thought experiment where somebody has to imagine becoming something inconceivable is a gimmick, not an argument.

You have no basis for deciding this inner I is the most obvious human thing. Even if we allowed it for the sake of argument, you then have no basis for deciding that the most obvious feature of one thing is the cause of any effect it has on the world. Seriously, imagine what your line of reasoning would achieve in the hands of the Klu Klux Klan - are you really prepared to die on a hill for this principle you are defending here? I am saving you from yourself.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests