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

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

11011
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 4:42 pm

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

Post by 11011 »

how is morality no more than a power game played by one group against another?

can you first qualify what you mean by morality? (ex. laws?)

there is evidences of innate moral impulses stemming from things like empathy, social bonds, etc.

the power game arises from inter-group relations, not morality itself. in fact, people surprisingly agree on what is right and wrong, but that doesn't change the fact of their unequal circumstances...and that is what gives rise to the power games

in fact, it precisely because they have so much in common that they fight....if they truly wanted different things, or had different notions of right and wrong, co-existence would be more likely, as they'd each simply settle in their own neck of the woods, uninterested in the other
commonsense
Posts: 2431
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

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

Post by commonsense »

I enjoy reading this thread. But, 27, sorry for asking this, but I am unsure about your phrase, “(ex. laws)”. Do you mean to say “e.g., laws”, “former laws” or something else all together? I dunno. Thanks.
roydop
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

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

Post by roydop »

"Also, if there's any chance that humanity changed, it will be by using its intellect, not dissing it."

Speaking about silly notions.

Has it not been that every system of thought created by humans has been to "improve" matters or to make the world a better place? All of it: religion, philosophy, psychology, science. How's it been working?

No, there is something much deeper going on. The "I..." thought is incorrect. Self is not the body or the mind. Unless this fundamental misiterpretation is corrected nothing will improve
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

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

Post by Arising_uk »

roydop wrote:Has it not been that every system of thought created by humans has been to "improve" matters or to make the world a better place? All of it: religion, philosophy, psychology, science. How's it been working? ...
Well in the places where psychology and science have been in the forefront its been working out pretty well indeed, life spans doubled and less 'mad' people incarcerated and laughed at for profit.
No, there is something much deeper going on. The "I..." thought is incorrect. Self is not the body or the mind. Unless this fundamental misiterpretation is corrected nothing will improve
Improve how?
roydop
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

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

Post by roydop »

Arising_uk wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:28 am
roydop wrote:Has it not been that every system of thought created by humans has been to "improve" matters or to make the world a better place? All of it: religion, philosophy, psychology, science. How's it been working? ...
Well in the places where psychology and science have been in the forefront its been working out pretty well indeed, life spans doubled and less 'mad' people incarcerated and laughed at for profit.
No, there is something much deeper going on. The "I..." thought is incorrect. Self is not the body or the mind. Unless this fundamental misiterpretation is corrected nothing will improve
Improve how?
Life spans doubling is exactly the unnatural behavior that has led to our overpopulation, which is in turn resulting in the destruction of the natural world and our own extinction. When all of our technology fails (yes it will fail) the ratio of happiness to suffering will resort back to the mean (can't have a high without an equivalent low). No more meds, no more food in the grocery stores, no more electricity. This existence will be a literal hell.


Is there less (psychological) suffering now than there ever has been, throughout all of the history of humanity? To me the answer is an obvious "NO". If it is a "no" then how can one come to the conclusion that all of this thinking has done any good whatsoever? It is difficult for the ego to accept responsibility for it's aberrant actions.

Thought is what produces ALL psychological suffering. Therefore, to transcend suffering one must transcend thought.
roydop
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

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

Post by roydop »

commonsense wrote: Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:45 pm It is generally accepted that thought produces behavior. It follows that unnatural thought produces unnatural behavior. What is unnatural thought other than psychosis?

Does this mean that the concept of extinction, or near extinction, of the species is psychotic? No, it is not unnatural to be wrong nor even to produce wrong behavior.

So, what brings about wrong thoughts? Who decides that a thought is wrong? Who/what defines wrong? Are there rules? Whose rules?
If it turns out that we do cause the extinction of all life on earth (a very real possibility), then we would undeniably be the most destructive force to have ever effected the earth.

I don't have a problem calling that "psychotic".
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

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

Post by Arising_uk »

roydop wrote:Life spans doubling is exactly the unnatural behavior that has led to our overpopulation, ...
No it hasn't, in those countries that have had the fruits of science and technology available to them the population growth has pretty much stalled.
which is in turn resulting in the destruction of the natural world and our own extinction. ...
We are the 'natural' world, woman has been remaking the world since she appeared. Barring major catastrophes it's very unlike woman will go extinct, curtailed likely but extinct no.
When all of our technology fails (yes it will fail) the ratio of happiness to suffering will resort back to the mean (can't have a high without an equivalent low). No more meds, no more food in the grocery stores, no more electricity. This existence will be a literal hell. ...
So you agree, science has been a good thing. Although I'm a bit puzzled as I thought you hearkened for the 'natural' world?
Is there less (psychological) suffering now than there ever has been, throughout all of the history of humanity? To me the answer is an obvious "NO". ...
You think the depression of the ennui of the lotus-eater is worse than the depression from starvation, disease, etc?
If it is a "no" then how can one come to the conclusion that all of this thinking has done any good whatsoever? It is difficult for the ego to accept responsibility for it's aberrant actions. ...
And apparently this ego appears incapable of seeing all the unaberrant actions?
Thought is what produces ALL psychological suffering. Therefore, to transcend suffering one must transcend thought.
No, that's desire.
roydop
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:37 pm

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

Post by roydop »

Arising_uk wrote: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:01 am
roydop wrote:Life spans doubling is exactly the unnatural behavior that has led to our overpopulation, ...
No it hasn't, in those countries that have had the fruits of science and technology available to them the population growth has pretty much stalled.
which is in turn resulting in the destruction of the natural world and our own extinction. ...
We are the 'natural' world, woman has been remaking the world since she appeared. Barring major catastrophes it's very unlike woman will go extinct, curtailed likely but extinct no.
When all of our technology fails (yes it will fail) the ratio of happiness to suffering will resort back to the mean (can't have a high without an equivalent low). No more meds, no more food in the grocery stores, no more electricity. This existence will be a literal hell. ...
So you agree, science has been a good thing. Although I'm a bit puzzled as I thought you hearkened for the 'natural' world?
Is there less (psychological) suffering now than there ever has been, throughout all of the history of humanity? To me the answer is an obvious "NO". ...
You think the depression of the ennui of the lotus-eater is worse than the depression from starvation, disease, etc?
If it is a "no" then how can one come to the conclusion that all of this thinking has done any good whatsoever? It is difficult for the ego to accept responsibility for it's aberrant actions. ...
And apparently this ego appears incapable of seeing all the unaberrant actions?
Thought is what produces ALL psychological suffering. Therefore, to transcend suffering one must transcend thought.
No, that's desire.
Is there suffering?

If so, is there an end to suffering?
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12313
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

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

Post by Arising_uk »

roydop wrote:Is there suffering?
Suffering from pain, sure but it depends on what suffering you're talking about?
If so, is there an end to suffering?
Yes, when you're dead but some would have it that you then may well have an eternity of it but they are masochitic hedonists.
commonsense
Posts: 2431
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

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

Post by commonsense »

Not all unnatural human behavior is deleterious: e.g., penicillin v pneumonia. Nor is it the case that all unnatural behavior is adventitious: formula v breast milk.

Science is not the sine qua non of unnatural behavior, either good or bad. It is mankind’s perception and utilization of science that leads to unnatural activity, good or bad.

It is difficult at best to predict the positive or negative effects of any present behavior or combination of behaviors. The very actions driving us toward disaster may result in a significant reduction in demand so as to provide sufficient resources for the population that survives. In similar fashion, the process of natural selection may leave only adaptable cockroaches to inhabit
Post Reply