Lord of the Flies

[Ierrellus]

Without ideals we are back to dog eat dog. Is this what you would prefer?
Once again, what were the boys reduced to? What could have saved them from themselves?

[Mictlantecuhtli]

@Ierrellus

Without ideals we are back to dog eat dog. Is this what you would prefer?
Once again, what were the boys reduced to? What could have saved them from themselves?

With ideals we’re still dog eat dog. It matters not ideals exist or not. Yes, I prefer it without all the illusions of idealism.

There is no saving humanity. Human nature is fixed and won’t change.

[Ierrellus]

@HaHaHa

@Ierrellus

Without ideals we are back to dog eat dog. Is this what you would prefer?
Once again, what were the boys reduced to? What could have saved them from themselves?

With ideals we’re still dog eat dog. It matters not ideals exist or not. Yes, I prefer it without all the illusions of idealism.

There is no saving humanity. Human nature is fixed and won’t change.

If humanity cannot save itself from itself, what does this offer the future of humans? Lord of the Flies offers no hope for a sane, humane future for mankind. The adults were as messed up as were the stranded boys. Is this how you see the future of the world?–Same old, same old until death?

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

@HaHaHa

Anybody that say animals outside of the human sphere are moral or ethical commit the fallacy of anthromorphizing.

It is not a fallacy but to say that is a fallacy is to make the fallacy of saying animals cannot communicate without language.
Animals have morality, they don’t have a language associated with it.

Morality is an evolutionary mechanism. Lions will be loyal to someone who rescues it.
Lions are born moral, and then other lions turn them into monsters, the cycle of lion monsterhood.

The cycle is, lions are born nice and friendly, then the alpha male rapes their mothers and kills their friends, and exiles them from the tribe. They become bitter, hateful lions, and what else is there left to but to rape the females who stood by and watched it happen, and kill the alpha male who did it to you, and then make the other lions suffer the same way you had to?

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

Humans are less moral than animals, so to say animals have morality is the opposite of anthromorphizing, it is actually turning humans into animals.

Worthless chinese vermin, these chinese women, don’t deserve to breathe air, they think it is cool to trap live animals in small tight plastic bags and wear them as jewelry, these women don’t deserve to breathe air and deserve to go to hell.

[Moreno]

@HaHaHa

Animals kill each other all the time and things going way beyond just for food.

It is primarily for food and sometimes males around mating and the children of others. But animals also will work in groups their entire lifetimes and not kill another of their own species. In fact most of the violence will be ritualized, since damaging other members of the group is bad for hunting or defense from predation.

To say someone was acting like an animal means nothing. It could mean they attacked someone or it could mean they saved someone or shared some food or cuddled for the night.

Clearly you haven’t researched it enough.

We are animals and it idealists trying desperately to make human beings into something we’re not.

Sure, O happens. But my point was that, ding ding ding, we are animals. So saying that we are like animals is loopy. Oh, look, the boys on that island degenerated and acted like animals. Well if they acted like animals, they might just as well have worked like a good back of wolves of a herd of bison. Teamwork, sharing, survival as a group, even if they have some tiffs along the way.

And there are moral like patterns in pretty much all social mammals. This does not mean they think in terms of good and bad, but they will tend to punish unfairness, behavior destructive to the group and so on. And animals have empathy. If someone read your posts about what human nature is, they would get the impression there is no empathy in humans. If someone acts with empathy they are simply having their minds controlled by society. Whoops no. Empathy is present in many mammals and they will even, sometimes, exhibit this cross species.

Everywhere you see something that someone calls kindness you see rule following or guilt. And there is truth in this. There is a lot of guilt and rule following out there, Jesus christ there sure is. But that is to the extent we have also crushed the empathetic portions of our animal nature.

You seem to think an authentic human is like and animal. An empathyless, free agent who only does things for others if it benefits him. But this just means you have not done your research. Empathy is a real animal trait and one we have.

You are the idealist. But your ideal is a rebellion against middle class suburban ideals. So you think it is freely chosen and you are will to face the real dark truths.

But you seem to only able to face these truths if you have a partial image of what human nature is. Becuase that is easy.

I don’t think you live this. But it is the mask you present.

When I pointed out you wanted to help that other guy, you had to cover it up. Because it does not fit the ideal you want to present, a Joker/Shiva mask that loves destruction and is free and dangerouns and in control.

But you are not in fucking control and as an animal you also have empathy and also a sense of fairness - which is not the same as morals but nor it is anything goes in practice.

And if you are going to act like Iamb and tell me I am afraid your beliefs are true…I will snort.

I see humans as worse than many other animals. They can talk themselves into coldly doing things other social mammals could not manage. To coldly systematically kill very large numbers of other people, or see to it that this is carried out. Only an overthinking animal would do this. Animal savagery is generally hot, individual against individual and the attacker hopes to gain some basic resource or eliminate a threat. Humans who have all the resources they need will bureaucratically kill large numbers of other people for various reasons having little to do with having enough resources and the threats are often hallucinated or manipulated into being.

When I am critical of this talk of humans regressing to animals it is in part because animals need not act like this and generally social mammals do not. Their is this mistaken idea of what animals are. But it is also because people confuse being calm and rational with being good, when the worst crimes have been carried out by the pen and by calm men who had enough but wanted more because they have so little life in them it is all them can think of to do with their time.

[Ierrellus]

See Walt Whitman’s poem on animals.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

@Moreno

@HaHaHa

Animals kill each other all the time and things going way beyond just for food.

It is primarily for food and sometimes males around mating and the children of others. But animals also will work in groups their entire lifetimes and not kill another of their own species. In fact most of the violence will be ritualized, since damaging other members of the group is bad for hunting or defense from predation.

To say someone was acting like an animal means nothing. It could mean they attacked someone or it could mean they saved someone or shared some food or cuddled for the night.

Clearly you haven’t researched it enough.

We are animals and it idealists trying desperately to make human beings into something we’re not.

Sure, O happens. But my point was that, ding ding ding, we are animals. So saying that we are like animals is loopy. Oh, look, the boys on that island degenerated and acted like animals. Well if they acted like animals, they might just as well have worked like a good back of wolves of a herd of bison. Teamwork, sharing, survival as a group, even if they have some tiffs along the way.

And there are moral like patterns in pretty much all social mammals. This does not mean they think in terms of good and bad, but they will tend to punish unfairness, behavior destructive to the group and so on. And animals have empathy. If someone read your posts about what human nature is, they would get the impression there is no empathy in humans. If someone acts with empathy they are simply having their minds controlled by society. Whoops no. Empathy is present in many mammals and they will even, sometimes, exhibit this cross species.

Everywhere you see something that someone calls kindness you see rule following or guilt. And there is truth in this. There is a lot of guilt and rule following out there, Jesus christ there sure is. But that is to the extent we have also crushed the empathetic portions of our animal nature.

You seem to think an authentic human is like and animal. An empathyless, free agent who only does things for others if it benefits him. But this just means you have not done your research. Empathy is a real animal trait and one we have.

You are the idealist. But your ideal is a rebellion against middle class suburban ideals. So you think it is freely chosen and you are will to face the real dark truths.

But you seem to only able to face these truths if you have a partial image of what human nature is. Becuase that is easy.

I don’t think you live this. But it is the mask you present.

When I pointed out you wanted to help that other guy, you had to cover it up. Because it does not fit the ideal you want to present, a Joker/Shiva mask that loves destruction and is free and dangerouns and in control.

But you are not in fucking control and as an animal you also have empathy and also a sense of fairness - which is not the same as morals but nor it is anything goes in practice.

And if you are going to act like Iamb and tell me I am afraid your beliefs are true…I will snort.

I see humans as worse than many other animals. They can talk themselves into coldly doing things other social mammals could not manage. To coldly systematically kill very large numbers of other people, or see to it that this is carried out. Only an overthinking animal would do this. Animal savagery is generally hot, individual against individual and the attacker hopes to gain some basic resource or eliminate a threat. Humans who have all the resources they need will bureaucratically kill large numbers of other people for various reasons having little to do with having enough resources and the threats are often hallucinated or manipulated into being.

When I am critical of this talk of humans regressing to animals it is in part because animals need not act like this and generally social mammals do not. Their is this mistaken idea of what animals are. But it is also because people confuse being calm and rational with being good, when the worst crimes have been carried out by the pen and by calm men who had enough but wanted more because they have so little life in them it is all them can think of to do with their time.

Human beings are overtly intelligent but all this means is that we’re highly creative, intelligent, and destructive kind of animal. We’re still animals and to say otherwise is beyond ridiculous.

I’m glad you brought up empathy and that’s because you’ll notice I’ve never brought it up before. Here’s a shocker, I certainly do believe enpathy exists but like all else revolves around self interest. I do not believe altruistic or selfless acts exist. You mentioned other reasons why animals kill beyond food and I feel like you’re intentionally trying to minimize or downplay them.

Nonhuman animals have no conceptual understanding of right,wrong, good, and evil where assigning moral or ethical attributes to them is assinine. With human animals however we do have conceptual understanding of all that but you’re already acquainted with my nihilistic stance towards all of that in terms of being fictitious.

I think you’re confused because you assign moral or ethical value to empathy.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

@HaHaHa

@Moreno

@HaHaHa

Animals kill each other all the time and things going way beyond just for food.

It is primarily for food and sometimes males around mating and the children of others. But animals also will work in groups their entire lifetimes and not kill another of their own species. In fact most of the violence will be ritualized, since damaging other members of the group is bad for hunting or defense from predation.

To say someone was acting like an animal means nothing. It could mean they attacked someone or it could mean they saved someone or shared some food or cuddled for the night.

Clearly you haven’t researched it enough.

We are animals and it idealists trying desperately to make human beings into something we’re not.

Sure, O happens. But my point was that, ding ding ding, we are animals. So saying that we are like animals is loopy. Oh, look, the boys on that island degenerated and acted like animals. Well if they acted like animals, they might just as well have worked like a good back of wolves of a herd of bison. Teamwork, sharing, survival as a group, even if they have some tiffs along the way.

And there are moral like patterns in pretty much all social mammals. This does not mean they think in terms of good and bad, but they will tend to punish unfairness, behavior destructive to the group and so on. And animals have empathy. If someone read your posts about what human nature is, they would get the impression there is no empathy in humans. If someone acts with empathy they are simply having their minds controlled by society. Whoops no. Empathy is present in many mammals and they will even, sometimes, exhibit this cross species.

Everywhere you see something that someone calls kindness you see rule following or guilt. And there is truth in this. There is a lot of guilt and rule following out there, Jesus christ there sure is. But that is to the extent we have also crushed the empathetic portions of our animal nature.

You seem to think an authentic human is like and animal. An empathyless, free agent who only does things for others if it benefits him. But this just means you have not done your research. Empathy is a real animal trait and one we have.

You are the idealist. But your ideal is a rebellion against middle class suburban ideals. So you think it is freely chosen and you are will to face the real dark truths.

But you seem to only able to face these truths if you have a partial image of what human nature is. Becuase that is easy.

I don’t think you live this. But it is the mask you present.

When I pointed out you wanted to help that other guy, you had to cover it up. Because it does not fit the ideal you want to present, a Joker/Shiva mask that loves destruction and is free and dangerouns and in control.

But you are not in fucking control and as an animal you also have empathy and also a sense of fairness - which is not the same as morals but nor it is anything goes in practice.

And if you are going to act like Iamb and tell me I am afraid your beliefs are true…I will snort.

I see humans as worse than many other animals. They can talk themselves into coldly doing things other social mammals could not manage. To coldly systematically kill very large numbers of other people, or see to it that this is carried out. Only an overthinking animal would do this. Animal savagery is generally hot, individual against individual and the attacker hopes to gain some basic resource or eliminate a threat. Humans who have all the resources they need will bureaucratically kill large numbers of other people for various reasons having little to do with having enough resources and the threats are often hallucinated or manipulated into being.

When I am critical of this talk of humans regressing to animals it is in part because animals need not act like this and generally social mammals do not. Their is this mistaken idea of what animals are. But it is also because people confuse being calm and rational with being good, when the worst crimes have been carried out by the pen and by calm men who had enough but wanted more because they have so little life in them it is all them can think of to do with their time.

Human beings are overtly intelligent but all this means is that we’re highly creative, intelligent, and destructive kind of animal. We’re still animals and to say otherwise is beyond ridiculous.

I’m glad you brought up empathy and that’s because you’ll notice I’ve never brought it up before. Here’s a shocker, I certainly do believe empathy exists but like all else revolves around self interest. I do not believe altruistic or selfless acts exist. You mentioned other reasons why animals kill beyond food and I feel like you’re intentionally trying to minimize or downplay them.

Nonhuman animals have no conceptual understanding of right, wrong, good, and evil where assigning moral or ethical attributes to them is assinine. With human animals however we do have conceptual understanding of all that but you’re already acquainted with my nihilistic stance towards it in terms of being fictitious.

I think you’re confused because you assign moral or ethical value to empathy. I don’t.

You’re right, I don’t live all of my perceptions on things because if I ever did I would of been imprisoned and executed a long time ago. No, I blend in and pretend to go along with the fictitious bullshit that pervades all of civilization until a time comes where I no longer have. Do I have empathy? Yes. A sense of fairness? That’s a bit of a stretch. No, not really.

I agree with you on the very destructive and violent tendencies of human beings or civilization in general. That is all very self evident.

[Ierrellus]

So empathy has nothing to do with ethics or morality?

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

@Ierrellus

So empathy has nothing to do with ethics or morality?

It most certainly often does not.

The human animal often does not act out on empathy, whereas an animal will always act on it’s empathy.
Like, if you brainwash a kid to think having sex with women is evil, and you should only have sex with priests, if his dad buys him a hot hooker the kid will refuse to have sex with it, and instead only have sex with buttugly priests.

Only a human can be brainwashed to disobey its own empathetic feelings. Its how cunts wearing “LOVE” shirts are the biggest meat eaters of all.

[Moreno]

@HaHaHa

Human beings are overtly intelligent but all this means is that we’re highly creative, intelligent, and destructive kind of animal. We’re still animals and to say otherwise is beyond ridiculous.

I was arguing that HUMANS ARE ANIMALS.

I’m glad you brought up empathy and that’s because you’ll notice I’ve never brought it up before. Here’s a shocker, I certainly do believe empathy exists but like all else revolves around self interest. I do not believe altruistic or selfless acts exist.

It doesn’t matter if you can find a way to interpret the effects of that empathy as in the end benefiting the one feeling it. My point was that empathy is an animal trait and it affects the way they interact with eachother. It leads to all kind of teamwork and tends to minimize real violence between members of groups that depend on each other, like say in packs and herds and equivalent to the group of fictional kids on that island. If the boys had degenerated into a full animal nature including empathetic reactions to each other, the outcome might have been different. It doesn’t matter for my argument if ‘REALLY’ they were empathetic in their own interests, since my argument had nothing to do with are we selfless ever or some other issue you seem to be hallucinating, but rather focusing on what I consider the confused way their behavior is being called animalistic as a pejorative, when in fact the problem in general is that humans deny their human nature, especially its fullness, in this case empathy. I am also critical of the idea that if you take away laws and morals people will treat each other with contast savagery. THAT IS ONE OF THE MYTHS the moralists want us to believe, in their mistaken understanding of what animals are like.

You mentioned other reasons why animals kill beyond food and I feel like you’re intentionally trying to minimize or downplay them.

Amazing that your feelings have so much cognitive content. That said it doesn’t amount to a point.

Nonhuman animals have no conceptual understanding of right, wrong, good, and evil where assigning moral or ethical attributes to them is assinine.

Who did that?

With human animals however we do have conceptual understanding of all that but you’re already acquainted with my nihilistic stance towards it in terms of being fictitious.

I think you’re confused because you assign moral or ethical value to empathy. I don’t.

Actually I am critical of the way people here are blaming what happened to the fictional boys on their reversion to animal nature. Animal nature could have led the boys to have an effective pack or herd, which it almost always does in nature, and where members do not kill each other. Behaviors that parallel our notions of fairness and reciprocity are well documented in social mammals.

I FEEL like you responded to some position my position reminded you of, but not my position. I have backed up this feeling above.

As far as empathetic acts always being in ones own interest, this just doesn\t hold water, since animals will put themselves harm\s way, even across species. This will not even help their genes. Once empathy is in place / which may very well help the species / it leads to acts that do not help the self.

[Ierrellus]

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

@Ierrellus

So empathy has nothing to do with ethics or morality?

It most certainly often does not.

The human animal often does not act out on empathy, whereas an animal will always act on it’s empathy.
Like, if you brainwash a kid to think having sex with women is evil, and you should only have sex with priests, if his dad buys him a hot hooker the kid will refuse to have sex with it, and instead only have sex with buttugly priests.

Only a human can be brainwashed to disobey its own empathetic feelings. Its how cunts wearing “LOVE” shirts are the biggest meat eaters of all.

Really convoluted logic. I admit that a point was made about humans being able to brainwash each other. But other animals mimic their parents as a way of attaining the requirements of belonging to a flock or herd. Is that brainwashing? Is it not the essence of the human sense of ethics?

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

intellect based beings must be open to programming and that is why children and females are so easily brainwashed.

Men begin as females, then turn into childlike females, which are males with violent urges but nothing male about them other than that. human organisms must be susceptible to brainwashing by neccessity, it is the same function which allows them to learn and evolve. Like all tools, it has a downside.

Adult females are very hard to brainwash outside of their already instituted programs. Children are slightly easier to mold, that is why devout religous people are turned into religous people. The masculine program, allows rational instinct to act as a filter sorting out garbage info. The feminine routine, turns off this filtering mechanism.

[Ierrellus]

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

intellect based beings must be open to programming and that is why children and females are so easily brainwashed.

Men begin as females, then turn into childlike females, which are males with violent urges but nothing male about them other than that. human organisms must be susceptible to brainwashing by neccessity, it is the same function which allows them to learn and evolve. Like all tools, it has a downside.

Adult females are very hard to brainwash outside of their already instituted programs. Children are slightly easier to mold, that is why devout religous people are turned into religous people. The masculine program, allows rational instinct to act as a filter sorting out garbage info. The feminine routine, turns off this filtering mechanism.

These male vs female assertions are spurious, having no legitimate bases in psychology or philosophy.

[Ierrellus]

We are way off track here. Did the boys in Lord of the Flies simply reflect the evils of adult societies?

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

@Ierrellus

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

intellect based beings must be open to programming and that is why children and females are so easily brainwashed.

Men begin as females, then turn into childlike females, which are males with violent urges but nothing male about them other than that. human organisms must be susceptible to brainwashing by neccessity, it is the same function which allows them to learn and evolve. Like all tools, it has a downside.

Adult females are very hard to brainwash outside of their already instituted programs. Children are slightly easier to mold, that is why devout religous people are turned into religous people. The masculine program, allows rational instinct to act as a filter sorting out garbage info. The feminine routine, turns off this filtering mechanism.

These male vs female assertions are spurious, having no legitimate bases in psychology or philosophy.

Those are spurious! Spurious I say!

What a fucking joke.

[Ierrellus]

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

@Ierrellus

@Ultimate Philosophy 1001

intellect based beings must be open to programming and that is why children and females are so easily brainwashed.

Men begin as females, then turn into childlike females, which are males with violent urges but nothing male about them other than that. human organisms must be susceptible to brainwashing by neccessity, it is the same function which allows them to learn and evolve. Like all tools, it has a downside.

Adult females are very hard to brainwash outside of their already instituted programs. Children are slightly easier to mold, that is why devout religous people are turned into religous people. The masculine program, allows rational instinct to act as a filter sorting out garbage info. The feminine routine, turns off this filtering mechanism.

These male vs female assertions are spurious, having no legitimate bases in psychology or philosophy.

Those are spurious! Spurious I say!
Is there no way you can get back on topic without vomiting your agenda of male and female hormonal influences on brain and thought? We’re talking hare about some reduction of a group of boys to the most basic of their human instincts. Apparently, you have nothing to say about that. Don’t usurp my thread with thoughts about how women who wear love shirts are senseless cunts.
What a fucking joke.

Apologies for the post as insert. I seem to have overlooked your latest BM.

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

You have an agenda of labelling things as an agenda. I am liek the clownofthetown, one minute i reveal batman’s identity then all of a sudden i change my mind and tell people not to leak his identity. The only agenda i have is the dna machine, the rest are just random facts I give. I have no fucking agenda.

Tommorow I could be ranting against the evils of men. But I would be honest about it, stating the facts, which I have. If you dont believe in hormonal influences you are a fucking retard.

[Ultimate_Philosophy (Ultimate Philosophy 1001)]

Ooh, did I hit a soft spot? Turns me on.