Human Nature

[Alan V]

However, if our biggest complaint is that we have to learn the hard way and we think that's unfortunate..we're probably not talking misanthropy.  That, to me, sounds like it comes from a place of caring and foresight which we could, imo, use alot more of.  It's not like you're over there saying "humans have to learn the hard way, and that's great, because I would like to hit em even harder..and all the time..the filthy fucking fucks!"

There are different varieties of philosophical misanthropy, as this article makes clear.  I guess what I am saying is that I am falling away from being an activist misanthrope and becoming a quietist misanthrope, though I keep struggling with both.  I am not convinced that either stance is particularly healthy for me. I just haven't figured out an alternative.

Looking back on my life now, it seems to me that I have always tried too hard with other people, and that trying too hard makes everything worse rather than better. My conclusion from such experiences is that most people have never been worth it.

[The Grand Nudger]

That one, I think, does come down to different life experiences. I couldn't tell you that you were wrong in any way with respect to whatever effort you've put into people that turned out not to be worth it to you. I've been disappointed, no doubt, but I tend to suspect that I could have worked harder. Could have been quicker on my feet. Could have been more patient. Could have, could have, could have...notes for the next time. Always notes for the next time..because there will always be a next time.

[The Grand Nudger]

If my metrics for good aren't representative then such metrics are irrelevant. It's like this crap about best possible world invented to make god blame free for all shit in the world he supposedly created. No matter how hard I look I can't see smidgen of evidence for this supposed goodness of human nature. Humans certainly can be good but as far as I am concerned aren't inherently so.

Really?  I get things wrong all the time.  I often underestimate difficulty, overestimate results.  When things go sideways...just as often.... I don't think it's because..failing my metrics or my expectations, that any other set of metrics or expectations are then demonstrated to be irrelevant.  

So people are so ineffective at doing good that few bad actors are enough to fuck up all their effort? Seems like excuse to me, just like when theists starts trumpeting about free will when some ask why their almighty god does not stop rapists.

Here I think we simply don't agree.  I've watched shitty people try to do their worst, fail at that, and accidentally help someone in the process.  I don't know if our wills are meaningfully free...but that happens whether they are or aren't.  Whenever someone opines on human nature or it's balance we're already talking about things we aren't truly free with respect to anyway.  I want to point out again that we don't have to be particularly good at good to be the best at good in an amoral universe full of things which are not moral agents.

Obviously they're voting against their own interests (as long as we're talking about working and middle class). But why voting so would be difficult to explain if human would be bad by nature? If anything it makes things far simpler - humans are bad so they chose (yes I know it sounds dramatic) evil. Interests of working and middle class people are largely different from interests of millionaires and billionaires and that won't change no matter how despicable people in question will be. Class supersedes morality in this.

If humans are bad by nature bad outcomes don't even need explanation.  It's just another way of saying the same thing.  If humans are bad by nature, but good things happen...then we need to explain why we are so consistently stymied in our efforts to do our worst.  When was the last time someone barged into your house at O-dark thirty and shoved your granny's face into your bare earth floor with their well oiled boot over a bundle of contraband sticks?

Has it been more than 15 minutes?  Why?  Are we slacking?  Is there no one around with boots and oil..do you not have a granny...do you possess a floor made out of something other than dirt..is contraband hard to come by?

I have no idea what you're trying to say but people willingly supporting cruelty and inhumanity certainly aren't evidence of this supposed goodness of human nature. If anything their support for cruelty shows that human nature is anything but good.

You say anything but, I say good and other things too.

[Angrboda]

I suspect my casualness and lack of expectations may in part be due to my Taoism. One's philosophical outlook may play a role in steering one toward or away from misanthropy.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm resigned to the fact that some few people are good, others are bad, and the large majority -- their supporters, by and large, because politicians and media stars have to play to headlines -- fluctuate between what we agree is good and evil.

[Ivan Denisovich]

Really?  I get things wrong all the time.  I often underestimate difficulty, overestimate results.  When things go sideways...just as often.... I don't think it's because..failing my metrics or my expectations, that any other set of metrics or expectations are then demonstrated to be irrelevant.  

If current state of the world is supposed to be evidence for humans inherent goodness then clearly metrics used are just shit. World with murderous dictators, wars, genocides or pedophile ring disguised as religious organization simply can't be settled by good natured people if these words are to have some meaning.

Here I think we simply don't agree.  I've watched shitty people try to do their worst, fail at that, and accidentally help someone in the process.  I don't know if our wills are meaningfully free...but that happens whether they are or aren't.  Whenever someone opines on human nature or it's balance we're already talking about things we aren't truly free with respect to anyway.  I want to point out again that we don't have to be particularly good at good to be the best at good in an amoral universe full of things which are not moral agents.

I've watched shitty people making lives of others more difficult. Currently I'm seeing Poland racing to the bottom and supposedly good natured people cheering it. In no way, shape or form I will admit that nature of human animal is good or even approaching goodness. All this talk about how we are good despite sucking at it seems to me like christian apologia for their bloodthirsty but supposedly all loving god.

If humans are bad by nature bad outcomes don't even need explanation.  It's just another way of saying the same thing.  If humans are bad by nature, but good things happen...then we need to explain why we are so consistently stymied in our efforts to do our worst.  When was the last time someone barged into your house at O-dark thirty and shoved your granny's face into your bare earth floor with their well oiled boot over a bundle of contraband sticks?

Has it been more than 15 minutes?  Why?  Are we slacking?  Is there no one around with boots and oil..do you not have a granny...do you possess a floor made out of something other than dirt..is contraband hard to come by?

Humans aren't bad by nature. Simple as that. It ain't children story - not being good does not automatically mean being bad. Also police and courts exists and thus consequences for acting like shit.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Humans aren't bad by nature. Simple as that. It ain't children story - not being good does not automatically mean being bad. Also police and courts exists and thus consequences for acting like shit.

How many people tailor their opinions on this or that issue based on whether they think it's right or wrong morally? I think most people check their wallets first and their group identity second. Maybe the other way around in a totalitarian state, but not a big difference when group identity means poverty or comfort in that context.

Here in a nominally-capitalist state, "it's the economy, stupid" wins elections. What that says about human nature isn't nice.

[Ivan Denisovich]

Humans aren't bad by nature. Simple as that. It ain't children story - not being good does not automatically mean being bad. Also police and courts exists and thus consequences for acting like shit.

How many people tailor their opinions on this or that issue based on whether they think it's right or wrong morally? I think most people check their wallets first and their group identity second. Maybe the other way around in a totalitarian state, but not a big difference when group identity means poverty or  comfort in that context.

Here in a nominally-capitalist state, "it's the economy, stupid" wins elections. What that says about human nature isn't nice.

I think that morality comes first to most people. Morality viewed by lens of ideology however; people support say libertarian policies because they think them just and because they see them as good for themselves. It's not that majority of people are monsters who would take welfare from grannies and kids for shit and giggles (though number of them is insignificant), they simply see this welfare as something morally bad and I suppose in their own view they're thinking that they are helping said grannies and kids by voting on politicians wanting to cut it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

How many people tailor their opinions on this or that issue based on whether they think it's right or wrong morally? I think most people check their wallets first and their group identity second. Maybe the other way around in a totalitarian state, but not a big difference when group identity means poverty or  comfort in that context.

Here in a nominally-capitalist state, "it's the economy, stupid" wins elections. What that says about human nature isn't nice.

I think that morality comes first to most people. Morality viewed by lens of ideology however; people support say libertarian policies because they think them just and because they see them as good for themselves. It's not that majority of people are monsters who would take welfare from grannies and kids for shit and giggles (though number of them is insignificant), they simply see this welfare as something morally bad and I suppose in their own view they're thinking that they are helping said grannies and kids by voting on politicians wanting to cut it.

I don't agree, at least not for Americans. The folks here act politically not out of moral concerns but out of "how might this affect me?" Most Americans don't give a shit about whether cutting welfare or school-lunch programs hurts others if it means their tax bill is lower.

At least, that's what they vote for -- and I take them at their word. If they cared about that stuff would they incessantly vote for lower taxes and concomitant cuts in government services? These voters aren't worried about teaching welfare-queens any big lesson, they're more concerned about I-me-mine.

[Alan V]

I suspect my casualness and lack of expectations may in part be due to my Taoism.  One's philosophical outlook may play a role in steering one toward or away from misanthropy.

I was hoping wabi sabi ideas might moderate some of my current misanthropy, and they have up to a point.  People are imperfect and incomplete -- those are just facts to accept.

However, that does lead to blaming human nature rather than specific individuals for their failings.  It's not altogether an improvement of misanthropic perspectives, since it really doesn't make sense to say that people are "perfectly imperfect" as some do, or that they are really okay that way.  If anything, it makes people seem deterministic and tragic.

What specific Taoist ideas have you found helpful?  I recently reread Lao Tzu, and found his ideas even less helpful and more muddled than when I read them earlier in my life.  "Lack of expectations" sounds rather like stoicism and its determinism.