Hell

[ecolox]

So are you learning these concepts from science or is science just "preaching to the choir" - (i.e. your animal behavior and brain functions are what they are, no science or proving needed whatsoever)

They are not concepts but facts. Thanks to modern technology we can examine with detail how the brain functions. It's social ties that are found often with social animals are there by nature. Studying animal behaviour shows how social thinking works. There is no preaching as you say and there are no concepts. It's called scientific findings.

There are concepts. Science's top objective is to conceptualize the world. What you call facts are science's best concepts.

The findings of science are man-made and subject to error and revision.

Religion is man made and subject to error.

Yes, unless, of course, God reveals something to us about how to live.

A human hunting a human for food?

That actually happened many times in history. It's not evil though. Maybe a little uncivilised from our view point but not evil.

Maybe you'll be lucky enough to be eaten by man, or just killed for sport - to decorate a trophy room.

If you look into the history of man you'll find that huge groups (like society today) has never been natural or hard-wired.

They have. We behave aggressively towards other races, to other cultures invading territory, and to possible threats to family and friends. We are still controlled by nature. We are still controlled by natural instincts. From running into a burning house to save a family member to acting aggressively towards others. A horse would run into a burning barn. It does this because it's instincts tell it to. A moth flies into flames, it does this instinctively.

Some people behave aggressively towards their spouse. Specifically they beat them. Others enjoy humiliating, raping and killing other people. It brings them satisfaction to prove that they are more powerful or cunning or willing to do evil, so they overpower people and look down upon them, and they often harm or kill them. There are people that would be happy to come to your home and beat you senseless, take all of the things you use to live, and leave you never to return. Others would be happy to kill your family and all of your friends - some may require a little money or other compensation. All of these things must be natural and unpunishable. There is no justice to be had because there is no right or wrong, good or evil. What you're saying is that there is no such thing as an innocent person who deserves to live or who deserves their keep or respect. You're point is that people live and die and it doesn't matter how - besides, no one has any control over how anyway. Naturally if I saw you (by nature) attacking an innocent (for food or joy) I would dispatch you to save the innocent because of my concept of God, good and evil, justice, and so on. But if someone wrongfully attacked you, then I would offer you the same assistance that I gave the innocent.

The U.S. society is based on concepts (e.g. the Constitution, etc).

I don't know much about the US but that means fuck all for nature. We are still animals and we are still controlled by instincts regardless of what concepts we decide to make.

Is your point that all nations are the same? No one is better off in one over another - because what rules people remains the same and concepts don't matter.

We have conflict on every level due to clashes between individuals and society.

Different groups of apes go to war with each other often due to different reasons, some instinctive some not. We behave just like apes do but just a little better at killing things.

Now you say that apes will fight for different reasons (instincts or concepts?), some instinctive some not. Just a second ago you said we were ruled by instincts alone and concepts don't matter. But now apes can be motivated by non-instinctual [concepts]. Terrorist bombers can use concepts.

God gives morality meaning.

For you, not for me. I have yet to see any evidence of this god you speak of.

You don't believe in morality (good and evil) either; too conceptual and invisible.

Why should you abstain from crime and support the punishment of criminals? Especially, why should you avoid doing things that you can get away with and that would be beneficial to you?

Because I think of others and I tend to gain more through helping others. If we all chose to think it's ok to do crime, there would be no society.

So you help others to help yourself? Jesus said to secretly help those who cannot repay you.
Even criminals can be beaten into a society (ruled by force) - e.g. the organized crime of gangs and mobs.

Why the hell wouldn't we revert back to our ancestral behavior? It was hard-wired then, and its hard-wired now...right? Or are you relying on concepts now?

It's called evolution.

Our genes don't allow us to be nomadic hunters and gatherers? What are you saying?

Since it can be thought of as unnecessary, conflict is rampant.

Conflict is natural between all species. Social animal groups can and do fight other groups. Conflict will increase should food supply dwindle or territory threatened.

So, your point is that conflict should continue since it's natural.

You need to be aware of social standards in order to create a convincing illusion, of course. Other than that I'm not sure what you're getting at...

You do not need to be aware of anything in order to be social animals. We are naturally social animals.

Anti-social humans need to be aware of social standards if they wish to trick others into following them and doing their bidding.

So unique personalities could never clash with the group?

Nope. No one has the same personality. Human or animal. Would be strange if it was.

You don't quite get it. Rephrase: The group may have rules or goals that the individual may disagree with, do you agree?