RE: Why be good?
June 2, 2015 at 11:23 am
(This post was last modified: June 2, 2015 at 11:25 am by henryp.)
re: rythym
The idea of "Being good" a control:
Turns out, there are more practical applications of not behaving 'good' than skullfucking babies and killing old ladies. The easiest place to look is the rich and powerful. People who get ahead in business or politics typically aren't doing so on the backs of their fair, truthful, and kind behaviors.
Using the simpler Nazi behavior. If you don't kill the Jews, you die. Dying is about as 'not one's my best interests' as you can get. We've been taught to 'be good' and die in that situation, I believe. I think that's a pretty clear example of acting outside my own best interests.
As for who's behind such ideas, I don't know. We know religions have been used 'being good' to control people for thousands of years. There are definitely people in power trying to convert our 'good' behavior into some benefit for themselves. "Oh look, a pink cancer ribbon on the packaging! I'll buy that one!" Conversely, a lot of good behavior is necessary to protect our own interests. Of course, what those are vary from person to person.
This might be something for a new thread. Generic morality being used as a contorl is definitely more complex than how Nationality is blatantly used to manipulate people.
---
Cannibalism:
Cannibalism is an interesting one. We've got a lot of behaviors that we're biologically/socially programmed to avoid. But as self-aware people, I think we can recognize when something is just 'wiring' rather than a reasonable rule. At least, I think some people can recognize that. In my mind, if I'm starving to death, meat is meat. I think I've read Cannibalism exposes you to some weird diseases, so obviously you want to avoid it for that. But living vs. dying, I'd take the risk. Of course, we live in a culture where you can't eat a dog, but you can kill a pig and share the pig meat with a dog, and that's okay. So it doesn't surprise me that such an oddly indoctrinated people will have a tough time shaking off some of their food beliefs.
----
On the idea that axe murderering being under the surface:
It looks like a perceived threat to your children's welfare is enough for you to break out the axe. So the question becomes what qualifies as a perceived threat. Is my taking up the last spot in the last lifeboat while your kid is still on the sinking ship a threat to your child's welfare? It's all shades of grey once we establish you'll kill me to keep your kid safe.
Hopefully, your trigger point is far off. But I just don't believe that it's as far off as people would like to believe. Sports parents, road rage, relationships going bad, Florida, and on and on. We have such a violent history, and for so many, violence is just waiting to be let out. While I hope we never find out, I'm very curious how such a soft entitled society as ours would handle a big setback. The global economy, climate change, nuclear war, the electric grid, etc... Seems like it's just a matter of time.
The idea of "Being good" a control:
Turns out, there are more practical applications of not behaving 'good' than skullfucking babies and killing old ladies. The easiest place to look is the rich and powerful. People who get ahead in business or politics typically aren't doing so on the backs of their fair, truthful, and kind behaviors.
Using the simpler Nazi behavior. If you don't kill the Jews, you die. Dying is about as 'not one's my best interests' as you can get. We've been taught to 'be good' and die in that situation, I believe. I think that's a pretty clear example of acting outside my own best interests.
As for who's behind such ideas, I don't know. We know religions have been used 'being good' to control people for thousands of years. There are definitely people in power trying to convert our 'good' behavior into some benefit for themselves. "Oh look, a pink cancer ribbon on the packaging! I'll buy that one!" Conversely, a lot of good behavior is necessary to protect our own interests. Of course, what those are vary from person to person.
This might be something for a new thread. Generic morality being used as a contorl is definitely more complex than how Nationality is blatantly used to manipulate people.
---
Cannibalism:
Cannibalism is an interesting one. We've got a lot of behaviors that we're biologically/socially programmed to avoid. But as self-aware people, I think we can recognize when something is just 'wiring' rather than a reasonable rule. At least, I think some people can recognize that. In my mind, if I'm starving to death, meat is meat. I think I've read Cannibalism exposes you to some weird diseases, so obviously you want to avoid it for that. But living vs. dying, I'd take the risk. Of course, we live in a culture where you can't eat a dog, but you can kill a pig and share the pig meat with a dog, and that's okay. So it doesn't surprise me that such an oddly indoctrinated people will have a tough time shaking off some of their food beliefs.
----
On the idea that axe murderering being under the surface:
It looks like a perceived threat to your children's welfare is enough for you to break out the axe. So the question becomes what qualifies as a perceived threat. Is my taking up the last spot in the last lifeboat while your kid is still on the sinking ship a threat to your child's welfare? It's all shades of grey once we establish you'll kill me to keep your kid safe.
Hopefully, your trigger point is far off. But I just don't believe that it's as far off as people would like to believe. Sports parents, road rage, relationships going bad, Florida, and on and on. We have such a violent history, and for so many, violence is just waiting to be let out. While I hope we never find out, I'm very curious how such a soft entitled society as ours would handle a big setback. The global economy, climate change, nuclear war, the electric grid, etc... Seems like it's just a matter of time.