37 Guests viewing this page
Hidden 9 yrs ago 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

I wonder why fighting is such an integral part of human nature.


Fighting is the logical outcome of the selfishness and pride ingrained in human nature. We want our way, we want to be right, and so anyone who wants anything else or has another idea must be wrong, and we have to prove to the world that that's true.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Fighting is the logical outcome of the selfishness and pride ingrained in human nature. We want our way, we want to be right, and so anyone who wants anything else or has another idea must be wrong, and we have to prove to the world that that's true.


How is fighting the logical outcome?
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by DarkwolfX37
Raw
GM
Avatar of DarkwolfX37

DarkwolfX37 Absolute L User

Member Seen 8 days ago

I wonder why fighting is such an integral part of human nature.


You want the real answer or the one you'll accept?
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by Balance>

How is fighting the logical outcome?


Selfishness: "I want my way." Pride: "I am right." If another person has an idea contrary to ours, then pride or selfishness puts us at enmity with the other idea. Enmity leads to fighting.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

You want the real answer or the one you'll accept?


Loaded question. You already set yourself up psychologically as being right and me being wrong. I don't partake in discussions on unequal footing.

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Selfishness: "I want my way." Pride: "I am right." If another person has an idea contrary to ours, then pride or selfishness puts us at enmity with the other idea. Enmity leads to fighting.


You're jumping from pride to fighting. You're skipping steps.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

You want the real answer or the one you'll accept?


I'm actually curious about your answer, since you won't derive it from biblical beliefs--mine is based on the biblical idea that man has a fallen nature.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Loaded question. You already set yourself up psychologically as being right and me being wrong. I don't partake in discussions on unequal footing.

<Snipped quote by Balance>

You're jumping from pride to fighting. You're skipping steps.


No, I'm not. Read it again. Pride is the idea that I am the best. Therefore, my ideas are the best. If someone else comes and has an idea contrary to mine, then as a result of that pride, both I and the other person will want our incompatible ideas to be the best. Because this is impossible, then our ideas logically clash, because they are incompatible. To settle this by compromise violates my pride, because I would have to change my idea to work with someone else's--but if my idea is superior, then why should I change it? And so the only way to continue is to fight over it.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by DarkwolfX37
Raw
GM
Avatar of DarkwolfX37

DarkwolfX37 Absolute L User

Member Seen 8 days ago

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Loaded question. You already set yourself up psychologically as being right and me being wrong. I don't partake in discussions on unequal footing.

<Snipped quote by Balance>

You're jumping from pride to fighting. You're skipping steps.


The one you'll accept is also correct, it's just secondary to the one you won't in terms of why.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

I'm actually curious about your answer, since you won't derive it from biblical beliefs--mine is based on the biblical idea that man has a fallen nature.


He's going to say natural selection.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by Balance>

He's going to say natural selection.


I assumed it would be something like alpha instinct inherited from our animal ancestors.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

No, I'm not. Read it again. Pride is the idea that I am the best. Therefore, my ideas are the best. If someone else comes and has an idea contrary to mine, then as a result of that pride, both I and the other person will want our incompatible ideas to be the best. Because this is impossible, then our ideas logically clash, because they are incompatible. To settle this by compromise violates my pride, because I would have to change my idea to work with someone else's--but if my idea is superior, then why should I change it? And so the only way to continue is to fight over it.


You were going fine, but then skipped several steps in the last statement. You went straight from "I won't change" to "fight." There's not a logical progression there.

<Snipped quote by Legend>

The one you'll accept is also correct, it's just secondary to the one you won't in terms of why.


I'm aware. I didn't post it looking for an answer; rather, I was thinking aloud as I worked through it.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Zeal
Raw
Avatar of Zeal

Zeal SideSlash

Member Seen 9 days ago

I wonder why fighting is such an integral part of human nature.


I wonder that a lot as well. Especially when I am in the shower.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

I assumed it would be something like alpha instinct inherited from our animal ancestors.


Rather that we're programmed that way in order to adapt.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

I wonder that a lot as well. Especially when I am in the shower.


Shower thoughts. I believe I have an answer.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Zeal
Raw
Avatar of Zeal

Zeal SideSlash

Member Seen 9 days ago

<Snipped quote by Zeal>

Shower thoughts. I believe I have an answer.


Oh?
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Legend
Raw
Avatar of Legend

Legend Isis

Member Seen 2 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Oh?


Mhm. But I believe I will work through it with those here before saying so myself.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by souleaterfan320
Raw
Avatar of souleaterfan320

souleaterfan320 Abel: Grand Warrior of Old

Member Seen 13 hrs ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Because Soul makes incredibly long posts? lol


He gets it.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Balance
Raw
Avatar of Balance

Balance Soren Fitz

Member Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by Balance>

You were going fine, but then skipped several steps in the last statement. You went straight from "I won't change" to "fight." There's not a logical progression there.

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

I'm aware. I didn't post it looking for an answer; rather, I was thinking aloud as I worked through it.


Let's see if I can continue, then. "I won't change." Neither person will change their ideas, and therefore--wait, no. I can't go from "I won't change" to "fight" unless we assume that I and the other absolutely have to decide which one is right. It doesn't account for the possibility that I don't care about the other person believing in his idea. Well, actually, that wouldn't lead to fighting in any case, so I don't need to account for that possibility.

So, ignoring that tangent, let's assume that we both believe that only one of us can possibly be right, and that the other person being wrong is wrong. In this case, I will have to prove that I am right, and he will have to prove that he is right, so that each of us can correct the other's wrongness. This leads to an argument.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by DarkwolfX37
Raw
GM
Avatar of DarkwolfX37

DarkwolfX37 Absolute L User

Member Seen 8 days ago

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

I'm actually curious about your answer, since you won't derive it from biblical beliefs--mine is based on the biblical idea that man has a fallen nature.


It's a bit roundabout when I say it so bear with me. The long story short is that we developed empathy along the way, we don't like pain, so it's a useful tool against things that feel pain that we don't like.
It helped us survive. Humans don't have claws, or sharp teeth, or high speed, or high jumping ability, or tusks, tough skin, etc. that other species have to keep them alive. We've got tools and a "more advanced brain" that spawned them. We respond to pain, like any mammal does, and we're a social species that builds tight-knit groups, tribes, societies, so on. If someone who has better tools than you gets food, and you don't get any, you'll starve. If you're starving, you'll want to kill to survive. If you're not getting much food or mates because you aren't high socially, you'll aim that intent at those in charge, rather than at prey. Because we respond to pain, inflicting pain to subjugate others is the obvious action to take to get more people to obey you. Our drive to survive and breed leads to fighting within our own tribe, and our instinct that anything different is dangerous leads to fighting between tribes. Because this helped us survive and later thrive, it was never bred out of us. So as time went on and we gained communication, we gained more ability to inflict pain to other things, because now we can more effectively organize our own group to work together against prey or other groups. We respond to pain, so we could use our group to subjugate another group, increasing the size of our own. Then the fighting moves back to within, because everyone wants the highest status to get the most mates. With language came ideas, then ideals, and suddenly motives changed but the method still works. Someone with a different language comes, we can't communicate, they're different and we don't understand them therefor they're dangerous, so kill or wound them. More time goes and our tribes get bigger, we need more resources, competition with other tribes grows. Suddenly you have nations and wars. From there, survivors pass on their tensions to their offspring, and you get revenge added onto distrust of the unknown. Skip to today, we have this same tension between skin shades, between cultures, between ideas... Instead of breeding out hatred of the new to us, we bred it in deeper because it worked for us. Now we're outside of huge chunks of natural selection so we don't need it very much anymore, but it's still there in our instincts, and generations don't try to raise it out of their offspring, so it keeps growing and stagnates at the status quo.
Bing bang boom we're violent towards each other and have no outside threats to direct it towards instead, and we don't educate everyone to a high enough degree which furthers the differences and the instinctual distrust that comes with them, we don't recognize the outside threats we create, and so we just sit here trying to beat the shit out of each other.

Long diatribe that basically boils down to "it helped us when we were a young species, on an individual and group level, so those with the violent approaches bred well and those without didn't, and now nearly everyone has it and doesn't try to raise it out, so there's no counterbalance to the nature from the nurture, leading to fighting.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by DarkwolfX37
Raw
GM
Avatar of DarkwolfX37

DarkwolfX37 Absolute L User

Member Seen 8 days ago

<Snipped quote by Legend>

Let's see if I can continue, then. "I won't change." Neither person will change their ideas, and therefore--wait, no. I can't go from "I won't change" to "fight" unless we assume that I and the other absolutely have to decide which one is right. It doesn't account for the possibility that I don't care about the other person believing in his idea. Well, actually, that wouldn't lead to fighting in any case, so I don't need to account for that possibility.

So, ignoring that tangent, let's assume that we both believe that only one of us can possibly be right, and that the other person being wrong is wrong. In this case, I will have to prove that I am right, and he will have to prove that he is right, so that each of us can correct the other's wrongness. This leads to an argument.


The other answer, by the way, is what you're getting towards. It's that every human has an existentialist need to believe their surroundings as real. We interpret our surroundings and consider our interpretations as our surroundings, so we believe what we believe to be real instead of what we believe. Two realities don't mix easily, and there are a lot more than two people. Ergo, fighting.
↑ Top
37 Guests viewing this page
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet