3 ms·

> Why would you cherish irrational vengeance instincts. It's very much a calculated thing, not an “instinct”. Social systems are driven by the signals the invo

> Why would you cherish irrational vengeance instincts. It's very much a calculated thing, not an “instinct”. Social systems are driven by the signals the involved parties send each other. If you tell them “I won't retaliate”, they will act accordingly. > Psychologically, I understand long term grudges from any slight are considered pathological personality traits. It's much more healthier and productive to forgive. Why is it “pathological”? Are there any observable negative effects? Nobody is saying “don't think about anything else” or “stop being productive”. Just “bide your time and take revenge at the most appropriate time”. This is perfectly sensible. > One can hold political leadership morally and legally responsible for their countrys action. No free nation can have an unpopular leader for a long time. In the long run, the actions of a free nation, good or bad, can be entirely attributed to its people. If you don't want to be responsible for what your leaders do, move to North Korea or something. > Nationalities are an abstract layer Nonsense. Nationhood is as concrete as is your mother tongue and culture.

adwn 11y ago
> Why is it “pathological”? Are there any observable negative effects? Yes: decreased happiness, productivity, and mental health. > Nobody is saying “don't think about anything else” or “stop being productive”. That's not how long-term grudges work in the real world. > No free nation can have an unpopular leader for a long time. In the long run, the actions of a free nation, good or bad, can be entirely attributed to its people. [...] Nationhood is as concrete as is your mother tongue and culture. Thas is a very, very, simplified opinion about complex matters. People with strong, oversimplified opinions about complex matters are dangerous to the rest of society. Please don't vote.
- catnaroek 11y ago
  > That's not how long-term grudges work in the real world. I can hold a grudge against you and still do business with you, simply because it's so damn profitable. That doesn't mean I'll hate you any less. > Thas is a very, very, simplified opinion about complex matters. If you want to attack my argument, give concrete evidence of its falsehood. That is, give me an example of a free nation where an unpopular leader managed to hold power indefinitely. Just saying “there is more nuance to it, and you're too dumb to grasp it” is counterproductive. > Please don't vote. I have no choice. Where I live, it's compulsory. (Don't worry, what my country does has basically no consequences on world affairs.)
fsloth 11y ago
"It's very much a calculated thing, not an “instinct”. Social systems are driven by the signals the involved parties send each other. If you tell them “I won't retaliate”, they will act accordingly." Uh, in dysfunctional settings this might be a valid strategy. Sure, I understand swift reprisal when the social code requires it for the individuals survival. But it's still a pathology - on the scale of the society. And luckily, not present in a modern civil society. If you live in such an environment then I am truly sorry for your current status. And I claim we are partly at least talking two different things. Grudges spanning centuries between populations, and intra-population social dynamics are on two different levels. Any way, if one needs to be vengeful to survive in a society I admit the root cause might not be the attitude of the agent-of-vengeance but deeper dysfunctions on a societal level. The vengeance intent still produces absolutely no benefit to anyone. " In the long run, the actions of a free nation, good or bad, can be entirely attributed to its people" This would be a situation where the majority of population is actually driving the policy of the nation, instead of reacting to policies of the governing body. Usually it's the latter - the political elite and their network driving the political train. If there ever was a situation where the political leadership was simply enacting the "average will of the people" I would enjoy any references you can provide. If the population is not driving the policies then it cannot be blaimed for the policies. Blaming the children of the perpetrators of any foul act is quite irrational (although practiced, yes, but still irrational and considered as such in civilized nations). "Nonsense. Nationhood is as concrete as is your mother tongue and culture." In general, nationhood as we understand it in the modern world is a fairly young concept politically. It's just one more football club to support. Mother tongue and culture are far more deeply rooted. For instance, Italy was a rambling collection of political entities after the roman times ended until Napoleon came and decided that governing the peninsula under one government was far more convenient. New club - one government.

adwn 11y ago

> Why is it “pathological”? Are there any observable negative effects? Yes: decreased happiness, productivity, and mental health. > Nobody is saying “don't think about anything else” or “stop being productive”. That's not how long-term grudges work in the real world. > No free nation can have an unpopular leader for a long time. In the long run, the actions of a free nation, good or bad, can be entirely attributed to its people. [...] Nationhood is as concrete as is your mother tongue and culture. Thas is a very, very, simplified opinion about complex matters. People with strong, oversimplified opinions about complex matters are dangerous to the rest of society. Please don't vote.

catnaroek 11y ago
> That's not how long-term grudges work in the real world. I can hold a grudge against you and still do business with you, simply because it's so damn profitable. That doesn't mean I'll hate you any less. > Thas is a very, very, simplified opinion about complex matters. If you want to attack my argument, give concrete evidence of its falsehood. That is, give me an example of a free nation where an unpopular leader managed to hold power indefinitely. Just saying “there is more nuance to it, and you're too dumb to grasp it” is counterproductive. > Please don't vote. I have no choice. Where I live, it's compulsory. (Don't worry, what my country does has basically no consequences on world affairs.)

fsloth 11y ago

"It's very much a calculated thing, not an “instinct”. Social systems are driven by the signals the involved parties send each other. If you tell them “I won't retaliate”, they will act accordingly." Uh, in dysfunctional settings this might be a valid strategy. Sure, I understand swift reprisal when the social code requires it for the individuals survival. But it's still a pathology - on the scale of the society. And luckily, not present in a modern civil society. If you live in such an environment then I am truly sorry for your current status. And I claim we are partly at least talking two different things. Grudges spanning centuries between populations, and intra-population social dynamics are on two different levels. Any way, if one needs to be vengeful to survive in a society I admit the root cause might not be the attitude of the agent-of-vengeance but deeper dysfunctions on a societal level. The vengeance intent still produces absolutely no benefit to anyone. " In the long run, the actions of a free nation, good or bad, can be entirely attributed to its people" This would be a situation where the majority of population is actually driving the policy of the nation, instead of reacting to policies of the governing body. Usually it's the latter - the political elite and their network driving the political train. If there ever was a situation where the political leadership was simply enacting the "average will of the people" I would enjoy any references you can provide. If the population is not driving the policies then it cannot be blaimed for the policies. Blaming the children of the perpetrators of any foul act is quite irrational (although practiced, yes, but still irrational and considered as such in civilized nations). "Nonsense. Nationhood is as concrete as is your mother tongue and culture." In general, nationhood as we understand it in the modern world is a fairly young concept politically. It's just one more football club to support. Mother tongue and culture are far more deeply rooted. For instance, Italy was a rambling collection of political entities after the roman times ended until Napoleon came and decided that governing the peninsula under one government was far more convenient. New club - one government.