4 ms·

I'm not going to argue on nature vs nurture but I will ask you a hypothetical question.. if you had to make a choice between fast evolution of "science, technol

by relay 17y ago

I'm not going to argue on nature vs nurture but I will ask you a hypothetical question.. if you had to make a choice between fast evolution of "science, technology, entrepreneurship" and a peaceful world without war nor violence, which would you take ? If (I have no idea whether it's the case or not) biological determinism was true and those views were confirmed, I still wouldn't see women as inferior. Being smart enough to create and have low enough morals to use the atomic bomb is NOT a gift, it's a curse.

geebee 17y ago
We posted at the same time. I actually agree with you. The only thing that really irritates me is they way some people are willing to assign "innate" or "cultural" based (it appears) on nothing more than whether they consider the activity to be good or bad.
araneae 17y ago
Ask girls about their experiences in all girls schools and ask them if they'd like to experience that for the rest of their lives. It's unlikely that killing off all men and then cloning the remaining females is a viable solution to world peace. In answer to your actual question, though, you proffer a world with no war in violence as an ideal. However, I challenge that idea that you would even enjoy living in such a world; or at least enjoy living in such a world that is necessitated by a total lack of violence. In elementary school, we learned that the central element to every story is conflict. A story with no conflict is boring. The same is true of life. And then add to that that it's impossible to have a world without conflict without giving everyone a lobotomy, which would then result in the sudden collapse of civilization and the extinction of the human race... It's a very simplistic world view you have that all violence is wrong. Sometimes violence is necessary, and sometimes it's entertaining (sports or action movies, anyone? Or a good beheading in the old days?). But even if you disagree on those two points, conflict is inherent in any system where individuals of the same species compete for resources. There are such things as dumb questions, especially if they're hypothetical.
- greenlblue 17y ago
  Ya, what's so nice about a world where there is no genocide and mass murder? I am not against conflict and you are deliberately using two meanings of the word to make your "point".
- relay 17y ago
  My world view is not any more simplistic than your biased view based on western culture.The buddhist's nirvana is the absence of desire and while they believe in reincarnation, they see it as a curse to those who are too much anchored to their wealth and earthly delights. What seems boring to you is some other people idea of paradise. I'm not religious myself but I feel dramatically attracted by the underlying philosophy of Buddhism. There is something wrong with you if you think that life needs to perpetuate violence for thrill's sake.
  - lionhearted 17y ago
    > The buddhist's nirvana is the absence of desire and while they believe in reincarnation, they see it as a curse to those who are too much anchored to their wealth and earthly delights. As a sidenote, I know Buddhism is quite popular in the West these days, but after spending time in Asia, I don't see it as superior in practice to the Western religions. The best of Buddhism, the most interesting and enlightening concepts make it to the West. But they have just as much silly superstition, social control, religious rank and hierarchy, and warriorship/violence in their history as the Western religions. Actually, some of the finest fighters of their era are the Shaolin and Honganji monks of China and Japan, who were at times much equivalently brutal to crusdaders and jihadists. As for me personally, I think struggle is a good thing. I think all the most important and valuable aspects of life are struggle - living, thriving, growing. Childbirth, one of the heights of human experience, is a brutal struggle. Farming is struggle, hunting is struggle, cooking is struggle. Training to dance or sing or play an instrument is struggle. I'm with you on non-materialism as accumulating stuff isn't particularly effective, but I (personally) reject the notion that struggle is bad. All the best parts of life are a struggle or the fruits of struggle. I embrace struggle, I embrace suffering for worthy causes - suffering in exercise, in farming, in hunting, in cooking, in dancing, in having and rearing children. It's all struggle - I don't want nirvana, give me this world and its struggles and sufferings, and I'll embrace it fully. > There is something wrong with you if you think that life needs to perpetuate violence for thrill's sake. This I agree with, but I think the original commentor's point was a bit more nuanced than that. I think he was saying conflict is necessary at times for life, and he was also noting that people do enjoy observing conflict and drama playing out. Myself, I've got mixed feelings on this - you know, I much prefer baseball to American football for instance. I played linebacker in high school, but watching a 6'6 220 pound receiver catch a pass in the air and get destroyed by a 6'4 260 pound safety while he's largely helpless makes me cringe a little. The strategy aspect of American football I quite like, the brutality of it not so much. So I'm with you on some points, less so on others.

by relay 17y ago

geebee 17y ago

We posted at the same time. I actually agree with you. The only thing that really irritates me is they way some people are willing to assign "innate" or "cultural" based (it appears) on nothing more than whether they consider the activity to be good or bad.

araneae 17y ago

Ask girls about their experiences in all girls schools and ask them if they'd like to experience that for the rest of their lives. It's unlikely that killing off all men and then cloning the remaining females is a viable solution to world peace. In answer to your actual question, though, you proffer a world with no war in violence as an ideal. However, I challenge that idea that you would even enjoy living in such a world; or at least enjoy living in such a world that is necessitated by a total lack of violence. In elementary school, we learned that the central element to every story is conflict. A story with no conflict is boring. The same is true of life. And then add to that that it's impossible to have a world without conflict without giving everyone a lobotomy, which would then result in the sudden collapse of civilization and the extinction of the human race... It's a very simplistic world view you have that all violence is wrong. Sometimes violence is necessary, and sometimes it's entertaining (sports or action movies, anyone? Or a good beheading in the old days?). But even if you disagree on those two points, conflict is inherent in any system where individuals of the same species compete for resources. There are such things as dumb questions, especially if they're hypothetical.

greenlblue 17y ago
Ya, what's so nice about a world where there is no genocide and mass murder? I am not against conflict and you are deliberately using two meanings of the word to make your "point".
relay 17y ago
My world view is not any more simplistic than your biased view based on western culture.The buddhist's nirvana is the absence of desire and while they believe in reincarnation, they see it as a curse to those who are too much anchored to their wealth and earthly delights. What seems boring to you is some other people idea of paradise. I'm not religious myself but I feel dramatically attracted by the underlying philosophy of Buddhism. There is something wrong with you if you think that life needs to perpetuate violence for thrill's sake.
- lionhearted 17y ago
  > The buddhist's nirvana is the absence of desire and while they believe in reincarnation, they see it as a curse to those who are too much anchored to their wealth and earthly delights. As a sidenote, I know Buddhism is quite popular in the West these days, but after spending time in Asia, I don't see it as superior in practice to the Western religions. The best of Buddhism, the most interesting and enlightening concepts make it to the West. But they have just as much silly superstition, social control, religious rank and hierarchy, and warriorship/violence in their history as the Western religions. Actually, some of the finest fighters of their era are the Shaolin and Honganji monks of China and Japan, who were at times much equivalently brutal to crusdaders and jihadists. As for me personally, I think struggle is a good thing. I think all the most important and valuable aspects of life are struggle - living, thriving, growing. Childbirth, one of the heights of human experience, is a brutal struggle. Farming is struggle, hunting is struggle, cooking is struggle. Training to dance or sing or play an instrument is struggle. I'm with you on non-materialism as accumulating stuff isn't particularly effective, but I (personally) reject the notion that struggle is bad. All the best parts of life are a struggle or the fruits of struggle. I embrace struggle, I embrace suffering for worthy causes - suffering in exercise, in farming, in hunting, in cooking, in dancing, in having and rearing children. It's all struggle - I don't want nirvana, give me this world and its struggles and sufferings, and I'll embrace it fully. > There is something wrong with you if you think that life needs to perpetuate violence for thrill's sake. This I agree with, but I think the original commentor's point was a bit more nuanced than that. I think he was saying conflict is necessary at times for life, and he was also noting that people do enjoy observing conflict and drama playing out. Myself, I've got mixed feelings on this - you know, I much prefer baseball to American football for instance. I played linebacker in high school, but watching a 6'6 220 pound receiver catch a pass in the air and get destroyed by a 6'4 260 pound safety while he's largely helpless makes me cringe a little. The strategy aspect of American football I quite like, the brutality of it not so much. So I'm with you on some points, less so on others.