4 ms·

> In a nutshell, I'm arguing that I will win at the biological imperative because of my drive to work and succeed. No, you are just using the same flawed reaso

by sedachv 10y ago

> In a nutshell, I'm arguing that I will win at the biological imperative because of my drive to work and succeed. No, you are just using the same flawed reasoning over and over again. The way it can also work is that a bigger and more aggressive man comes along, kills you, and takes your woman. Even the words you use come from Social Darwinism: "success" and "imperative" at some goal. The innate drive you talk about has nothing to do with reproduction - it is a set of instincts that makes mate finding and mating pleasurable. Goals and even establishing the causal connection between mating and reproduction requires reasoning faculties that not even most apes are capable of. > Those people that don't want to work and succeed would contribute to their species by going off somewhere quiet, and avoiding consumption of the resources needed by their fellow species members that are grinding away at "life" in the evolutionary sense And these people would listen to you tell them where to go and what to do because ...? It is quite obvious that you are trying to use a single evolutionary psychology argument without having any knowledge of the field. Human mating strategies are incredibly diverse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mating_system#In_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mating_system#In_humans. You have some kind of Puritan mental hangup about work that you are trying to justify with flawed reasoning.

module0000 10y ago
> It is quite obvious that you are trying to use a single evolutionary psychology argument without having any knowledge of the field. No - you're assuming what I mean from text that I never wrote. > The way it can also work is that a bigger and more aggressive man comes along, kills you, and takes your woman. Precisely that. That's exactly how evolution works. At some point, we eschewed evolution for "feeling good". I have a problem with that, and there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. > And these people would listen to you tell them where to go and what to do because ...? They won't, and I wouldn't tell them to do anything, given that random humans have no reason to obey my forum-written thoughts. > You have some kind of Puritan mental hangup I'm not a puritan. Don't lump me in with people that search for meaning and invent a bearded one in a sky/sun/moon/long-dead-arab. Sedachv, I get the impression you really want to argue with someone about something puritan-related. If you want to get together and rant about everything wrong they have done to our civilization and way of life, you would find I'm quite agreeable to that viewpoint. At the root of it all, I hate that I have to "work" so that other people can "not work". I want the "not work"-ing people to go away. Unfortunately, I can't go off and chase those ideals, because I am still taking care of my own biological imperative's fruit until they can are grown and capable of taking care of themselves. When people stop working early(most of them do not do so because they have become rich, as in the article), we have to take care of them. I don't want to take care of them.
dang 10y ago
Personal attacks are not welcome on HN, regardless of how irritated you are by someone. If you can't contain yourself from posting them, please at least proofread your comments and edit them out. For example, your final paragraph should consist just of its second sentence, and the comment would be far better for it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

by sedachv 10y ago

module0000 10y ago

> It is quite obvious that you are trying to use a single evolutionary psychology argument without having any knowledge of the field. No - you're assuming what I mean from text that I never wrote. > The way it can also work is that a bigger and more aggressive man comes along, kills you, and takes your woman. Precisely that. That's exactly how evolution works. At some point, we eschewed evolution for "feeling good". I have a problem with that, and there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. > And these people would listen to you tell them where to go and what to do because ...? They won't, and I wouldn't tell them to do anything, given that random humans have no reason to obey my forum-written thoughts. > You have some kind of Puritan mental hangup I'm not a puritan. Don't lump me in with people that search for meaning and invent a bearded one in a sky/sun/moon/long-dead-arab. Sedachv, I get the impression you really want to argue with someone about something puritan-related. If you want to get together and rant about everything wrong they have done to our civilization and way of life, you would find I'm quite agreeable to that viewpoint. At the root of it all, I hate that I have to "work" so that other people can "not work". I want the "not work"-ing people to go away. Unfortunately, I can't go off and chase those ideals, because I am still taking care of my own biological imperative's fruit until they can are grown and capable of taking care of themselves. When people stop working early(most of them do not do so because they have become rich, as in the article), we have to take care of them. I don't want to take care of them.

dang 10y ago

Personal attacks are not welcome on HN, regardless of how irritated you are by someone. If you can't contain yourself from posting them, please at least proofread your comments and edit them out. For example, your final paragraph should consist just of its second sentence, and the comment would be far better for it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html