3 ms·

The need for destructive capabilities isn't inate to our 'design'. It's more fundamental than that. It comes from the fact that cooperation is unreliable, and t

by rocqua 4y ago

The need for destructive capabilities isn't inate to our 'design'. It's more fundamental than that. It comes from the fact that cooperation is unreliable, and the fact that sometimes 'the greater good' means individual sacrifices that individuals may not agree with. If humans were a hive mind where cooperation was assured, you'd still need destructive capabilities against the environment, and perhaps other species. That humans strive for the capacity of violence doesn't surprise or sadden me. What does sadden me is that much of our pinacle of technological development happens with the explicit goal of violent capacity. And the fact that rough parity in our violent capacity is generally the only thing keeping big states from expansion.

lazide 4y ago
Exactly this. There is no more point being saddened by it, then there is being saddened by Bears having teeth. A toothless bear is no better off being so, because those teeth are useful and necessary for it to be a bear and/or equivalent in it’s ecosystem. It’s a part of it’s success and it’s future. It is a part of what makes it a bear. A bear that felt bad about having teeth though? That is one unfortunate bear. A bear that tries to tear out it’s teeth? That is a bear that longs to not exist as a bear anymore (or at all), and the most unfortunate being of all. If a bear happens to wish for a world where it's teeth weren't necessary, that is nice! But that doesn't much help that bear stay fed, survive the next winter, or reproduce. To the immediate parent posters comment regarding being saddened by the extreme focus (and spend) on destructive capability globally among us humans - it is sad, if one cares to dwell on it. I see out ability to do it as a sign of our luxurious position - not having to worry about if we will be fed or starve to death, if we will survive the next winter, or our being able to reproduce. Mostly due to that extreme obsession, the resulting tens of millions of (recent) dead bodies, and hundreds of millions more that did not end up dead because of them. Maybe I'm in a bit of an existential mood today, eh?

by rocqua 4y ago

lazide 4y ago

Exactly this. There is no more point being saddened by it, then there is being saddened by Bears having teeth. A toothless bear is no better off being so, because those teeth are useful and necessary for it to be a bear and/or equivalent in it’s ecosystem. It’s a part of it’s success and it’s future. It is a part of what makes it a bear. A bear that felt bad about having teeth though? That is one unfortunate bear. A bear that tries to tear out it’s teeth? That is a bear that longs to not exist as a bear anymore (or at all), and the most unfortunate being of all. If a bear happens to wish for a world where it's teeth weren't necessary, that is nice! But that doesn't much help that bear stay fed, survive the next winter, or reproduce. To the immediate parent posters comment regarding being saddened by the extreme focus (and spend) on destructive capability globally among us humans - it is sad, if one cares to dwell on it. I see out ability to do it as a sign of our luxurious position - not having to worry about if we will be fed or starve to death, if we will survive the next winter, or our being able to reproduce. Mostly due to that extreme obsession, the resulting tens of millions of (recent) dead bodies, and hundreds of millions more that did not end up dead because of them. Maybe I'm in a bit of an existential mood today, eh?