8 ms·

Humans have some deeply self-destructive tendencies. It's not just a predator/prey or an oppressor/oppressed relationship. I'm not sure that if we ban all outle

Humans have some deeply self-destructive tendencies. It's not just a predator/prey or an oppressor/oppressed relationship. I'm not sure that if we ban all outlets for self-destructive behavior that something good will come of it. Offering some amount of consentual self-destruction is absolutely in the business of helping mankind, in my opinion.

mensetmanusman 3y ago
In my opinion, humanity would be better off fighting our self destructive tendencies instead of letting those with power take advantage of their situation and squeezing the ignorant dry.
- dotnet00 3y ago
  Fighting them means offering less destructive ways to release those urges, and for the vast majority of people, that's what casinos are. If we're talking about destructive urges, another popular one would be alcohol, and yet we have many many examples of how it needs to be accessible to an extent to serve as a release, even if sometimes it still causes serious damage.
  - Kiro 3y ago
    What are those examples?
    - dotnet00 3y ago
      In the US, famously the prohibition era, and there are similar cases all over the world, eg cases in Iran of people getting ethanol poisoning from homebrewed alcohol, and very common similar occurances in various states of India, where the government sometimes spuriously decides to temporarily ban alcohol consumption. Put differently, the societal cost of outright banning some self-destructive things ends up being higher than just regulating them because a ban doesn't actually stop much. We even seem to be heading towards a similar realization for many drugs (eg Marijuana).
wiseowise 3y ago
Ludomania is not “outlet for self-destructive behavior” it’s a decease. Those parasites should be highly moderated, at the very least.
chongli 3y ago
Humans evolved over millions of years in an environment without casinos, addictive drugs, fast food, or any of this other stuff surrounding us in modernity. The fact that a bunch of these things hack into people’s natural blind spots is not evidence of “self-destructive tendencies.” These are exploits of people’s psychology, every bit as bad as fraud, but run by powerful, politically entrenched people. These are extremely toxic and antisocial industries and they make society much worse off.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- sparrowInHand 3y ago
  Im gonna jump on that mamoth with a spear- watch me, and if you want steak worship me.
throwaway22044 3y ago
>Offering some amount of consentual self-destruction is absolutely in the business of helping mankind, Prostitution, substance abuse, suicide, and other self-destructive acts, are the only measure that is available to us for enforcing that Leviathan keeps its end of the social contract: that our bodies and minds are first and foremost our own, and only when we infringe on others' freedom may ours be curtailed. The day one becomes unable to destroy oneself is is the day freedom becomes permanently unattainable.
- vacuity 3y ago
  Suicide is an expression of one's ultimate freedom to one's body, but these acts can have consequences beyond oneself. That goes from "oh well, it's your choice" to "don't drag other people down with you". What of a child born from a prostitute? What of others' safety when driving drunk? What of friends and family who expend mental energy and money? Cut yourself away absolutely or not at all, or perhaps in a more measured action, but don't just sink the ship and not care of the people scrambling for safety.
  - askonomm 3y ago
    Yeah, that's something a rational person should do. Self destruction hardly ever is rational however, and it's near impossible to see all of the collateral damage you make when destroying yourself.
    - throwawawaw 3y ago
      Irrationality (own or others') can trap people in situations where self-destruction is the most rational choice. Furthermore, we have a bit of a scoping issue on our hands: we default to assuming that self-preservation is rational. Self-preservation may be rational behavior for animals. But humans are qualitatively different from animals in at least the following aspects: - We have language, which lets us continue our thoughts beyond the immediate moment. - We are continuously aware of our own mortality. In that light, many of the relatively irrational choices that we make, can still seem more rational in comparison with an alternative of just sitting around and waiting to die. (Terror minimization theory.) It gets better. A being that exists, can suffer, dread, and die; not to mention, cause others to suffer, dread, and die. A non-existent being, on the other hand, doesn't have any problems at all. "Destruction" is just the process of going from existence to non-existence, and "self-destruction" is just an egosyntonic drive towards non-existence. You don't exactly act self-destructive because you want to exist more, quite the opposite. So, from a thinking being's perspective, self-preservation is at least as irrational as self-destruction, if not more so. Of course, either way, people's thinking is much less rational than we give it credit for, while people's actions - much more. But this only reinforces the point: that the most rational evaluation of the question of self-destruction is simultaneously the most counterintuitive. (Incidentally, if this line of reasoning makes sense to you, you can check out "Every Cradle is a Grave" by Sarah Perry. If it doesn't, also check it out, it probably contains a rebuttal to your first few arguments, and then you have no other choice but to really start thinking.) >it's near impossible to see all of the collateral damage you make when destroying yourself. It's still way easier to see than all of the collateral damage you make when not destroying yourself. See: the environment, the economy, the culture. All turned to shit, thanks to the presumably rational actions of presumably rational actors pursuing individual self-preservation and prosperity. Which is why you see so many young people finding life hardly worth living. Some of them even revert to what they perceive as "traditional" value systems - ironically, the same ones that made life hardly worth living in the first place. But of course the prostitutes are to blame /s

mensetmanusman 3y ago

In my opinion, humanity would be better off fighting our self destructive tendencies instead of letting those with power take advantage of their situation and squeezing the ignorant dry.

dotnet00 3y ago
Fighting them means offering less destructive ways to release those urges, and for the vast majority of people, that's what casinos are. If we're talking about destructive urges, another popular one would be alcohol, and yet we have many many examples of how it needs to be accessible to an extent to serve as a release, even if sometimes it still causes serious damage.
- Kiro 3y ago
  What are those examples?
  - dotnet00 3y ago
    In the US, famously the prohibition era, and there are similar cases all over the world, eg cases in Iran of people getting ethanol poisoning from homebrewed alcohol, and very common similar occurances in various states of India, where the government sometimes spuriously decides to temporarily ban alcohol consumption. Put differently, the societal cost of outright banning some self-destructive things ends up being higher than just regulating them because a ban doesn't actually stop much. We even seem to be heading towards a similar realization for many drugs (eg Marijuana).

wiseowise 3y ago

Ludomania is not “outlet for self-destructive behavior” it’s a decease. Those parasites should be highly moderated, at the very least.

chongli 3y ago

Humans evolved over millions of years in an environment without casinos, addictive drugs, fast food, or any of this other stuff surrounding us in modernity. The fact that a bunch of these things hack into people’s natural blind spots is not evidence of “self-destructive tendencies.” These are exploits of people’s psychology, every bit as bad as fraud, but run by powerful, politically entrenched people. These are extremely toxic and antisocial industries and they make society much worse off.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
sparrowInHand 3y ago
Im gonna jump on that mamoth with a spear- watch me, and if you want steak worship me.

throwaway22044 3y ago

>Offering some amount of consentual self-destruction is absolutely in the business of helping mankind, Prostitution, substance abuse, suicide, and other self-destructive acts, are the only measure that is available to us for enforcing that Leviathan keeps its end of the social contract: that our bodies and minds are first and foremost our own, and only when we infringe on others' freedom may ours be curtailed. The day one becomes unable to destroy oneself is is the day freedom becomes permanently unattainable.

vacuity 3y ago
Suicide is an expression of one's ultimate freedom to one's body, but these acts can have consequences beyond oneself. That goes from "oh well, it's your choice" to "don't drag other people down with you". What of a child born from a prostitute? What of others' safety when driving drunk? What of friends and family who expend mental energy and money? Cut yourself away absolutely or not at all, or perhaps in a more measured action, but don't just sink the ship and not care of the people scrambling for safety.
- askonomm 3y ago
  Yeah, that's something a rational person should do. Self destruction hardly ever is rational however, and it's near impossible to see all of the collateral damage you make when destroying yourself.
  - throwawawaw 3y ago
    Irrationality (own or others') can trap people in situations where self-destruction is the most rational choice. Furthermore, we have a bit of a scoping issue on our hands: we default to assuming that self-preservation is rational. Self-preservation may be rational behavior for animals. But humans are qualitatively different from animals in at least the following aspects: - We have language, which lets us continue our thoughts beyond the immediate moment. - We are continuously aware of our own mortality. In that light, many of the relatively irrational choices that we make, can still seem more rational in comparison with an alternative of just sitting around and waiting to die. (Terror minimization theory.) It gets better. A being that exists, can suffer, dread, and die; not to mention, cause others to suffer, dread, and die. A non-existent being, on the other hand, doesn't have any problems at all. "Destruction" is just the process of going from existence to non-existence, and "self-destruction" is just an egosyntonic drive towards non-existence. You don't exactly act self-destructive because you want to exist more, quite the opposite. So, from a thinking being's perspective, self-preservation is at least as irrational as self-destruction, if not more so. Of course, either way, people's thinking is much less rational than we give it credit for, while people's actions - much more. But this only reinforces the point: that the most rational evaluation of the question of self-destruction is simultaneously the most counterintuitive. (Incidentally, if this line of reasoning makes sense to you, you can check out "Every Cradle is a Grave" by Sarah Perry. If it doesn't, also check it out, it probably contains a rebuttal to your first few arguments, and then you have no other choice but to really start thinking.) >it's near impossible to see all of the collateral damage you make when destroying yourself. It's still way easier to see than all of the collateral damage you make when not destroying yourself. See: the environment, the economy, the culture. All turned to shit, thanks to the presumably rational actions of presumably rational actors pursuing individual self-preservation and prosperity. Which is why you see so many young people finding life hardly worth living. Some of them even revert to what they perceive as "traditional" value systems - ironically, the same ones that made life hardly worth living in the first place. But of course the prostitutes are to blame /s