Thread: WAR
View Single Post
Old 07-18-2007, 01:31 PM   #126 (permalink)
Willravel
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
I think this is what the "intrinsically war-like" crowd is saying. Just like ants and lions and sharks, we too have war-like tendencies. All of us. There are varying degrees of aggression in different people obviously, but there is an underlying and possibly even unprecedented degree of violence potential in people. I agree with Freud that much of our propensity for violence comes from our intelligence and our sexuality, and that people sublimate their base instincts for the sake of civilization, ie., the safety of the herd. Without the sublimation, the human race would cease to exist, he says. The sex drive is one of those things that fucks up the possibility of a perfect world, or world peace or shangri-la. Wasn't sex outlawed in the movie "1984" so as to avoid subversive thought amongst the populace? Thats a specifically Freudian concept for example. Then there are issues surrounding the aggressive wellspring inherent in orgasms (the ultimate source of ego gratification), and castration as one of the most effective ways to remove much of the latent aggression in people and other animals. I would recommend Freud's Civilization & It's Discontents to anyone interested in the dynamic, or in just a plain cool book to read.

But one does oneself a disservice by denying reality. Inherent human aggression, ambition, motivation needs to be included in the equation of any sort of "quest for worldwide peace". There needs to be mechanisms built into the system to account/accomodate for this.
There is a difference between violence and aggressiveness, and war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
Not really because all the kumbayayas that get discussed don't apply to some of the people so thus someone gets marginalized.
Kumbayayas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
You are talking about "solving" maybe one or two, there was something that I sent to roachboy a bit ago about conterfactuals, whererin a known counterfactual historian changed his mind based on simulations.
I understand counterfactuals, but because no one has made an effort of this magnitude, it can't be considered unreasonable.
Willravel is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360