Misanthropes, let's talk
 

Ok, so yeah, it's been awhile since i've posted anything and I have a message that tells to talk to someone. So I want to start a conversation about misanthropy. Before I go any further I wish for it to be known I'm mainly posing my discussion towards other misanthropes like my self.

Ok so here goes...
How does someone come to hate their own? Is it nature or nurture? Obviously there're strong arguments for nurture, abused as a child, traumatic experience(s), or just upbringing by a spiteful parent with a skewed ideology, and etc.
Nature as with all great nature v. Nurture debates as an overwhelming lack of evidence to support it's argument. How can you say you were born with a different ideology than someone else? I know I can't make such a bold claim, but if pressed for an answer for my own situation I would have to say I was born slightly cynical. I have no evidence to prove it but my hatred doesn't stem from a past event. But then again my hatred is based on a view of the actions of a largely capitalist world. Would I still hate in an utopian setting? I know there are still good people out there, many better than I, so I try to keep an open mind when meeting new people.

So I'll end it here in fear I've already thrown too much out to talk about objectively. What are your views?

Misanthropy isn't always a negative. Sometimes it's a rational response to humanity's darker side. Still, you can't be pessimistic all the time.

If you think about it, at our primal core, humanity is selfish. When things come down to zero sum, i.e. limited food, shelter, mates, etc. humanity reverts back to it's primal core and all that jibber jabber about being 'enlightened' goes to shit. In my experience, the people who preach enlightenment the most are the quickest to shaft someone.

Shrug. I've seen many 'friends' do shady things when the stakes were high enough. I guess that's where true character comes in.

I guess my feelings of misanthropy are flow from my observation of hypocrites.

Back in 2004, I was one of the most liberal people you knew. Then I got shafted enough times by friends to realize that people, in a word, suck. Be careful to not let your guard down too easily.

As my grandma says "There ya go again, havin' another bad day on purpose.":shakehead:

Lindy

I like Heinleins take on this issue:

"Pessimists are more often right, but Optimists have a lot more fun"

Perhaps slightly misquoted, but the meaning is still there.

I'll tell you why I'm a misanthrope, and why you probably are too. But yall aren't going to like it.

I'm a misanthrope because I'm better than most people. I have self-control so the fat guy squishing me into the side of the plane makes me mad at him. I have intelligence, so the commercial double talk is insulting so I hate them. I'm a better driver, so I hate the idiots that can't bother to understand traffic etiquette that make it dangerous to drive...etc. I think you get the gist of it. I'm basically punished because of 99% of the human race are dolts. Of course I'm going to be peeved. Yall slow down my growth and enjoyment of life.

These aren't the best examples and I could sugar coat it but I'm getting bleary eyed and need to get to sleep. So I'll leave it as is and see what the reaction will be.

After the shit I put up with the past couple of days, I'm tending to agree with you.

You are right on many levels, most of my hatred of a large populace of people comes from a sense of superiority, but that only explains so much. There very intelligent people that profit off the dumb, the weak, the fat, the poor, etc. Example; Lou Pearlman, used his brains to get over on a lot of people, but he disgust me. I doubt I could stop myself from choking the life out of him if I met him.

Here, let me throw in some objective real world knowledge though. Most of my friends are misanthropes, and they post here. I had the opportunity to room with one for two years in a two bedroom apartment, damn near best of friends. Before it was over we were at each others throats hating each other, even though we spent a lot of time proving our intellect through deep discussions and still we both couldn't wait to get out. Now obviously there wasn't the thought that he was inferior, but in the end I came to the conclusion that misanthropes can't live together, and my hatred doesn't 100% stem from a sense of superiority.

There are thousands of reasons to hate humanity, but it's all a question of how much you let it affect you. Even if you feel like you're better than most people you meet, I'd just step back and ask yourself if they really have any impact on your life.

I try not to let the actions of others decide my happiness. I wouldn't consider myself a misanthrope, but I have no problem just doing my own thing. If the actions and opinions of others affect you to the point of getting less enjoyment out of life, try to come up with real, logical reasons that you should care. I'd say 99% of the time, it's not even worth thinking about.

This is all assuming, of course, that you accept that lots of people are just assholes and there's probably no hope of changing that.

Wrexify, those first two paragraphs are wishy washy BS that school teachers pour down the ears of little kids. If a jerk comes up to you and shoots you in the face, you should what, ignore death?

An extreme example, but it drives the point home. I'm not talking about little, intangible things, I'm talking about real world obstacles because people are dolts.

Lake Wobegon effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I also think it's a balance of nature and nurture. Nature makes the experience (nurture) more susceptible to misanthropy. Being a misanthrope myself, I think myself to be a subject of my environment, also an effect of the Lake Wobegon bias. The thing is, if you are effected by nurture, you are concious of it, so most attrinute this to nurture.

Ok, fair enough. If you're talking about REAL idiots who are ACTUALLY getting in the way of your happiness for legitimate reasons, then I have no argument. If we're talking about humans in general, I see no reason why you can't just disregard the stupidity of total strangers.

[Edit] sorry after posting I reread what you wrote and see what you're getting at. True- "ignorance is bliss," but I'd like to add "but also incomplete." [/edit]

Well i'm speaking for myself, but i'm sure many will agree, it's not the stupidity of everyday people we meet that draws hatred. Sure they can have that effect. But to look at humanity as a whole and watch it barrel through life like a toddler with a bucket on it's head repeatedly bumping into the same wall over and over and over again. And then after awhile that toddler takes the bucket off and plows right back into the same wall and calls it progress.

Let me stop there and ask a question to self described misanthropes; Why read and post on a forum? It can only lead to more human interaction

This kind of stuff is really interesting to me... I have a few "friends" who are big misanthropes and I never really understood their thought processes.

Do you find that it's hard to explain why you feel the way that you do? The misanthropes I know can give me hundreds of examples of human idiocy that get them angry, but never explain why it bothers them so much. Vice versa, they don't really understand why/how I choose to ignore it and I guess I don't really have an explanation for them either.

Maybe I'm reading into it too much and no one really has any concrete answers.

I never heard this quote before, but it interests me.

I'd say pessimists are ALWAYS right, because "right" is subjective.

Which means that optimists are also ALWAYS right. AND they have more fun.

Who says I let it bother me a ton? Most feelings of hatred against humanity are fleeting and I know theyre rather futile so I put it behind me and enjoy my life. There's no clause in the misanthrope handbook that says we all have to be hatebots 24/7. Misanthropy is really a philosophical outlook, not a disease like depression. I decided a long time ago to carve out some happiness in all this darkness.

As far as specific reasons I can give you countless ones how dolts effect me everyday. For instance anyone who works and pays taxes are all effected by doltism. You pay at least triple your taxes for safety regulations, bailouts, extra police, firemen, military, etc. None of those things would be needed (or needed much much less, natural fires will happen, etc) if we didn't have so many dolts. Traffic is slower because people don't know how to drive, so whenever you get in a car to travel somewhere dolts are stealing part of your life. How does that not make you at least dislike them?

That's what I'm getting at, now I think we're on the same page. I have thoughts like the ones you describe all the time... everyone must at some point or another. The people I don't understand are those that are constantly harboring this anger to the point of isolating themselves completely.

I think it all depends on your surroundings. I never had any feelings of hatred or hopelessness for humanity until I came to my current school and started getting random group projects... and I sincerely hope that I never encounter anyone like the people I've met here after I leave.

It's choice. You chose to be this way. You can choose not to be this way if you want, though it does provide intellectual benefit to be distinctly critical of others. Personally, I subscribe humor to replace my being critical so people don't realize the harshness of what they perceive to be jokes.

Wow way over my head here. Does everybody on here have PhD's or are people just applying logic and filling in the blanks with excerpts from newspaper articles. I am saying this to establish some kind of credibility. Life experience is a great way to add credibility and there is no way to prove it, but trust is a way to go.

I know this comes as me being the asshole and if a lot of this is just opinion then so be it. That is what TFP is all about, but please claim your words as your opinion and nothing more, if that is all it is. Please do not try to pass off your opinion as fact or logic. One mans logic is another mans chaos.

For me, your cluelessness is actually kinda mutual. Recently I have come to the conclusion that there are multiple reasons for misanthropy and everyone is different to the cause and degree of their 'hate'. Which is why I started the thread in the first place. I feel it's hard for me to explain my ideas mostly cause I don't have the connection with language I wish I had. (Sometimes when I want to be perfectly clear I'll stop and spend a minute or more looking for the ideal word to get my point across in a conversation) Ideas are difficult for me to portray to others the same as they appear in my mind's eye. (make sense?) I wonder if your misanthropic friends have the same problem.

you will, trust me, you will.

I speak for myself, no PhD here and no college level education as at the end of my high school career I felt college was unnecessary and a waste of my time. Though sociology is somewhat of a hobby of mine. (yeah I know I hate people, yet I want to know why they do what they do.):rolleyes:

I'm a reserved person socially which gives me time to observe. And as for me (an American) the western philosophy and way of life is what I really hate about humanity. Natural reactions, when we're pressed and left searching for a response, more often than not comes across as being an 'asshole'. I do it, you do it, we all do it. But again like I said all my observations are of western society where greed is ingrained in us at an early age. But is it really just greed that makes us the 'asshole' or maybe more of self preservation response where agression tends to be rewarded over submission.

misanthropy strikes me these days as being kinda facile--you know, easy peasy, reductive. maybe this is something that accompanies getting a bit older. i say this because when i was maybe 20 i was quite full of a sense of my own superiority and quite convinced that most people are simply fucking stupid. but now i don't think so much that people are stupid--instead folk spin imaginary worlds continually and what differentiates one from another is mostly a matter of the frameworks they use to set them into motion. mostly i'm interested in how this spinning happens, curious (and often bewildered and sometimes disgusted) by the premises that folk adopt and why they might choose them--why direction a or b instead of what i'd take to be a sane one.

i've also figured out that it makes little sense to compare yourself to others, and even less to fob off the results of this comparison as issuing into a sense that you're better or smarter or more skilled---there are alot of people in the world and it's inevitable that there are folk who do anything you do or can think of doing better than you do. once you figure that out, you also figure out that comparisons/evaluations are mostly about your own vanity and not about the world. vanity isn't interesting, particularly not the vanity of others.

so you just do what you do, do what engages you, and move along that line. that's what i think matters.

for example, when i was young and stupid i would decide on whether someone was interesting based on the music they liked. of course my personal preferences were by definition far more interesting than anyone else's because, well, the were mine. there was some kind of stupid yardstick that i'd apply--the closer to my preferences someone was, the cooler they were apt to be. but that's an idiotic way to think. not only does it make you obnoxious to talk to, but you miss out on alot. folk are drawn to music that moves them, and they play (for example) what moves them and what matters about that really is their commitment to the form. whether you or i like it or not is of no consequence. if you dont like it it's simply not for you. so what? and there are a host of experiences you miss out on by thinking otherwise. in the end, it's your choice but if by making this kind of choice you're also choosing to live in a diminished world with narrow experience because you're so sure you know everything that you don't venture outside your little tiny box, why do it?

Well now I feel like I gotta defend myself a bit. I'm hardly living in a box and you know nothing about me. Ironic you're berating us for being judgmental when your being judgmental yourself.

I used to be a bit like your young self too, comparing a lot and feeling superior. Although nothing so shallow as judging based on music taste (no offense). I know I'm not the best person in the world, I could have more compassion, be more active in changing the world, etc. So I fully admit there's at least several million people out there basically better than me. Certainly even more that have actually accomplished things...but I'm still in the top 5% on about any measure of aptitude you care to test me on.

Making mistakes are a part of life...I just make a whole lot fewer than most. If I'm being honest with myself, it doesn't really make me a 'better' person as that's a value judgment which is totally subjective, nor does it make me happier. It just makes me different. Doesn't make me resent the masses any less though for fucking up the world so much.

If one hates and mistrusts mankind;
wouldn't it follow that you would hate and mistrust yourself ?

( a misanthrope purist, perhaps)

This psychological remove tactic is used in many other arenas.

The 'Other'..the 'Thems'

curious business.

I do hate parts of myself. Surprisingly easy to cope with. Also, I'm not sure I've ever met someone who doesn't hate some part of themselves.

Though I don't go all whiny and emo about it. It just is. Usually not thinking about it.

I think part of the problem here is we might be using different variations/definitions of "hate."

Never saw the worst of someone else in yourself? Just curious. :shrug:

i didn't write that with the idea of making anyone defensive. but i suppose the slippage between what one thinks and how the same thing reads when you write it down is in this case something i should have anticipated. but i didn't.

what i suppose i should have made clearer is that from where i am now looking back on where i remember myself being in my late teens/early twenties, it seems to me that i was living in a box. it may well be that this is a memory function, cross-cut with a degree of that sort of vague regret-like sense that one acquires with time. i think the logic runs along the lines of where i find myself now seems ok (which is inevitable, i suppose, because one occupies a particular position, a particular vantage-point and if you didn't find it ok you wouldn't occupy it--so the evaluative dimension is circular---i guess as far as one can go with that is to say that it is circular--which doesn't put you outside of it---all it does is maybe function to relativize the position---maybe...) so where was one is necessarily something of a way-station. one's own life is a space in which the teleological fallacy seems to be less a fallacy.

ANYWAY (this is perhaps the wine talking)...

1) what makes you think that "the masses" have fucked shit up? it seems to me that most folk are kinda passive and like to like what they're told they like to like in the way they're told they like to like it. so if anyone's fucked shit up, it's the folk who orchestrate opinion management and the educational system that makes this mode of opinion management seem like a great idea...but this is the direction along which i moved personally that shifted this into a political problem. i make no pretense here that this is a necessary direction.

it's a little strange trying to move out from under the usual messageboard thing where anything you write amounts to an assertion of a position that appears entirely thought out. i don't know how this is going.

3) i do think it's more interesting to be curious than to be judgmental--but i've had this discussion alot in 3-d and it hasn't always turned out as i expected. folk tell me that i treat others like they're in a petri dish and i put myself in the position of a vague scientist who wants to figure out how these strange organisms react.
i haven't got a good response to that.
go figure.

Oh yes of course indeed yes.
I didn't think i was giving the impression, otherwise.
Sorry if that is how it came across.

Perhaps I should have written that differently.

'one' and 'oneself'.... instead of the 'you and yourself'

would that have changed perception of my intended meaning?

I too have spent a lot of time studying petri dishes.
It's easier to see my own, through other peoples eyes.

I know *exactly* what you mean, I do a lot better in real time conversations, but such is the nature of forums.

*chuckles* I think we're actually very similar roachboy.

A point, but currently I am of the opinion that to be passive is just as bad as doing "evil." By doing nothing, by not learning to defend yourself or thinking critically, you are giving your consent to "evil".

Humanity should probably go extinct. Not in a nuclear holocaust though, something more gradual. We rape, murder, pillage, and destroy each other, our planet, other species...and we have no plans to stop. Humans are inherently selfish and destructive. Some manage to break the mold, but even those that do are doomed to become the same as the rest of humanity, eventually; it's the human condition. Arthur Schopenhauer knew the fucking score.

*EDIT*
Amen brother.

Although we do differ on this point.

Look at the Milgram experiment. It's always touted as evidence of what people will do simply because an authority figure tells them to, but I see it equally as proof of what people are willing to do when absolved of responsibility. If the "victim" were hooked up to an EKG and flatlined, I have little doubt that most people would continue to shock him. We've been so heavily conditioned to follow the rules rather than think for ourselves that we have no sense of what's right unless our secular or religious leaders tell us so.
I dislike people as a whole, but I give each individual a chance. That make sense?

so perhaps the word 'mankind'
is an oxymoron for some.

just thinking out loud

I would very much like to thank you for this quote. It so eligently states how I feel about humanity as a whole. We're an overpopulated, non-moralized, society that's strangling the life out of the very planet that we depend on to survive.

Zeraph hit it on the head earlier, true misanthropes indeed hate parts of themselves or their whole being. but seeing as misanthropes are more often than not very intelligent people we see death as a waste and learn to cope with what we're surrounded with.
Humanity is ugly, but the world is a beautiful place.

again my feelings exactly. though most people are fucking idiots, I'm not, and I never know when I'll run into someone like me that can provide me with a good conversation or some insight I didn't have before. and when I do, it's moments like that that make life worth living.

I think you got the context of 'kind' out of place in the word. It should read more like 'kind of man'. as in type rather than gentle. double meanings of words is one of the biggest disconnects I have with language.

I did that on purpose

I'm in a like-loath situation with humans being at this point in time!!!

hate is a product of ignorance. indifference is a lot healthier.

Indifference is socially inert. How is being the social equivalent of a mowed front lawn healthier?

Of course it is.

You're speaking under the assumption that hate is fact-based opinion but it never is. Hate isn't logical, therefore it's bullshit; some sort of ignorant reaction to a spontaneous emotional response ("You cut me off! FUCK I HATE DRIVERS"). Of the two states of bullshit (not caring and not understanding yet still caring) I'll take indifference.

I'd rather absentmindedly mow my front lawn without thought then light it on fire to achieve the same goal.

Uh... the depth of the abstractness here has me lost. How does this fit with hoo-munz?

hahaha perhaps I'm completely off base or I'm making no sense.

What I'm infering is that to mindlessly mow your lawn (something like eating, driving, etc, that takes no real presence of mind) is similar to indifference; with the definition being something like "as much, or as little, interest in either object/task as the other." Because I'm assuming your response of "indifference is socially inert" implied you think being indifferent or passive is socially perverse; that it is healthy to "pick a side" or "have an opinion".

Hate on the other hand is what I would describe as a thoughtless act as well, but with a destructive and passionate root; something similar to lighting your lawn on fire for the sake of cutting it. It's excessive and needless but it gets the job done.

So my analogy describes a lawn that needs to be mowed. You can do it thoughtlessly without care for or against the lawn. The lawn might not look perfectly but it will suffice. Even deeper, you might say your lack of care means not mowing at all. It'll look shabby but it's there. Or you could light it on fire and get rid of the same grass; it's crude and needless but it gets the job done too. You risk destroying your home, your car, your deck, your neighbors home, etc.

I guess another point I should have made is indifference doesn't imply ignorance. You can completely understand either side and all of it's intricacies and still not care for one more then the other. Hate implies an ignorant and fiery dislike for something that could reach destructive and catostrophic levels (see: hate crimes).

Of course I'm implying that you can't truely hate something you understand because understanding provides the ability to remove it from your life or at least have it explained away with logic. I could give an example but that would be tedious. And if you choose to "hate something" after it's completely understood you're being obtuse and ignorant. You can dislike things but to hate it is to want it abolished.

And I agree. Indifference is a social disease, but equal to, or less than, hate in how it affects said society. And in the case of having someone not care about my needs, or having someone want to work to take away my means for fulfilling said needs, I'll take indifference. Both are bad. Indifference is better.

I hope that makes sense.

So...if someone rapes and kills your daughter hating said person is ignorant bullshit? It would be better to be indifferent?

I'll keep my hate. *Pets Hate on the ass*

Hate does not imply any ignorance. I hate religion and it's fanatics, but am more educated on the bible, Quran, Torah, Talmud, the Vedas, etc. than most fundamentalists. I hate pure capitalism, but am more familiar with the intricacies of a globalized market than most of the idiots investing in a market they don't understand. Obviously, I could list further examples, but the point is I'm not going to go kill religious people or blow up a stock exchange. Nothing catastrophic stemming from this hatred.
You further implication that hatred stems from ignorance is unnecessarily condescending and without any real reason as to why. I find it rather insulting.


My misanthropy has been cultivated only through my education. I am a student of history, and the one constant throughout human history has been it's cruelty towards itself. I'd really like to hope that the more mass information gets diffused and the world get smaller (mostly via the internet), that people will stop being so indifferent towards each other. However, I know this is a pipe dream.

Did that first caveman tie a sharpened rock to a stick to take down a giant mastadon, or did he do it because he wanted something his neighbor had, came up with a brand new way to kill him and steal it, and it just happened to be useful for hunting as well? If all the wars in recorded history are indicative or the wars of pre-history, I think that question becomes rhetorical.

I'll try and answer this the best I can.

Let's change my idea from indifference to undecided. There is a big difference, I know. But that was more of where I was trying to go.

Perhaps I'm too young to understand where you're coming from. From where I stand I see only problems when your only purpose in a relationship with something is destroying it/dismantling it/etc. Because, correct me if I'm wrong (and I would appreciate your opinion), isn't that the purpose of hate? If it's not based in ignorance that means it has a purpose, hypothetically, so what is it's purpose if it isn't that?

Your religious fanatics base their practices in polar beliefs. Hate. Blind Faith. Is responding with more hate and resolve going to solve anything? Really? That isn't naive or hippy-talk; that's legitimate. Perhaps it's tedious. But wouldn't you rather they listen to your reasoning? Isn't that why you hate them? Because they won't listen to reason? What is the chance that you'll listen to them? About the same right? And you, like me, would claim we are being reasonable in not accepting their practices but the truth is that our opinions matter as much as theirs. But we don't know what's up there. What we say isn't any more true then them. I'm with you on this but I've just decided not to practice any type of faith-based religion right now but I don't know who I'll be when I'm 80. I might be speaking in tongues. That's just my point of view and I didn't mean to insult you. My apologies.

As a person who has experienced very little in his life I have very few instances that I can call upon to show you how I live my life but I have two:

1) I was mugged by a kid. Or attempted. He tried to assault me and take my things. He didn't care who I was or what I did. He was desperate. But I don't know him and I don't know what he's gone through in his life. It doesn't excuse his actions but it could explain it. The explanation could be that he's a drugged-up asshole or that he's living on the street to avoid abuse and has no other means of getting money. But my assumptions and hate towards street people, or kids who mug people, would not only be useless, and demeaning, and stressful (because hating something is stressful) but, far worse, it would be restrictive.

2) My best friend Jackie was kidnapped in front of me when I was six. The guy who took her out in the woods and viciously beat her and raped her (she was eight) for two weeks and then killed her and through her in the leaves. He was arrested and killed in prison. I don't hate him for what he did. He was really sick. I know people who are really sick. I pity him. But me hating him wouldn't do anything but stop me from understanding the situation.

Because hatred is what? The polar response of dislike right? My question is what's the point? What do you gain? What do you leave with? I'm obviously not an indifferent guy. I don't believe in passive-aggression to solve problems; I don't waffle. But what does a polar response to anything, be it overly joyful or overly hateful, help in any situation.

Because my answer to you Zeraph is I'd do whatever helped in the situation. Not helped me cope or scrape by. At some point, for me, that would have to stop. And I'm okay with never finding an answer. I'd be arrogant to say that I'll figure it all out. I'm not okay with stopping the exploration of a situation (I sound like Al Sharpton). What would help me understand.

And I think everyone is missing my stupid, small little point. Between the two: hatred of something, and being in the middle, I see a couple of differences but one stands out. The Middle means wiggle room. It means options. An option to change or grow. Hatred implies solidarity right? Something that's been decided. Because if it's not based in ignorance, then that means it's something figured out and decided. But isn't that decision ignorant in itself. You don't know EVERYTHING about religion and it's purposes so why jump the gun and decide in the realm of finality. What's so great about finality? The world is too big for me to finalize right now.

I just love to learn. About me. About you. About everything.

Hate is just as useful as any other emotion if not more so. It is an adequate creator of motivation. And speak for yourself, I don't go all blood rage crazy just because I may hate something. Nor does it mean I can't or won't understand it. Nor does it mean it's a "final" decision. Nothing ever really is, but there's nothing wrong with living in the moment.

Appeal to emotion. Irrelevant.

Or if you prefer, I'll share my initial reaction:

I tend to view self-identified misanthropes with a sort of amused condescension. I suppose this makes me a mismisanthrope.

Antimisanthrope is probably more correct, but infinitely less fun.

Martian- Thanks for adding to the thread with your deep insights and well thought out response.

This post is also available in sarcovision for those that are sarcasm impaired.

Right-o, thought out response coming up.

It's my opinion, based on only my personal experience, that those who claim misanthropy tend to view the world through a pair of flaw binoculars, if you will -- they have a habit of grossly magnifying the flaws and/or mistakes of others until said flaws represent the entire person, yet when turned on the holder all flaws are reduced to near non-existence, if you follow. It's a peculiar mix of narcissism combined with a complete lack of self-awareness (although some might argue these two things are one and the same).

If you don't see how ludicrous this is:

I frankly don't know that we have anything to discuss.

Regardless, I find it interesting and insightful that so many here seem to equate acceptance with complacency. One does not imply the other.

(see: Tilted Life - Single... thread) Islands in the stream. That is what we are.

I don't care if they can see me! I love Martian. Deal with it Cate Blanchete.

I am a misanthrope. However, I recognize myself as a human, and as such must see myself as the flawed jackass I am, and I have contributed to the goatfuck we call human history as much as Hitler, my mailman, or the old lady down the street. You can't assume all misanthropes are narcisists. I recognize my own flaws as quickly and readily as I do others', if not with greater expediency and discretion. I constantly hear people say things like "Everyone has good inside them." or "He's a good person, really, he raped and beat that woman because he grew up on the wrong side of the tracks." etc.; bullshit. People are like gay clubs: dicks wrapped in assholes. It's just most people can't handle the reality of the situation, so they stick their heads up their own asses and live in a world of blind naivete. Well, I'm tired so I'm gonna hit the hay. I'll check this thread tomorrow.

So to paraphrase and summarize:

"Hey, I'm just as much of a stupid fucked up asshole as the next guy. The only difference is that I'm the only one smart/perceptive/cool enough to realize what stupid fucked up assholes we all are."

Sound about right?

It bothers them because it proves that their superiority is an inane dream. In their hubris, the self righteous misanthrope just cannot admit that superior intellect just isn't a requirement to get along in life, or to be happy. More often than not greater intellect just leads to greater misery for self and others. Misanthropes simply hate themselves because they are miserable and want to blame anybody but themselves for their misery. This self hatred just gets turned outward.

Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. Get over yourselves. Oh, and waaaaaaaahhhh!!!!!

Hate is a useless emotion

---------- Post added at 12:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 PM ----------

None of us is as dumb as all of us, right? Who said that?

It's been your *experience* with misanthropes? Please tell me how many you've had direct experience with that it has enabled you to label the rest of us.

The naivete train has arrived guys. Let's try to ignore their supercilious insults and continue our discussion.

hahahaha it seems the irony train has arrived as well.

Did you all see Jack Nicholson in the movie "As Good as it Gets" as the endearing obsessive-compulsive misanthrope, Melvin? "Loveable misanthrope" is like an oxymoron but ya' just had to luv 'em...here is one of Melvin's quotes from the movie. He's speaking to his gay neighbor, played by Greg Kineer, who has just knocked on his door looking for his little yippy pooch (which Melvin had thrown down the laundry shoot):

Just click again on the screen if you get an error message on the screen:

I think a few posters are getting a misanthrope and a solipsist confused here.

...

Also:

Thank you!

To others: I've spent years reading and going over my philosophical pondering of misanthropy to come to my conclusion. Something tells me you haven't. How about we start judging a little less?

Something I find amusing is that statistically, 1 in 10 people are far superior in whatever category you want to pick. Wisdom, intellectualism, education, etc. You can't tell me you don't notice a difference between those top 10%ers and everyone else.

And there's like 500 posters on the TFP? Which would make like 50 people that are far superior. What makes you so sure none of us are even in that top 10%? I'm usually smart enough (hehe) not to bother mentioning such because people feel so insecure about themselves and lash out, but this was a thread that was supposed to be between misanthropes until you guys derailed into into (essentially) name calling.

No, if that were the case, I would be the only misanthrope...besides, for the most part it's not a question of intelligence or perceptiveness. Alot of people enjoy living in their own little fantasy worlds. I never claimed to be cool,or unusually perceptive, or unnaturally intelligent. You shouldn't react to my post with in such a rash manner; that only encourages my misanthropic outlook.

Sorry this was a bit ago, but I kept forgetting to post a response to it.

Irrelevant?!

Ummmm

Umm..

Umm...

You realize this thread is about emotion? How can one *not* bring emotion into it? This is about hate and what happens in the real world to cause it. Little girls do get raped and killed and to be indifferent to it is an affront to good people everywhere.

---------- Post added at 05:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:31 PM ----------

Haha, indeed. This thread has epic irony.

My post was the original dissent (see: sin) in this thread I believe.

My beliefs are as mulled over as the next person. My philosophy is as questioned and reworked as well. But because what I believe opposes your life philosophy in some way doesn't mean I was taking shots at you. My definition of hate and it's use in my life was clearly stated. I calmly answered your questions and asked more in return (because this is a forum for debate and conversation). I referred to the use of hate as "useless" and "ignorant" but within my life philosophy it is and I explained why I saw it that way clearly. I didn't demand you change your mind. I didn't even suggest that I was right or wrong (in fact, I pointed out that my life experience is lacking).

I got no real answers to my questions. I was legitimately asking for answers.

In response to my posts I got things like "Oh, so if your daughter was raped you'd be indifferent?" or "The naivety train has arrived; all aboard" or "I've spent years thinking about this; something tells me you haven't" or etc.

And yet I'm not really offended or hurt; I don't really care. It's just a conversation. It's about learning, not about One Uping at tfp. I want a discussion; but one that does not end in irreversible resolve and an attempt to squash or belittle my words or actions by labeling them as childish or naive.

Thanks (and that isn't a loaded thank you, or a sarcastic thank you, but a genuine one because I have to assume that people here are adult enough to be thankful for opposing views)

Eh I don't have much of a beef with you punk, I was mostly talking about martian (and I think 1 other I don't feel like looking up) as he came in with one liners and started using vulgarity. Though you seemed to support him. And the words you used I believe were "ignorant bullshit" to hate anything. And ya, that is attacking my perspective. Maybe you didn't mean for it to come off like that but that's how it did.

And I must say I still have no idea what your perspective really is...to me being indifferent is being stagnant and passive to "evil." I certainly appreciate you actually taking the time to share your ideas and put your thoughts down though.

Re-read my posts and I'll do the same for you; I think you might be missing what I'm saying.

Hmm.

I pondered at length how best to address the amount of vitriol I seem to have solicited here. I have decided to take this on a per-user basis.

Zeraph, you first.

Starting at the beginning:

Yes. Unsurprisingly, my opinions are shaped by my experiences. Thus, my expressed opinion regarding misanthropy and those who who identify with it would be based upon my own experience and anything outside my admittedly rather limited experience does not factor into it. This should go without saying, but I felt the need to emphasize it anyway, lest anyone misunderstand and believe that I am making statements regarding absolutes.

Isn't judging others what misanthropy is all about? You've judged the rest of humanity and found them wanting. Asking people to be less judgmental in a thread regarding misanthropy strikes me as highly amusing.

I'm glad that you've thought out your viewpoint. It's a bit short-sighted, to say the least, to assume that others haven't. Part of my personal experience with misanthropy comes from my own prior experiences as a self-identified misanthrope. Later experience, however, demanded that I reassess my view and opinions about the world. This was brought on largely by an increase in self-awareness, when I finally started to figure out who I really am. This is not the full extent of my experience in the matter, but forms a large part of it.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you here, your argument centers around the self-evident fact that one in ten individuals fall within the ninetieth percentile on any given measure of aptitude. The flaw in your logic as I see it is that you assume that the same ten percent are going to be at the top of every category.

If we assume that you're correct, it still doesn't make sense. I make no secret of the fact that I fall within the ninety-eighth percentile for intelligence, yet you continue to refer to me (obliquely, at least) as naive. Wouldn't my supposed lack of wisdom combined with my readily apparent intellect destroy your theory? And if not, do you hate me for being unwise or like me for being smart?

Emotion is fine for opinions, but has no place in debate. Had you said 'I hate the world because people rape little girls,' then I would agree that this is your opinion and you have a right to it. But when you use this as an attempt to persuade others, you enter into the realm of the debate and the rules of logic apply. As there's no logical basis for misanthropy, things quickly fall apart here.

Again we find acceptance equated with indifference.

I'm sorry, I must've missed the sign; I wasn't aware that this discussion was reserved only for people who consider themselves to be misanthropes. Regardless, it strikes me that a philosophy that can't stand up to a bit of criticism must not be very strong to begin with.

FelixP:

I think you've misunderstood me. My point was to illustrate that what you were saying seemed to be just another form of intellectual elitism, making your statement incompatible with your claim that you aren't better than the teeming masses. It wasn't meant to be applied specifically to you, or even to be taken literally at all. I apologize if that was unclear.

Regardless, you're free to have whatever outlook you wish, but I'll not be blamed for it. Assuming for the sake of argument that I was particularly bothered by the opinion of someone on the internet, it's still not up to me to make up your mind for you. I'm going to say what I have to say. It's up to you to interpret and internalize that in whatever way you see fit.

EDIT for the cross-post.

Certainly I came in with a quip. Such is my modus operandi. I had to double-check on the vulgarity thing, since that's not usually my style; I suppose you're correct insofar as I did write the word 'fuck' in my initial post, although it wasn't actually directed at anyone and more intended as an illustration of surprise at what I'd read.

I have done nothing more sinister here than express an opposing viewpoint. I'm sorry that it seems to upset you so, but I refer you to the above. If your philosophy is unable to withstand dissension, perhaps you should consider a re-examination.

Why do you continually assume that anyone who doesn't have your sheer volume of bile is passive and indifferent? I don't understand where this comes from. It is possible to accept that there are bad things in the world without hating everyone. I recognize that I don't have the power to change such things and that my energy is better spent elsewhere. That doesn't mean that I'm okay with the terrible things people do to each other, but it does mean I'm also capable of recognizing that there are a lot of good things in the world as well, and would rather focus my time and energy on that.

There's nothing passive about it. Some of the individuals who had the greatest impact on the world we live in taught a philosophy of acceptance. See also: Rev Dr. Martin Luther King, Gandhi.

Eww TLDR maybe later, especially since most of it was taking my points out of context and ripping on them. But from what I've read that's much better. All I wanted was your contribution, not your animosity.

1in10 can be looked at for sole category, or multi category. Both somewhat arbitrary. My only point there is that superior people do exist...in any category or multi category you want.

And ya, part of me likes you for your intellect, but my misanthropic part despises that unwise part of you. And misanthropy is about judging *all* not just *others*.

Most of my points are being taken out of context and being mashed together. What I'm trying to say overall is that there are superior people, that hatred has its uses, that being misanthropic does not automatically make one narcissistic or even arrogant and something else but I'm tired.

The biggest perception problem I think is that people seem to be equating the angsty teen syndrome that we all grow out of with the well thought out misanthropic adult. I don't think we have any angsty teens here.

To Martian: My final comment about you encouraging wasn't about blame (I accept my philosophical beliefs as being of my own choosing, not a decision forced upon me by others), it was meant to be ironic, and yet illustrate that while I dislike most aspects of humanity, our emotions are most irritating (more irony. yay.)

I'm not sure how I come accross as an elitist (or did I just prove your point?). Have you read any of Schopenhauer's stuff? I share some of his views, the most pertinent to this discussion being antinatalism. As an objective observer I disdain my specie and would like to see it gradually go extinct, but as a human being with emotions, I personally see suicide as a coward's way out, and as an unnatural end (this sorta keeps in line with my wish that humans die out gradually, not in a nuclear holocaust or biblical rapture). I know it can be hard to find one post in a topic with many, so feel free to PM me.

Dude, I'm an angry teen... and I'm only 21 :D

I'm a misanthrope, I believe that 'other' people are to blame for many things that go wrong simply because they refuse to see beyond their point of view.

I believe people are assholes until I meet them and hence determine they're not.

I mean, in my experience (This might generate some sence of plausibility of sorts :D) interacting with someone who at first comes off as an ass ... is an ass. The idea that, "you have to get to know him first, he really is a good guy inside" is fuckin' stupid.

Fuck! There! That's all I wanted. Not "I am this; take it!" Just a reason and a description. Thanks buddy.

(keep in mind that "you" is the "general you"; a message to all misanthropes)

It's an interesting approach. Here is where I differ and it is quite a difference. I approach life and all matter as if it doesn't exist until I've distinguished it's existence.

For instance: if I were in a square room with a door but I had no concept of a door I wouldn't see it. It would simply be part of the wall. Our mind creates natural patterns and general rules that apply to all similar objects; door equates opening to a separate space. Without ever seeing or hearing of or touching or thinking about a door, a door simply does not exist.

Where we differ, I think, is our view of humanities unpredictable and often confusing nature. You view it as a problem; that until someone can prove their worth they are viewed as an asshole - some unpredictable, unreliable, stupid as fuck asshole. I see them as individuals: all individually non-existent. And my purpose is to diligently observe and learn about them so they take shape. A person is simply a wall, to use my former analogy, until I figure out their purpose (do you know what I mean?).

And that purpose is subject to change; it has no limitations or restrictions. VERY basically, that is "living presently".

Here is why I'd rather live with my philosophy than yours. I can control my actions, thoughts, and emotions; like you and every other capable, intelligent, emotionally sound human being. There are no outside variables because my science creates an equation in which everything is applicable defeating the purpose of definition or specificity. To be clearer: I'm not looking for anything specific (ie: where you are waiting for them to prove their worth) so all I need to do is watch and learn and, for lack of a better word, mingle; take part.

Misanthropy, if I understand it from your definition, depends completely on everyone else. You've removed yourself from the equation all together. You are, ironically, putting the power in the hands of the people who, in your opinion, don't deserve it. Your happiness completely depends upon the people who are stupid as fuck. That's kind of shitty for you. Not shitty OF you (just being clear so I'm not flamed).

Perhaps the most troubling thing about it is (and this is where I kept citing ignorance, and I'm sorry if that offended) that your predetermination of humanity leaves you with a prejudice. You have all ready prejudged EVERY living being as something not worthy of said life which means you are less likely to be willing to understand it (am I right?). Like Mart said, it's like wearing "Flaw Goggles". If you are unwilling to understand it, while also waiting for it to prove it's worth (or, rather, give you a reason to understand it), understanding becomes borderline impossible; you create a cyclical behavior in which you refuse to understand something until it proves itself, which in turn leaves it impossible for them to prove themselves. Ignoring possibility and being closed off to information is, to me, the definition of ignorance and that's what this comes off as.

Again, I am not saying YOU are indeed ignorant. But if this isn't ignorance, then it's close. And that is shitty OF you. It's incredibly presumptuous and leaves it impossible for others, and yourself, to succeed or execute their/your life to their fullest potential. Labeling restricts. What's worse is the label is made up; something they haven't even earned. I could understand if - to bring up the raped little girl situation - you wanted to hate a guy for raping a little girl. But to meet a guy with the assumption that he is more likely to do that then be a great guy is kind of sick and it kind of insults me.

I'm not inciting another fight; just sharing my opinion.

Oh, and ZERAPH. Just bolded to see if you'd read it all. Because you should. It might make me seem like less of an asshole.

Zeraph: I'm confused. You complained that I wasn't contributing sufficiently, but when I compose a lengthy rebuttal to what I see as the flaws in your thinking, you then complain that it's too long.

I'm curious how you'd know I was taking you out of context if you didn't read what I wrote.

FelixP: I'm familiar with Schopenhauer's work and, in short, consider it to be a load of crap. Schopenhauer's views are not compatible with mine, and I find a lot of what he wrote to be quite frankly abhorrent. I suppose one could argue that he was more in line with the thinking prevalent during the early to mid nineteenth century, but that just makes him obsolete at best.

If you want a definition of my own views.. well, it's hard for me to do because I'm not big on labels. I do take a lot from Camus' existentialism though. If you haven't delved into that area yet, I strongly recommend Sartre and Camus for further reading. Coming from Schopenhauer, you'll see a lot of connections in the underlying principles, although the conclusions are quite different.

As for my point regarding elitism, it's simply that you seem to claim some form of uncommon knowledge. You may not consciously distinguish yourself from the rest of humanity, but you do seem to believe that your insight is unique, insofar as you've made implications to the effect that anyone who shared it would necessarily share your viewpoint. This is a very narrow perspective, to say the least.

For clarity, this:

is where I get the idea that you believe your particular insight to be uncommon, and this:

is where I find the implication that said insight is tied fundamentally to your philosophy, and that therefore anyone who doesn't share your view must not have observed the same phenomenon you have to arrive at your conclusions. The conclusion I'm reaching here is that you believe the teeming masses are either unwilling or unable to face the reality you've defined/discovered, but you're made of sterner stuff.

I may be misinterpreting; text is a singularly poor medium for these sorts of discussions.


Assuming I'm correct, do you now see where I'm finding a sort of elitism here? Your way of thinking doesn't seem to allow for an individual who might start with the same data and arrive at a different conclusion. It seems to me as though you're suggesting that either people see it your way, or the wrong way (heads up their asses). And therefore it follows my prior observations about misanthropy being a form of narrow-minded elitism more than anything.

This is absolutely the cause of my misconceptions of misanthropy. Many of those I know who define themselves as misanthropes turn out to be nothing more than angsty teens in disguise.

The explanations given by Xerxys and punkmusic aka thespian are 100x more logical and insightful than any I've heard from "misanthropes" IRL. Though I must admit, thespian, your response started to get a little too abstract for my tired brain.

Unfortunately, angsty teen posers tend to discredit the whole philosophy.

Because Martian I don't consider ripping my posts out of context contributing. And don't be difficult, TLDR is a saying not meant literally. I scanned most of it. And it's out of context because I was in the middle of a conversation with someone else during the time I wrote the majority of that stuff and specifically replying to their specific points. Not writing out my philosophical doctrine.

Gotta love how you leave out the next sentence after my quote about experience. I can't tell if you're purposefully being difficult or if you really don't see the problem in that kind of arguing.

Not to mention you keep putting words in my mouth. "your sheer volume of bile..." I've repeated again and again that this was a philosophical decision and I rarely actually think and feel the hate on a day to day basis.

Seriously, have you even read the thread? Or did you just butt in here in the middle of a conversation between a group of people and pick random out of context points to rip on?

And dude, just because I'm not going to waste my time participating in your little quote out of context and rip to the logical bone doesn't mean our philosophy doesn't stand up to a little criticism. This was a casual discussion between between polite adults until you came in here.

I really can't tell if your just being difficult or honestly just biased and not realizing it, but I'm done playing this game that has nothing to do with the original thread. PM me if you really feel you must continue. Spare the rest your diatribe.

EDIT: Martian that was mostly in reply to your post before last. Your last post is a lot better. So take this how you will.

thespian86 I'm just going to role my eyes at you. I'm sick of defending my beliefs. I didn't come to this thread for that. I think I'm done here.

If you guys can't see how your posts are coming off as attacks yall need to take a break from message boards.

Yeah Martian I agree, text is a horrible medium with which to communicate ideas and beliefs this complex with any sort of clarity.
You were saying that I must be the only one cool/smart/perceptive enough to see things as the way they are. I was replying that if that was the case, I would be the only misanthrope. There are misanthropes much more intelligent than myself, just as there are misanthropes much less intelligent than myself. The same goes for people who are not misanthropes. I guess in my own personal experience, and what I've read in history books (I love history), people are assholes. We try to convince each other we're not, because most people are emotionally soft and would rather go through life happy than aware. So yes, I suppose I am claiming some sort of superiority here, but it's not genetic or inherent. It was something that was developed, often against my will, over years of existence on planet Earth.

Here's an analogy: I can do 70 pushups without resting. I have a friend that can do sixty. Therefore, I am superior in the realm of pushups. But a year ago I could barely do 35 pushups without stopping, while he could have done about 50; therefore he used to be superior in the realm of pushups. But I practiced, worked out, etc., and now I am superior. If he worked out frequently, he would probably be superior in so far as how many pushups he could do. Not everyone is the same, some people are better at certain things than others; most things NEED TO BE WORKED ON before someone can become good at it.

I am convinced my position is right; if I wasn't, I wouldn't be a misanthrope.

Writing about this is almost pointless; it's pretty difficult to effectively communicate my point.

This is the most frustrating conversation I've ever had on TFP and it isn't because you disagree. I don't expect you to agree. I expect that we are discussing. I've written several upon several clear and concise responses that were articulate and diplomatic. I deserve much better then the response you just gave me.

If you want to "leave the discussion" that's cool, but all it does is make you come off as a sophist; someone who feels the need to defend without actually discussing and when forced into a corner they retreat with an excuse. Socrates loved your kind. If I'm wrong, prove it to me. Don't just say "you're wrong" or "you're ridiculous" or "you're a dick".

You keep going on like we are attacking and insulting but we are trying to figure out why you think and feel this way and why we don't agree with it. It isn't my problem that you can't act like an adult.

I'd be very happy to discuss this with you but you'd have to stop with things like answering my huge post with "I'm just going to roll my eyes at you". Yeah dude, I was wrong; totally not ignorant.

Okay, this thread needs to listen to less My Chemical Romance and get a haircut.

sigh, I can't believe I have to actually show you your own writing. Just because you preface something with polite nonsense doesn't mean you can say whatever you want afterward. We were never in a discussion you and me. There is nothing between us. Just because you write down your arguments, doesn't meaning I'm participating in a discussion with you. All my recent posts have been mostly defending myself because I feel like I'm being personally attacked. Oh what gave me that idea?

I don't care if you put a little polite point after it.

Oh wait, it's only "close"? I guess I'm not insulted then.


And you're right, you don't deserve my attention.

I appologize for the Zeraph comment; it was an attempt at being cute, not to slight you. And you are taking that sentence completely out of context. I have a logical and well thoughtout post that is attached to that. For you to throw away the rest to point out that I'm an asshole is petty dude.

I'm not trying to fight you or attack you. I keep saying this. It's not about you. It's about the discussion. I'm trying to talk about Misanthropy. About what I see it as. You obviously don't agree with me or my philosophy but it's not insulting to me; it's life.

There is no "polite non-sense"; I'm polite in general and feel like I'm stepping on toes so I'm asserting that I'm not attacking and that I think the world of everyone's views here. But my blunt honesty shouldn't be mistaken or twisted into an attack. I can't help if you feel I'm attacking you but I'm not.

---------- Post added at 03:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 PM ----------

unneccesary. I'm just trying to fucking learn about this lifestyle. Jesus.

I understand how it could be frustrating to try and join in a discussion and become repeatedly misunderstood. Apology accepted.

So go ahead and ask me what you want to know then plain and clear. I would suggest concise questions so as not to be misconstrued.

PS I would be open to an apology from Martian as well.

That's nice. I've done nothing more than share my opinion here, and therefore have nothing to apologize for.

Also, quoting relevant text is not the same as taking it out of context. One does not always lead to the other.

FelixP: The problem I see with the way you're explaining it is that it still discounts the possibility of other outcomes. You've created a sliding scale, where more misanthropic (like more push-ups) is better. This isn't necessarily the case.

I'm fully aware that there are a lot of assholes in the world. Depending on who you ask, I'm one of them. But despite knowing that, and despite being well versed in a number of the atrocities that humanity has committed upon itself, I still choose to see the good. To be perfectly honest, there is nothing and no one in this world that I hate, and knowing the horrors that people are capable of doesn't change that.

And this is where I'm going here. Perhaps it wasn't entirely accurate to claim narcissism as a root cause, although I have known several narcissistic misanthropes (myself included). But there's still an undercurrent of elitism there. And honestly, that's fine. I may not agree with you, but if you want to tell yourself and anyone else who will listen how much better you are for only being able to see the negative aspects of history, it's not my place to tell you different. What I really don't understand, though, is the denial.

that's an interesting point actually; the idea that enlightenment equates an understanding that everything is flawed. But I found, as I got older and more honest and open with myself and the world around me, that the negatives I saw were simply misunderstandings or assumptions.

Also, could a misanthrope please read and respond to my post. I'm quite sincerely interested.

ps. Zeraph: I wasn't apologizing for my opinion, my beliefs, my words, or my actions aside from the apparent hurt that was caused with my (in good humor) comment using your screen name. Everything else stands. Just to be clear.

Fine then neither of you are invited on my river ship this Sunday in Egypt.

Everyone else: All the gold doublooms you can carry!

PS you guys can bandy words all you want, but I can easily read through it and I'm highly amused at how 'in denial' you are about it.

No man, it doesn't work like that, it NEVER EVER works like that. What about buying a car, you have to be weary of the car salesman and make sure he isn't swindling you. Given this example you have automatically assumed he is out to get you.

With the room example. No, you will see the door. Your brain wil distinguish patterns and curiousity will ensue.

When it comes to misanthropes, (and I'm happy you used the word boderline) these senses of skeptisism are heightened. But we do not completely close off the off chance that someone may actually have good intentions rather than bad. We just believe in fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, WTF was I thinking!!!

I have to disagree on both counts. With the salesman example, it is a choice, subconcious or concious, to not trust the salesman. Now, it would be stupid and naive to say that "car salesmen" aren't, generally, out to take you for your money; it's part of the business. But to assume that is certainly restricting your view of who and what he is; making him simply an obstacle to overcome. I can't telly ou how many people who are deemed oppposition by society that I've interacted with to my satisfaction or advantage simply because I allowed myself to get a VERY basic understanding of who they are, and interacting with that part of them. If that person shows no sign of human life (ie: he shows no part of HIMSELF through his work. which seems very unlikely) then the excercise is irrelevant anyways.

On the patern, curiousity front, you are designing an argument that works on the most basic of levels. Of course our mind recognizes difference, but to say by looking at something we discover it's purpose without having prior knowledge of something similar, is impossible. I can be curious, and will be, but without distingiushing what it is I simply see it as an excentric part of a wall. An example I'll use is sorta silly but effective. An african herdsman is known for his intuitive connection with his cows; for example he can tell their physical state by their color. A man or woman unaware of this would say "that's a dark brown cow" but the herdsman would look at each cow and say "she is dehydrated, he is ill, he is healthy, she is recently pregnant". The unknowledgable person wouldn't be able to see this or even percieve it. Their mind can't understand it because what they see is "brown".

Another way of saying this is a disservice to the concept but perhaps a more widely recognizable thought that "does something exist if I've never heard of it? does a tree make a sound if no one is around to hear it fall?" Everything is assumption, and it works for the most part because society and knowledge don't require physical evidence on a conversational or educational level (see: history, or, well, every subject on earth). Someone can tell you something and you assume it's valid and true. Like "Stella is a great gal". But the idea is that Stella's existence is, until you distingiush her existence, verbal. She exists as a part of language until you can put a physical form of independant and unique mass to said "idea". My philosophy recognizes the danger in assumption, generalization, and social isms that leave room for existence to unfold.

I get it, but you have to see it from the simplest perception possible. Sure, let the car sales man or IRS guy surprise me. But I don't go into ANYTHING at all assuming or expecting otherwise.

It's a bit different from "brace youreself, he's gonna hit, and he's gonna hit me hard!!"

It's more like "I know this douche is gonna try and swindle me and I know what to do, I'm just glad I did my homework."

It's OK to have a positive outlook on life, but if you go around expecting the best of all situations especially many that you could have helped and they do wind up bad, then you fucked!! In the end you only have yourself to blame. That's why we wait for a chance for someone to prove their intentions first.

It's not at all closed minded if you ask me.

Just to clear something up. It's not about seeing the world in a positive light. It's about seeing one in no light at all. You can walk away with the realization that this person will have a negative, harmful effect on you. Or a positive one.

... or none at all ...

Captain Don't Care

Exactly you fucking supreme being you. It's an effort to a) walk into a situation and be present what's happening now, b) allow things to happen without pre-judgement, c) live at a heightened version of me during this and control what is mine to have control over, d) let the things I can't control slide without inflecting it on myself (ie: do what most people do and pass things through my own personal filter that have nothing to do with me).

I don't only see the negative aspects of it, I just see that as the general undertone...like a bad movie with a few good jokes. Yeah, I laughed a few times, but it was still pretty bad overall. And yes, I do hail my POV as the superior one, because maybe, just maybe, if we realize how brutal and hateful and fucked up and selfish we are, we can change, and then I (and future generations) won't have a reason to be so misanthropic.

I'm not holding my breath.

Too Late I am afraid.

Thread I would like to participate…

Anyhow,

Misanthropy is such a cruel label.

Do we really hate Humankind, Mankind?

Or

Are we just disappointed with the Humanity and into what we have evolved as viewed/judged by the actions of the majority of our fellow bipeds?

One could say that we as Humanity (due to our potential) should have used our advanced sophisticated thinking machines with the independent minds and persons behind controls, to develop somewhat more enlightened society.

History is paved with countless graves of failed experiments and best intentions that meant to bring about this shangrila.

No system of rule or Ideological leadership will ever get us there.

No system of education has a recipe for moulding / stamping out free independent thinkers.

Somehow it is my feeling that it is more spontaneous “from within” induced change/leap in perception rather than “from without” imposed process.

I think that, only if the individual members of the society evolve and mature in to enlightened beings by themselves and become free thinkers then and only then we can expect the society to evolve in to enlightened society with its foundations constructed not from indoctrination, one philosophy of thought, blind obedience, forced acceptance and prejudice but rather on certain mutually shared basic understanding and clear thought of what we are, who we are, where we go and why.

But for that we need to adapt both ourselves and our environment and create the most optimal nurturing environment for this steady development.

I do not pretend to know the answers, nor even if I had such excellent recipe for human development would I publish it or start preaching it.

Why?

Well, At best I am afraid I would create another church of blind followers of the doctrine without understanding the contents, which would defeat the purpose; At worst I would get chopped up as a heretic which would underscore my reluctance to offer it for general consumption in the first place.

Again all this requires change in the way we think and this change needs to come from within.
Like in psycho analysis and therapy – I am not telling what to think and how to behave, I can assist you on your own way towards understanding and optimisation of oneself with what one would hope to be unbiased, uninvolved opinion that may act as the reality check just because I may have a perception or be trained in what some may considered “normal” as regards to where you may think to be (or where the rest of society thinks and/or is) at the time of reading ;).

…..


All in all

My problem with the humanity is the fact that it is by enlarge enclosed in its own shell of lies and unwilling to admit this uncomfortable truth, thus disallowing for the next step in our evolution towards better things.
That we chose to chop each other’s legs and arms as a way to settle differences;
That the so called socio-cultural and technological “progress” is driven by the need to develop “bigger” gun

And many many other reasons.

But most of all, the greatest grievance is with the generally accepted Hypocrisy.

We sell ourselves certain self induced images with certain positive tinge of ourselves as something that we are, while knowingly being aware that it is otherwise and still refusing to challenge this evident lie to any critique and be open to consider it and make a difference.

We live in a lie, we propagate the lie, and we believe it to be true

Therefore I am upset, unhappy and misanthropic on occasions and feel that it is hard for me while having this perception of things surrounding me to be part of this society and contribute my mind because it is alien to me.

So I am cursed, perhaps enlightened or simply misguided.

Back to the question:

Do we really hate Humankind, Mankind?

Or

Are we just disappointed with the Humanity and into what we have evolved as viewed/judged by the actions of the majority of our fellow bipeds?

Yours truly,


"We forfeit three-fourths of ourselves to be like other people."

Oh Nevermind. "Do as I say, not as I act."

Quite right

What a man can do is to find something that is his and build an Island for himself.

Oj Oj

Happy New Year chaps :D

All right Trubadur, I'll fux wit ya. I feared this thread turned into a stupid he said, she said hissy fit argument.

Yeah I feel the same way. That humanity as a whole missed the mark on it's potential mostly because for most of history a few have seeked to bend the masses to their will to make their short lives better. This is nothing new nor something relegated to history as I can example with Bernie Madoff and Enron just for effect. There will always be someone trying to screw someone over and I truly believe that all great fortunes were made on an amoral or illegal act.

That being said I accept this as true and shall continue for all time. I dream of a eudaemonia type society but there will be those who can't fathom the logic and reason being used and will clamour for power as to not be left by the wayside. So this I can not envision to come to pass.

Which brings me to my point. Yeah we as humans missed our potential, sure. Time goes on and maybe one day we'll reach it. Technology is being developed and advanced at increasingly exponential rates. But the individuals I meet on a day-to-day basis just say things that make me look at them and wonder how they remembered to breath this morning. :oogle: The ratio of the stupid to intelligent is just astounding.

that would be my plan.

*side note to Trubadur - I agree almost with your signature. I believe in evolution and that it is a slow unperceptable process. I am better than my parents just as my offspring will be better than me. Thanks to free will though whether or not the next generation lives up to the potential is their choice. But they have the opportunity to be better than I ever could. And that thought gives me hope.

I am not entirely convinced that past generations of human beings of 200 and 2000 years ago had lesser capability for intelligent thought and discourse then we currently possess.
You take child from 2000 bc and raise it today it will be able to function and contribute to the society equally as everyone else and it will be as intelligent and knowledgeable and wise as you or me if given the chance.

The difference is that today, more people have access to more knowledge and have more time to think and digest the information in an environment that is slightly more suitable for human habitation.

Technology advances with our advancements in understanding of surrounding environment.
This knowledge was obtained and build upon by successive generations that went before us, and who, by trial and error and bit of luck with extra spare time to think due to their personal circumstances allowed to progress our general knowledge and science.

Your statement about evolution is true if you define the “better” as better adapted to the present, or changed environment.
Children of migrants who grow up in new (for parents) environment, are better adapted to this environment then the parents. And are able to flourish in it better then the parents; However there are helpless if exposed to the environment of their parents.

Greater Intelligence in your children in an environment where such “betterment” (in your eyes) if not appreciated or recognized by prevailing society will prove to be rather “Bad” evolutionary turn hampering development of full potential of your offspring.
As contrary to let as say less mental capacity but greater physical capacity to be a football player (soccer) or similar

With the Intelligence it is added difficult, because any tests are as good as the people who created them. Thus if you exceed any standards in a non standard or accepted ways then the general assumption is you are not doing it right because the judges which are your seniors and usually superiors by majority may not recognize nor accept or be willing to notice the “genius” of your logic or any deviation to standard and official ways that makes them be the authority in the first place.

There are exceptions, of course but my conclusion is that what is hampering human development is humanity itself.


BTW: my signature is a quote from George Orwell, it just happen that my own observations kind of concur with his assessment ;)

Experience has shown me that most people who "feel superior" are just arrogant assholes who have no reason to feel superior.

Misanthropy is for losers.

If we are talking about feelings...

Misanthropy does not deal with the feeling of superiority, but rather ( if at all ) with the potential feeling of “disappointment” in respect of other human beings and potential dislike, distrust, disgust, contempt, or even outright hatred.

But if we are talking about feelings...

Let us assume that a majority decides to kill themselves or do something irrational as a solution to some imaginative problem, even against your own “better” judgment, and the solution or idea you may (or may not) have shared or even advocate; or simply acquired it in the hindsight post factum.

Such situation may leave you feeling perturbed and disappointed by the stupidity of the masses and the individuals that make up those masses. Also It may induce feeling of ones superiority versus masses and individuals.

The problem starts when someone starts to apply generalizations and fails to see individual person with its reasons before applying such general judgments.

Nonetheless, masses can and are placed in “boxes”, based on certain associated behavioral characteristics, and preconceptions, psychological and sociological studies and of course market researchers and governments. Etc.
Unfortunately Individuals often do not escape such treatment and are victims of preconceptions and generalizations, due to the fact that no one can truly and fully appreciate and account for and individual and his her needs, when the human society of 6/7 billion people cannot let each other leave in peace.

But they try, and will keep trying.

What is ironic, everyone does it, to lesser or greater extent and we are all guilty of ignorance and arrogance. The trick is to understand and respect the difference in other person before passing judgments. But this is yet another story altogether.

Sorry boss but superiority is not really what question of misanthropy is about. But I will grant you that it may be (but not necessary) associative with the misanthropy while the feeling of "disapointment" is.

Rspct

I've always found myself unable to genuinely despise a human being, regardless of their set of attitudes and behaviors. With a reasonable understanding of biology and psychology, all of it can be dismantled into factors that are beyond the conscious control of the individual. Cause and effect preclude the possibility of a living creature ever possessing full responsibility for behavior, which limits my capacity for hatred. I recognize that a human being is an animal, driven by emotional impulses and reactions to the world around them, and their manner of reacting is governed by biological processes with an underlying genetic basis, shaped by the environment.

Can you fault a mass murderer for who he has become? Was he in control of every event leading up to his current psychological condition? Did he have any influence in determining his genome? No.

I don't hate humanity, but I have difficulty relating on a meaningful level to the vast majority of its constituents. My confidence in the kindness of the proverbial human spirit has been routinely shaken, and while there exist instances of goodwill, the lion's share is due either to self interest or programming (cultural and biological). For that reason, it is seemingly impossible to dislodge my viewpoint from aloof neutrality.

Assuming that we are helplessly executing our genetic programming and environmental conditioning without freedom of choice then we are not truly accountable for our actions.

And since I am firm believer in freedom of choice which in my dictionary translates in to responsibility and accountability for actions one decides/chooses to make and take.

I would have to say that yes, I can blame mass murderer for his actions and choices he / she made as a conscious being; for as long as he/she is undeniably proven otherwise to be incapable of sound judgment due to some hardware/firmware. And thus the Defective model is a victim of circumstances beyond his/hers control and ought to be fix or discarded.

Otherwise I share the view point regarding the biological programming and environmental conditioning with an exception that the biological programming provides only for predispositions and potential aptitudes for one or the other thing.

While environmental conditioning ought to identify and exploit predisposition to best possible effect

It is fascinating area of research Nature v Nurture. Humans, the mind and the biology, these topics are like borderline of constantly shifting tectonic plates, we can look there but there is too much chaos to see anything. We know the materials but there is too many variants to correlate the hardware and software..