This topic contains 21 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Deathbal 10 years, 4 months ago.

  • Author
  • #44724


    and It’s too bad that no one is actually listening to what I have to say. fighting will never be a way to make peace.



    Yes we are… But you need to understand this is one of those touchy subjects that begs opinionative responses.


    Metal Slug Mario

    what death means is..people tend to fly off the handle when it comes top politics..belive me ive learned..


    KTM Rider

    I think the issues of war go deeper than easily controlled emotions. Psychologically, humans (men in particular), are easy to anger compared to many animals. Not because of our pride, vengeance, whatever, but because of our hairline chemical responses. I highly doubt it would be possible to eliminate conflict (large-scale war, maybe, but not conflict).

    As it is, an interesting question AI and I sometimes debate is population control. Previously, we had a plethora of issues that kept the human population in check. Now, with advances is medical and safety technology, many of those issues are negated. War does serve a purpose in keeping a population in check (well, somewhat). Now, don’t misunderstand me, I agree that war is perhaps one of the largest human atrocities, but it does serve a purpose.

    On the other hand, certain societies did evolve without (most) war. An ancient Hawaiian war consisted of all of their strongest tribesmen gathering together with an enemy tribe and making faces at each other. Then, if neither became scared, they’d all go eat a feast. Sounds like the life to me (lets just ignore the cannibalism)!

    But still, the ancient Hawaiians’ population was always low. They dealt with predators, volcanoes, and disease.

    As it stands right now, there are a bunch of people who violently disagree with my (and many people’s) way of life. I know that these are my overactive chemicals talking, but I don’t believe they should be shown any quarter.



    chemical responses? that’s honestly got to be the oddest thing I’ve heard. and according to that, It can be fixed. by modifying our DNA.

    I still say it’s vengence. If someone attacks, the person wants to attack them back. If they didn’t attack back, everything would be ok.

    also, pride is the biggest issue, if everyone let go of their pride and their separate ‘traditions’, then we’d be much better off.


    The AI

    The issue with chemical pacification is multi-fold. It has moral and technical ramifications.
    Also destroying “pride” as you put it destroys culture, and if you have to culture, no tradition, no self pride. what are you?
    You are pointless, worthless.
    It is a deep matter, a removal of “pride” is a removal of self value, of self respect.
    If I struck you, what response would it bring me?

    A typical response would be anger, anger that they have been struck, that they have been injured. Yet with a lack of pride, what would they do?
    they couldn’t fight back, they have no pride, they take no value of them selves.

    The only other way to avoid that would be Xenophobia. Yet in the terms you have laid out, to flee would be prideful.


    KTM Rider

    Actually, no, DNA doesn’t need to be modified. There are several medications. Many anti-depressants, depressants, and drugs can alter the chemical balances in your brain. AI and I know a guy who had an imbalance, he was excessively agressive and violent all throughout school. Now, he is regulated by a slight depressant. He functions perfectly, a model citizen.

    The disturbing concept is that many behaviors can be changed, through medical or psychological means. And AI is right, it raises many moral questions.

    Also, if someone attacks, and you attack back, is it vengeance, or defense? If someone was to steal my wallet, or another person’s, my immeadiate response would be somewhat violent. Not to avenge myself, but to 1)put an end to the action, 2) convince (I use the term lightly) the pickpocket not to attempt it again, and to 3) disable them.

    A violent action doesn’t necessarily imply malicious intent.

    I, personally, have plenty of pride. Does it harm anyone, I highly doubt it. A dictionary descrition of pride implies:
    1.A feeling of self-respect and personal worth
    2.Satisfaction with your (or another’s) achievements
    3.The trait of being spurred on by a dislike of falling below your standards
    4.A group of lions
    5.Unreasonable and inordinate self-esteem (personified as one of the deadly sins)
    I could understand how numbers 3 and 5 could evolve violently. But elimination of pride would end in a much worse condition. AI’s comment has truth. If I bash you, then, without pride, it would be wrong to either bash me back, or to run. So you’d stand there, as I am not corrected for my misdeed.

    Anyways, without conflict, we wouldn’t have Scorched.

    This is turning very philosophical.



    @doom wrote:

    I still say it’s vengence. If someone attacks, the person wants to attack them back. If they didn’t attack back, everything would be ok.

    Ok let me get this straight. If someone lops off my arm with a scythe and I choose not to shoot him with the gun in my other hand, everything would be ok? I guess, except for my arm! 🙄

    Here are some interesting quotes.

    Anyone who clings to the historically untrue-and thoroughly immoral-doctrine that violence never settles anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler would referee. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worse. Breeds that forgot this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms.

    -Robert Heinlein

    “I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they’d never expect it.”

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.