The Paradox of Humanity

[wayneL]

I guess only a hermit would not know that Christchurch NZ ha suffered a devastating earthquake.

We are literally being bombarded with stories of people trying to help in a thousand different ways to help the people of Chch, often at great personal sacrifice. There are thousands of altruistic individuals doing what they can... even if just on a one on one level.

For those of us watching and wishing we could help, there is the realization that we can, but if only we could sacrifice. We give money, but feel there is more we could do... and feel inadequate.

On the other hand, there are those who take advantage and profiteer, take advantage, even loot and burgle.

WTF????

I don't get this; what is the difference on people that causes these differences in attitude?

Discuss

 

[Julia]

I'll be most interested in any answers. I surely don't have any.
That people can be such scum in the face of such overwhelming tragedy defies comprehension.

I've had to quell an irrational need to get on a plane to Christchurch, even if just to hold my family and friends who are so horribly displaced and distressed.

The only time I've ever had such a sense of helplessness was watching my beloved dogs die.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

I guess only a hermit would not know that Christchurch NZ ha suffered a devastating earthquake.

We are literally being bombarded with stories of people trying to help in a thousand different ways to help the people of Chch, often at great personal sacrifice. There are thousands of altruistic individuals doing what they can... even if just on a one on one level.

For those of us watching and wishing we could help, there is the realization that we can, but if only we could sacrifice. We give money, but feel there is more we could do... and feel inadequate.

On the other hand, there are those who take advantage and profiteer, take advantage, even loot and burgle.

WTF????

I don't get this; what is the difference on people that causes these differences in attitude?

Discuss

Hi Wayne,

I was lucky enough to see the city years ago so feel that it is a sad situation for the people of CC. I enjoyed the little town.

First, it is probably not a general issue in which all events and happenings are the same and not involving the same paricipants. It could be a case of people just looting and without moral compass doing what they please. It could also be desperate people without help taking advantage of a situation where they know what they do will not impact so much. Either would most probably be reported as one type of event to the masses, but only the few involved would really know why.

If the world were set up so we could fly off to help people, and let jobs wait, I'm sure more would do that than not. I'm positive on humanity because good will always come out.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

The only time I've ever had such a sense of helplessness was watching my beloved dogs die.

Hi Julia, aren't there any humans you have felt helplessness about?

 

[GumbyLearner]

I'm not adding to this thread for fear of contradicting myself. So there. :

 

[Mofra]

Wayne, this does bring to mind the classic "nuture vs nature" argument.

On the one hand I have a friend who is completely nuts - covered in tatts, changes jobs every 5-6 months (not always voluntarily), extreme ADHD case (but a heart of gold once you get to know him - volunteer work, involved in church groups etc despite looking a bit scary). He loves his drink & rock gigs.

His adoptive parents are baptist ministers and teetotalers, and hate loud music. He is obviously a case of nature over nuture.

On the other hand, ciminal statistics show a very strong correlation between socio-economic status and conviction rate which seems to indicate a nurture over nature scenario.

Unfortunately there will always be those individuals who are concerned only with themselves or their "clan" - I'd like to think the people who have the ability to sympathise with the plight of others are beginning to outnumber them. Getting back to Christchurch, from my viewpoint the volunteers far outnumber the looters.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia, aren't there any humans you have felt helplessness about?

Not nearly so much, Snake. Animals are so dependent on us and trust us so utterly.
Few human beings, in my experience, give us that total love.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Not nearly so much, Snake. Animals are so dependent on us and trust us so utterly.
Few human beings, in my experience, give us that total love.

Fair enough, and I guess we humans have more free choice which allows us to be put in positions and places of tragedy etc. We have also been sidetracked with surfdom.

 

[pixel]

I'll be most interested in any answers. I surely don't have any.
That people can be such scum in the face of such overwhelming tragedy defies comprehension.

I've had to quell an irrational need to get on a plane to Christchurch, even if just to hold my family and friends who are so horribly displaced and distressed.

The only time I've ever had such a sense of helplessness was watching my beloved dogs die.

FWIW, I come from a point of view that sees humans still as part of the Animal Kingdom. And in spite of what humanitarians (aka "do-gooders") try to ascertain, some humans - e.g. those that Julia calls "scum" - are more animal-like, others are less so.

One trait, however, is common to all: If an animal is rewarded for a certain behaviour, it adopts that behaviour. If it suffers pain as a concequence, it won't repeat that behaviour.

While it's true that some humans can be influenced by mental pain, those with a shorter leash into the animal kingdom will only "learn" from corporal pain.
A few animals may completely lack the ability learn. Left to Nature, they will inevitablly be removed from the gene pool. Maybe we shouldn't mess with Nature in that regard?

Applied to the Question at hand: If, during the formative years in a child's development, positive reinforcement of ethical standards fails, parents and educators must have the second option to deter noxious behaviour. Youngsters that still won't learn are better taken out of the gene pool, rather than allowing them to poison humanity.

I know I will be utterly unpopular with do-gooders; but unless they can show - and prove - that their softly-softly approach works globally, I maintain my position.

 

[tothemax6]

On the other hand, there are those who take advantage and profiteer, take advantage, even loot and burgle.

WTF????

I don't get this; what is the difference on people that causes these differences in attitude?

Wayne I think you are trying to see people as all equal. People really aren't. Some people really are garbage, and some people really are nice. Some people, in their natural state, see nothing wrong with hurting people when they are weak. These people were not made by the earthquake - the looting occurred because the people (who are few by the way) of this nature were already there, and the earthquake created the opportunity for them.

As to why some people are rats and some people are upstanding gentlemen, when that's the same old same old: genes, upbringing, philosophy, environment etc.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

Why worry about others? There's no benefit. If you want to go and help someone, that's fine. Do it.

Compassion is self-pity in disguise.

 

[breaker]

One trait, however, is common to all: If an animal is rewarded for a certain behaviour, it adopts that behaviour. If it suffers pain as a concequence, it won't repeat that behaviour.

Yes how I well remember my mispent youth wiyh the cane and a coppers kick up the bum,and then go home and tell dad who gave me another floggin....I did,nt repeat that behaviour

 

[IFocus]

FWIW, I come from a point of view that sees humans still as part of the Animal Kingdom. And in spite of what humanitarians (aka "do-gooders") try to ascertain, some humans - e.g. those that Julia calls "scum" - are more animal-like, others are less so.

One trait, however, is common to all: If an animal is rewarded for a certain behaviour, it adopts that behaviour. If it suffers pain as a concequence, it won't repeat that behaviour.

While it's true that some humans can be influenced by mental pain, those with a shorter leash into the animal kingdom will only "learn" from corporal pain.
A few animals may completely lack the ability learn. Left to Nature, they will inevitablly be removed from the gene pool. Maybe we shouldn't mess with Nature in that regard?

Applied to the Question at hand: If, during the formative years in a child's development, positive reinforcement of ethical standards fails, parents and educators must have the second option to deter noxious behaviour. Youngsters that still won't learn are better taken out of the gene pool, rather than allowing them to poison humanity.

I know I will be utterly unpopular with do-gooders; but unless they can show - and prove - that their softly-softly approach works globally, I maintain my position.

Going by this you would have done away with most of the diggers in WW1 as larrikin behavior was the hall market of the Australian troops much to the disgust of British officers.

 

[breaker]

larrikin, a##hole there is a difference

 

[Sean K]

I think the difference is the organisms assessment (conscious or unconscious) of what is most advantageous to its own well being and acts accordingly.

It can also be a learned cultural act when understanding right social action contributes to society's harmonious functioning and your own safety, well-being and potential.

 

[moXJO]

Some people are not brought up with a sense of what is right or wrong. I know parents who teach their kids to hate cops. They fly off the handle when someone doesn’t support their view. God only knows what other idiots are teaching their kids.

 

[pixel]

Going by this you would have done away with most of the diggers in WW1 as larrikin behavior was the hall market of the Australian troops much to the disgust of British officers.

I wouldn't.
If you consider larrikanism as unacceptable behaviour, you may have.

The difference between larrikins of old and looters/ hoons/ graffiti vandals/ ... of today is far more than gradual. Those diggers had a sense of propriety that may have been occasionally reinforced by the odd clout or kick up the bum, but they "knew right from wrong". I don't believe they would loot or vandalise their neighbour's property. As recently as 30 years ago, we habitually left our backdoor unlocked; we even spent several weeks with a blanket hung where the front door would be, while renovating one part of the house and living in the other. I wouldn't recommend that today - because today's youths are untouchable, and if you catch one first-time offender and reinforce your disapproval by said clout or kick, you get sued for assault. In effect, we're now rewarding theft and obnoxious behaviour - and then we wonder why society goes to pot.

PS: I wish I had read breaker's reply earlier. He said the same thing with fewer words. Onya mate.

 

[pixel]

Some people are not brought up with a sense of what is right or wrong. I know parents who teach their kids to hate cops. They fly off the handle when someone doesn’t support their view. God only knows what other idiots are teaching their kids.

correct - and as soon as you permit even a small segment of one generation to grow up as scum, then even insist on "rewarding" their antisocial behaviour by "social welfare", what else can you expect?! Yu encourage them to breed and teach the next, numerically even stronger generation to be scum. And so the cycle feeds on itself.

 

[Whiskers]

Wayne I think you are trying to see people as all equal. People really aren't. Some people really are garbage, and some people really are nice. Some people, in their natural state, see nothing wrong with hurting people when they are weak. These people were not made by the earthquake - the looting occurred because the people (who are few by the way) of this nature were already there, and the earthquake created the opportunity for them.

As to why some people are rats and some people are upstanding gentlemen, when that's the same old same old: genes, upbringing, philosophy, environment etc.

That pretty well sums it up for me too.

But, the bottom line is society will always be volatile, it's the nature of the beast because the 'beast' evolves in a dynamic and volatile environment.

The way I see it is like when you get different pests and weeds in your garden at different times of the year, if you keep your maintaince up no pest or weed will overtake and dominate. But if you neglect your maintaince different pests and weeds escalate at different rates in different seasons until you end up with a dominant pest and weed (subjective)... err, plants and animals that evolved to be best suited to survive in that circumstance.

What we as self serving human beings often don't understand or usually ignore is that even dominant flaura and fauna evolve in symbiotic relationships.

We humans tend to think we dominate and expand in a mutualistic or at least commensal type of symbiotic relationship, but really we have a dominant predisposition to anything that remotely looks like a peer.

In the really big picture that most don't understand or even contemplate, that symbiosis my even be parasitic... ie us humans just cant help ourselves to expolit a resource or opportunity for our own benifit and maybe eventually to kill our host family, country, planet and ourselves in the process.

Maybe that really explains our desire for space travel... a sense in the back of our mind that we will kill off this host (mother earth) and need another sometime later.

What is "Humanity"? Firstly, it's a word invented by humans meaning;
1. all human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.
2. the quality or condition of being human; human nature.
3. the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.

Now that's a contradiction... or was that a paradox!

 

[pixel]

That pretty well sums it up for me too.
What is "Humanity"? Firstly, it's a word invented by humans meaning;
1. all human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.
2. the quality or condition of being human; human nature.
3. the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.

Now that's a contradiction... or was that a paradox!

"Humane Humanity", i.e. the combination of 1 and 3 above, is an oxymoron.