Thoughts on society.....

[Leisotto]

Hello all,

Been a reader of these pages for a while and thought that i would get around to putting up a post. Im a bit weary of the whole internet thing at the moment, so if its possible, ill just add for the time that im a mid 20s male from Sydney

That aside, i see that philosophical issues get quite a run on this website. Always an interesting read, so i thought id add some thoughts on society in general. I read with interest the questionaire that was put up a couple of weeks back about peoples thoughts on a wide range of issues. Initially, i though it would be good to put thoseideas into writing.

I've always wondered, do our genes dictate the person that we become or our environment? Is it a mix of the two? It would be hard to argue that we are not a product of our environment. Everyone is influenced by those around them. But from my line of thinking, how we are influenced is dependant on our character traits. If a person is brash and loud, would they be influenced by an environment the same way that a quite and shy person would? I don't think so, so in this situation, i think that the character of a person comes back to their genes.

A character will always shine through in any given environment. Given time, the individual will become known to the group and the personalities will shine. Its psycho- babble, i know, but in most groups, the individual will fit into a role. And its how society works, at all levels. From the prime minister down to the pauper who cleans the street. Everyone works their way into the role. And id argue that this role is dictated to by the individuals personality and their genes.

Anyways, enough of me, what does everyone else think? I might warn people in advance, i dont get on much, so any replies may take a while.
Thanks for reading

Regards

 

[El Duque]

For sure it has to be a mix of both. I recall watching something once on whether certain people were just Born Bad or was it something else that madethem that way.I think it ended up figuring some people were just Born Bad and it wouldn't of mattered where or howthey were raised. I can only assume this means that the same rule applies to all peoples different character traits.

Still, if Osama bin Laden had been raised in Aus and had nothing to do with Islam would he be the same mad androtop he is today??

 

[ozbash]

i dont think so el dook. i think most,if not all behaviours are learned and its only a very few with a psychological abnormality that you could class as pathologicaly bad. they could also be called geniused, socially disfunctional ,brain damaged etc.

i think that the world we live in creates the person,the person does not create the world.......

 

[pepe]

you only have to walk outside and see the loser parents to understand why some kids finish up the way they do.

i send my daughters to a private school to get them away from the riff raff,hopefully they'll grow updecent people,if not i want a bloodyrefund from the school.

pepe

 

[Willow]

Welcome to the forum Leisotto.

Social issues do get a good run on LWOS and imo, its one of our assets. We don't always agree but thats the strength of an open and free discusssion.

The question, 'do our genes dictate the person that we become or our environment? '
Does anyone know the answer? Looking at kids, you can get two from the same family who are completely different. But they are still fundamentally the same. Sometimes one child is more screwed up than the other (eg the first to the the second) but their values aren't always that different.

Anyway, I don't know... when in doubt I always refer back to the Bonobos... amazing critters.

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Bonobos??

Ahhh, the good ol Bonobos lol.

Welcome as well mate

Id have to say that its a mixture of both. As u mentioned, there is a combination of the environment and genes in everyone's personality. Im sure there are people from feral areas who go right to the top of the food chain. Pepe, i see what you mean, but i also see people from poor areas who top the HSC (or another selected area like sport) and go on to make a good fist of life. A lot of the current Australian soccer team such as Okon, Kewell, Schwarzer, Corica, Viduka (and should i mention Bosnich? lol) got their starts in the west.

Moffo

 

[imported_E_A__]

I'm a really quiet, shy, retiring type prick in real life. I'm still a prick though.

And a proud Westie.

I like that the internet brings out parts of people's personalities that don't necessarily surface too much in real life. There wasn't anything in your post Leisotto that I'd disagree with. I doubt that anyone is completely a product of their environment.

But Raging Bulldog may be the exception to the rule. He's barking mad.

 

This message has been deleted by the manager or assistant manager.

 

[imported_Lord Ted.]

Well, in the nature V nurture department is there a solution needed.
I mean I don't care if a homicidal maniac had crook genes and a caring environment,put the bastard in the clink and chuck away the key.

 

[EYE_EYE_SPASMODIC]

i go with Darwins theory of natural selection the cream will rise and the shit will sink i've heard lots of arguments to this effect. "but of course humans are much more advanced than other species. it's obvious." is it? well, of course, if you believe in god, then humans are above animals, and then there really is no argument. but even then, why did god chose to make us the "chosen species"? why choose humans, and not, say, gibbons? we must be the most advanced species, right? p.s. what DOES "advanced" mean, anyway? i use the word "advanced" in the broadest sense. i cannot accurately define it, as it used in a more abstract sense here. well, let me give some examples of "proofs" i have been given that humans are more advanced, and explain why they are all crap. if you have some more, tell me and i will be happy to explain why they, too, are probably crap (unless they are so specific they cannot be refuted, like "humans are the only animals that have invented computers". yeah, well, cows have four stomachs.) <ul> [*]humans have the largest brain of all animals. bollocks. the sperm whale has a brain weighing 20 pounds. a human brain weighs about 3. [*]humans employ intelligent use of tools. p.s. this was a leading argument for a long time in many fields. of course it is bullshit. chimpanzees lick the end of a stick and put it in an anthill to catch ants. oh, hell, we don't have to go to such "advanced" (and i use the term cynically here) species. just look at the spider's web. [*]humans are social animals. human society is absolutely embarrassing compared to many insect societies. look at ants. or bees. who is more social? humans or bees? [*]humans show emotions. octopuses show emotions. [*]humans are the only creatures who communicate using language well, maybe humans are the only creatures who communicate using german, but by today it is well known that dolphins have quite a complicated language. actually, ants use thousands of chemicals to convey information. that is just as much a language as human vocal (or written or whatever) language. [*]humans are the most intelligent of all creatures here we're getting into a rather dodgy area. one i usually don't like to go into. what is intelligence? how do you measure it? in any case, there is no evidence to show that humans have cognitive skills that are unique to us. dolphins, for example, are known to be extremely intelligent, and there's no way to compare human and dolphin intelligence. there is no acceptable universal test for human intelligence yet (people who grew up in an isolated african tribe will hardly be able to perform simple arithmetic, but does that mean they are less intelligent?), so how can we tell the difference between two species? and the last (and my favourite) "proof": [*]humans can cut an onion, but an onion can hardly cut us what the people who use this argument are trying to say is that we are killing off many species, which makes us superior. a man can kill a lion more easily than a lion can kill a man (using a stinger missile, for example). Well, i guess that simply means that the Human Immunodeficiency Virus is more advanced than humans. we have no idea how to kill it, and yet it kills us quite easily. (there are tons of other virii and bacteria who are more advanced than us using this reasoning, HIV is just one examplei've heard lots of arguments to this effect. "but of course humans are much more advanced than other species. it's obvious." is it? well, of course, if you believe in god, then humans are above animals, and then there really is no argument. but even then, why did god chose to make us the "chosen species"? why choose humans, and not, say, gibbons? we must be the most advanced species, right? p.s. what DOES "advanced" mean, anyway? i use the word "advanced" in the broadest sense. i cannot accurately define it, as it used in a more abstract sense here. well, let me give some examples of "proofs" i have been given that humans are more advanced, and explain why they are all crap. if you have some more, tell me and i will be happy to explain why they, too, are probably crap (unless they are so specific they cannot be refuted, like "humans are the only animals that have invented computers". yeah, well, cows have four stomachs.) <ul> [*]humans have the largest brain of all animals. bollocks. the sperm whale has a brain weighing 20 pounds. a human brain weighs about 3. [*]humans employ intelligent use of tools. p.s. this was a leading argument for a long time in many fields. of course it is bullshit. chimpanzees lick the end of a stick and put it in an anthill to catch ants. oh, hell, we don't have to go to such "advanced" (and i use the term cynically here) species. just look at the spider's web. [*]humans are social animals. human society is absolutely embarrassing compared to many insect societies. look at ants. or bees. who is more social? humans or bees? [*]humans show emotions. octopuses show emotions. [*]humans are the only creatures who communicate using language well, maybe humans are the only creatures who communicate using german, but by today it is well known that dolphins have quite a complicated language. actually, ants use thousands of chemicals to convey information. that is just as much a language as human vocal (or written or whatever) language. [*]humans are the most intelligent of all creatures here we're getting into a rather dodgy area. one i usually don't like to go into. what is intelligence? how do you measure it? in any case, there is no evidence to show that humans have cognitive skills that are unique to us. dolphins, for example, are known to be extremely intelligent, and there's no way to compare human and dolphin intelligence. there is no acceptable universal test for human intelligence yet (people who grew up in an isolated african tribe will hardly be able to perform simple arithmetic, but does that mean they are less intelligent?), so how can we tell the difference between two species? and the last (and my favourite) "proof": [*]humans can cut an onion, but an onion can hardly cut us what the people who use this argument are trying to say is that we are killing off many species, which makes us superior. a man can kill a lion more easily than a lion can kill a man (using a stinger missile, for example). Well, i guess that simply means that the Human Immunodeficiency Virus is more advanced than humans. we have no idea how to kill it, and yet it kills us quite easily. (there are tons of other virii and bacteria who are more advanced than us using this reasoning, HIV is just one examplei've heard lots of arguments to this effect. "but of course humans are much more advanced than other species. it's obvious." is it? well, of course, if you believe in god, then humans are above animals, and then there really is no argument. but even then, why did god chose to make us the "chosen species"? why choose humans, and not, say, gibbons? we must be the most advanced species, right? p.s. what DOES "advanced" mean, anyway? i use the word "advanced" in the broadest sense. i cannot accurately define it, as it used in a more abstract sense here. well, let me give some examples of "proofs" i have been given that humans are more advanced, and explain why they are all crap. if you have some more, tell me and i will be happy to explain why they, too, are probably crap (unless they are so specific they cannot be refuted, like "humans are the only animals that have invented computers". yeah, well, cows have four stomachs.) <ul> [*]humans have the largest brain of all animals. bollocks. the sperm whale has a brain weighing 20 pounds. a human brain weighs about 3. [*]humans employ intelligent use of tools. p.s. this was a leading argument for a long time in many fields. of course it is bullshit. chimpanzees lick the end of a stick and put it in an anthill to catch ants. oh, hell, we don't have to go to such "advanced" (and i use the term cynically here) species. just look at the spider's web. [*]humans are social animals. human society is absolutely embarrassing compared to many insect societies. look at ants. or bees. who is more social? humans or bees? [*]humans show emotions. octopuses show emotions. [*]humans are the only creatures who communicate using language well, maybe humans are the only creatures who communicate using german, but by today it is well known that dolphins have quite a complicated language. actually, ants use thousands of chemicals to convey information. that is just as much a language as human vocal (or written or whatever) language. [*]humans are the most intelligent of all creatures here we're getting into a rather dodgy area. one i usually don't like to go into. what is intelligence? how do you measure it? in any case, there is no evidence to show that humans have cognitive skills that are unique to us. dolphins, for example, are known to be extremely intelligent, and there's no way to compare human and dolphin intelligence. there is no acceptable universal test for human intelligence yet (people who grew up in an isolated african tribe will hardly be able to perform simple arithmetic, but does that mean they are less intelligent?), so how can we tell the difference between two species? and the last (and my favourite) "proof": [*]humans can cut an onion, but an onion can hardly cut us what the people who use this argument are trying to say is that we are killing off many species, which makes us superior. a man can kill a lion more easily than a lion can kill a man (using a stinger missile, for example). Well, i guess that simply means that the Human Immunodeficiency Virus is more advanced than humans. we have no idea how to kill it, and yet it kills us quite easily. (there are tons of other virii and bacteria who are more advanced than us using this reasoning, HIV is just one example but EA you will always be a Troglodite[/list][/list][/list]

 

[imported_E_A__]

That isn't oneye, you misspelled Troglodyte in such a way that I can still understand what word you were after.

 

[EYE_EYE_SPASMODIC]

THANK FOR THAT SPELL CHECK

 

[EYE_EYE_SPASMODIC]

[From Latin<tt> Tr

glodytae</tt>, a people said to be cave dwellers, from Greek<tt> Tr

glodutai</tt>, alteration (influenced by<tt> tr

gl

</tt>, hole, and<tt> -dutai</tt>, those who enter), of<tt> Tr

godutai</tt>.] <hr align=left width="25%"> trog

lo·dyt

ic (-d

t

k) or trog

lo·dyt

i·cal (-

-k

l) adj.[From Latin<tt> Tr

glodytae</tt>, a people said to be cave dwellers, from Greek<tt> Tr

glodutai</tt>, alteration (influenced by<tt> tr

gl

</tt>, hole, and<tt> -dutai</tt>, those who enter), of<tt> Tr

godutai</tt>.]

 

[imported_midas]

Bloody hell,eye,I,m impressed.Until this post I thought your only two areas of expertise were bodily waste functions and genitalia

 

[dubby]

people are aproduct of their environment/background/culture. one thing is for certain though, we influence each other and society as a whole. Let me explain, we feed off emotions/hype and adrenelin in atmospheres such as concerts, footy games and other social events, where people may act a little different to their normal behaviour. This is mainly emotional of corse. Then there is the family environment, school and mates we make. i could go on forever, but society today is what we've made it, more to the point, its a result of previous generations. From achristian point of view, we live in a fallen world. Due to sin entering the world, Satan now basically can do what he wants, to an extent. As for all the stuff the other guy wrote before, well there is an answer to your question as to why GOD made mankind the supreme race; we are made in the image of GOD.
All GOD wants is a realtionship with us.I won't rave on, but its amazing to see intellectual types try and work out are mere existancewhen it really is quite simple. The world today is what we've made it, like it or not...

 

[Willow]

"Satan now basically can do what he wants, to an extent...."
For that to be true, we have to believe in Satan.

"...we are made in the image of GOD."
In caps too! Impressive.

"...The world today is what we've made it, like it or not..."
This contradicts your previous statement.

The world is not a simple package of good versus evil. I know that would provide some explanation... but its really just what a lot of people want to hear. The truth is a far more complex than story telling.

 

[imported_midas]

Willow
Not a simple package of good v. evil?Take all the evil (In whatever form you care to name)out of the world and imagine how few problems we would have .history shows that it,s always been a case of good v. evil or evil v.evil (can,t think of any conflict involving good v. good )Yep,it is that simple-its only the nature of evil that is complex .
Why do you think St George slayed the bloody Dragon?(more than the NRL could do.)

 

[Willow]

lol.. Like gods, Dragons are also mythical creatures.

How do you define good? How do you define evil? Are there circumstances to consider..? Are these sometimes extraordinary circumstances? You bet there are.

What I'm saying is that there is no inherant evil or good in people. There is no bad gene. There is no heaven and there is no hell... apart from those we make for ourselves... or others make for us.

By trying to simply things, you are tripping over your own argument.
eg: "Take all the evil (In whatever form you care to name)..."
- already getting tricky.

And this kind of makes a bird of it:
"history shows that it,s always been a case of good v. evil or evil v.evil (can,t think of any conflict involving good v. good )Yep,it is that simple-its only the nature of evil that is complex ."
Exactly what does all that mean?

I find no historical consistency that shows good v evil being the sole source of conflict. Too many holes in such a conclusion.

 

[imported_pastor-borderline]

I definately side more with Dubby then Willow. I knid of get what he is saying here &quot;history shows that it,s always been a case of good v. evil or evil v.evil (can,t think of any conflict involving good v. good )Yep,it is that simple-its only the nature of evil that is complex&quot; as a personal application and then, consequently, as a theory into the state of society. The second sentence is quite profound. More over, it's too early in the day to discuss theology.

 

[imported_pastor-borderline]

Mind you, it was Midas who conjured up that profound bit of genius