I think the issue with countering an argument like that is the terminology, in order to counter an argument like this you need to understand exactly what is meant by "nature" and "true nature". So long as it's enigmatic, you can't really counter the argument. The argument may not even be invalid, depending on those definitions. Once you have the definitions, you can make a counter argument using their own logic to demonstrate invalidity.I'm really thinking about a belief that a person's underlying nature doesn't change but that stress and or drugs let them express that true nature
How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
-
- Posts: 251
- Joined: May 2nd, 2017, 10:10 am
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
You can ask "What do you mean by their nature?" Temperament? Character? Desires? Attitudes? Where do these traits come from? When you say 'true nature', do you mean that people usually hide their desires and attitudes, but let them show under the influence of chemicals? But then, don't we all hide some of our nature? What is good behaviour, virtue and manners but a suppression of our true nature?
-
- Posts: 474
- Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
Ok, I'm confused about the role that last sentence would play in my argument.Alias wrote: ↑January 12th, 2018, 11:05 am That's right.
You can ask "What do you mean by their nature?" Temperament? Character? Desires? Attitudes? Where do these traits come from? When you say 'true nature', do you mean that people usually hide their desires and attitudes, but let them show under the influence of chemicals? But then, don't we all hide some of our nature? What is good behaviour, virtue and manners but a suppression of our true nature?
I don't believe that people's "true nature" needs to be suppressed.
To make it clear where I'm coming from, I believe that Homo sapiens is a social species whose population took off as never before in Evolution when the strength and complexity of our social behaviors increased. To me, that means we are "hard-wired" to be social, therefore "good". We are also hard wired to have impulses like the rest of the mammals that push (particularly males) towards violence, sexual misconduct, greed, sloth, etc.. The evidence such as it is and my life experience back this up, I believe.
Also, I've had panic disorder in the past, so I know what it feels like when (as I see it) a primitive part of your brain sends impulses to the rest of your brain that are perfectly authentic-seeming, but do not comport with reality. To me, different parts of the brain process different information differently and the same information differently.
So the idea of a "true nature" that is singular seems totally wrong to me.
-
- Posts: 474
- Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
And yet you go on to show exactly how it does:
And those are the impulses that alcohol and drugs, as well as some other outside influences, liberate from conscious control.we are "hard-wired" to be social, therefore "good". We are also hard wired to have impulses like the rest of the mammals that push (particularly males) towards violence, sexual misconduct, greed, sloth, etc..
In a smaller way, and on a daily, hourly basis, we all have to suppress the impulse to say something unkind, to make a rude noise, to laugh at someone's misfortune, to ask an inappropriate questions, to touch an off-limit person or body part, to remove our clothing, to grimace or point, or leer or stare or spit or sneeze or scratch or take the last cookie.
-
- Posts: 474
- Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
Fair enough. I didn't actually mean that to be critical in any way.
Here's the thing - are those misbehaviors excesses of degree or flaws in fundamental motivations? Anyone can get angry, but can anyone say really hurtful things when he's angry? That's part of the question that brought this up, so let me put it out there.And those are the impulses that alcohol and drugs, as well as some other outside influences, liberate from conscious control.we are "hard-wired" to be social, therefore "good". We are also hard wired to have impulses like the rest of the mammals that push (particularly males) towards violence, sexual misconduct, greed, sloth, etc..
In a smaller way, and on a daily, hourly basis, we all have to suppress the impulse to say something unkind, to make a rude noise, to laugh at someone's misfortune, to ask an inappropriate questions, to touch an off-limit person or body part, to remove our clothing, to grimace or point, or leer or stare or spit or sneeze or scratch or take the last cookie.
I'm very much on the "excesses of degree" side of the argument. Yes, I think there are behaviors that some Homo sapiens - with the benefit of growth and rudimentary positive conditioning - simply could not engage in no matter how much they were stimulated. But I think history shows us there are not many.
Certainly women seem consistently incapable of certain acts of barbarism even when forced, and some men too. It's harder to say that a man "wouldn't ever" do anything, based on the extremes of behavior male Homo sapiens have engaged in time and time again, but I think it's possible.
The degree to which otherwise normal-seeming people vary in their capacity for excess, however, is both broad and broad over the same person's lifetime.
So is "good behavior" an act of suppression or is it the channeling of a pre-existing virtuous motivation which competes with typically more selfish and less-considered motivations?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
Oh yes - unless they have very deeply embedded, overpowering superego and very little id.
Anyway, my point wasn't about degrees of misbehaviour and who is capable of what.
I merely suggested that you ask you judgmental relative where the lines are to be drawn. How she tells the difference between the kind of animal impulse we all suppress under civilized conditioning and the bad behaviour that manifests the "true nature" of people she condemns.
-
- Posts: 251
- Joined: May 2nd, 2017, 10:10 am
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
http://www.historynet.com/men-against-f ... am-war.htm There are statistics about world war 2 and the American-vietnamese war that show the vast majority of men were unwilling to shoot or kill others even when permitted and ordered to do so. Some figures showing only 2% of soldiers in ww2 shot to kill which included psychopaths which constitute 1 in every 100 people and probably more in armies.Certainly women seem consistently incapable of certain acts of barbarism even when forced, and some men too. It's harder to say that a man "wouldn't ever" do anything, based on the extremes of behavior male Homo sapiens have engaged in time and time again, but I think it's possible
The solution to this was to "condition" people to shoot to kill by implementing training exercises where soldiers were taught to shoot on reflex at cut outs in the shape of humans. The evidence suggests things are actually entirely reversed from your views, there is no need to condition people to non-violence.Yes, I think there are behaviors that some Homo sapiens - with the benefit of growth and rudimentary positive conditioning - simply could not engage in no matter how much they were stimulated. But I think history shows us there are not many.
There are many factors in why men commit violent crime, firstly once again it is estimated that 15-25% of prisoners are psychopaths and more with regards to violent crime. Ultimately my point is that your view is incorrect, though I doubt you care.
Whether you repress your "bad" side or channel your "good side" basically I think most of the really "bad" stuff are not options to most people who have neither power or desire to do "bad". Normal people don't need to sit down and remind themselves not to rape and kill others, past that point it comes down to your idea of "good behaviour" which is surely different to mine.So is "good behavior" an act of suppression or is it the channeling of a pre-existing virtuous motivation which competes with typically more selfish and less-considered motivations?
And to go back to the topic at hand, does a person's inhibitions and restraint not comport to some degree their "true nature"? If you are born with violent tendencies beyond your control and struggle against them, is that not more of an accomplishment than being born as someone with no violent tendencies and then committing no crimes? Why would the former individual be praised as having a virtuous "true nature" when they aren't even responsible for their own "goodness".
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: December 13th, 2017, 2:05 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
You don't because it is effectively a declaration of war.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: December 13th, 2017, 2:05 pm
-
- Posts: 474
- Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm
-
- Posts: 474
- Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
That's exactly how I always take it, Greta.
But at the same time, it's such a hardy, recurring idea among humans that I don't know if the answer is just to throw everyone who thinks that way at all under the same bus as those whose feeling of superiority guides their everyday behavior.
(Any guess whom I might be thinking of?}
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: How To Counter A Flawed Philosophy - NICELY????
...Safvd...
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023