Page 2 of 2 [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

16 May 2013, 7:08 am

starkid wrote:
Furthermore, perhaps you ought to re-evaluate what you mean by "love." It is one of the most selfish things a person can experience, so I don't understand why you say that a person who has feelings for others for selfish reasons doesn't really love them. It is as if you have abstracted the meaning of the term away from human nature, when in fact human nature is the only thing that it can meaningfully be based on.


I agree. You are spot on, I understand theoretically. The problem is for me to feel love that way.



qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

16 May 2013, 7:30 am

If one should accept all consequences of survival, one should have no problem with people bullying and mocking others. It's a way of ensuring that only the strong individuals make it through. Another place where I have a problem accepting it.

More fundamentally it's the human pack mentality that is difficult for me to accept. Do you?



Nonperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,258

16 May 2013, 8:59 am

I don't think most people are consciously aware of "acting out of self-interest". It's something one realizes later, through detached observation. For instance, helping the poor in your city/country is self-interested on some level: it's in your interest to live in a society with a tradition of helping the poor, in case you or your child is poor someday. It also reduces the risk that the poor people will turn on you and create social turmoil. But that reasoning is not what goes through a person's head when they help the poor - they act on instinct/emotion. They see someone suffering, empathize with that person, and help them. They are wired to do so. The "self-interested" reasons for doing it I gave are an attempt to recreate the reason that wiring is there in the first place, not the actual conscious reasoning behind the decision.

The problem we have is that we don't necessarily have the same instinctive reactions everyone around us does (although we probably have some, they might be different, muted, jumbled...) and this leads us to reflect more on the ultimate meaning behind the behavior. That isn't something NT's are likely to even think about, unless they're trying to justify their actions after the fact or are psychologists. They feel the same way most people around them do, so they trust the feeling.

EDIT: for instance, an NT who is putting someone else down and embarrassing them publicly probably isn't consciously thinking "if I do this it will prove I'm superior to this loser and increase my own status", but rather, only thinking "that person is a loser", feeling contempt/pride, and acting on it without questioning it at all.



Anomiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,023

16 May 2013, 9:07 am

Aggressive ≠ Strong

There are so many other factors that contribute to survival, why would we have any interest at all to make our fellow humans more aggressive? It's not like it is needed at all in modern society.
Like I said, altruism works. We could be just as interested in making people more altruistic.
I know you didn't argue that it was right to do anything like that, but still that's not the only thing "strongness" is based on.



qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

16 May 2013, 2:36 pm

Nonperson wrote:
I don't think most people are consciously aware of "acting out of self-interest". It's something one realizes later, through detached observation. For instance, helping the poor in your city/country is self-interested on some level: it's in your interest to live in a society with a tradition of helping the poor, in case you or your child is poor someday. It also reduces the risk that the poor people will turn on you and create social turmoil. But that reasoning is not what goes through a person's head when they help the poor - they act on instinct/emotion. They see someone suffering, empathize with that person, and help them. They are wired to do so. The "self-interested" reasons for doing it I gave are an attempt to recreate the reason that wiring is there in the first place, not the actual conscious reasoning behind the decision.

The problem we have is that we don't necessarily have the same instinctive reactions everyone around us does (although we probably have some, they might be different, muted, jumbled...) and this leads us to reflect more on the ultimate meaning behind the behavior. That isn't something NT's are likely to even think about, unless they're trying to justify their actions after the fact or are psychologists. They feel the same way most people around them do, so they trust the feeling.

EDIT: for instance, an NT who is putting someone else down and embarrassing them publicly probably isn't consciously thinking "if I do this it will prove I'm superior to this loser and increase my own status", but rather, only thinking "that person is a loser", feeling contempt/pride, and acting on it without questioning it at all.


Wise words. This helps a lot. How come I oppositely most people have to find out how to act/live...I suppose it's AS? It's like I have to "construct" a "scripted" personality, while people normally don't consider such things.

That's what I mean when I say NTs seem to care less than I often do. They just do what they feel like (generalizing much here), without considering whether the actions taken are basically evil/unfair (putting someone else down and embarrassing them publicly is an evil act in my eyes even though I know it is "just" a part of the human pack mentality). Some people don't mind taking this very far. Really despising those with lower social status. I realise it's to a large extend the human pack mentality I consider evil.



qawer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,252

16 May 2013, 2:49 pm

Anomiel wrote:
Aggressive ≠ Strong

There are so many other factors that contribute to survival, why would we have any interest at all to make our fellow humans more aggressive? It's not like it is needed at all in modern society.
Like I said, altruism works. We could be just as interested in making people more altruistic.
I know you didn't argue that it was right to do anything like that, but still that's not the only thing "strongness" is based on.


I see your point. Especially on a more subtle level. But in everyday life aggressive persons seem to be more likely to get what they want, while the more altruistic ones stand in second line.

My problem is that aggressiveness at the expense of other people more often than not pays off. It's just wrong.