Omerik wrote:
My opinion:
1. Everything has a reason (plus, I'm a determinist).
Does unreason have a reason?
Do reason have a reason?
Does thinking everything has a reason have a reason? Think about that.
Does existence have a reason?
Does nonexistence have a reason?
Omerik wrote:
2. We can't define good or bad (I'm a nihilist).
3. We have instincts of empathy, which we consider "good", universally.
I seem to not have this, sorry.
Omerik wrote:
7. Non-Autistic people are less sensitive, and more capable of hurting, manipulating. etc.
More capable of hurting and manipulating should not be grouped together.
An autistic person could cause intense hurt by their inability to grasp certain concepts or to be so hard hitting in some areas that destroy the foundation of another. Not that I consider the latter bad, just that it can cause hurt.
Omerik wrote:
8. Non-Autistic people are more influenced by society.
9. Autistic people have some kind of "self-defence" from society's influence.
10. Autistic people therefore are more true to their nature.
I'm not entirely sure what true to their nature means.
Omerik wrote:
12. If other people still feel compassion and appreciate honesty, universally, it's perhaps something about their nature as well.
13. If people are more violent in different cultures, than they're "bad" due to influence.
14. It cannot be because of genetics, because they act differently in different eras, and have different values.
This is a gross misunderstanding of genetics and to what we know and don't know. You should keep in mind we are thought to be still using the genetics from 150-200k years ago with some possible minor variations. Additionally to only refer to genetics and not address the factors that people grow up in, which includes the era, fails to address many aspects.
Omerik wrote:
15. Violent Aspies are motivated by moral (so they're still "good"), or because society has ruined them by being cruel to them, or teaching them to socialise too quick, perhaps.
I don't agree.
You're use of "good" puzzles me. It doesn't make sense.
I could think of scenarios that I think would be so-called good that others would not, thus negating your stance.
Omerik wrote:
16. "The task of education is to make the individual so firm and sure that, as a whole being, he can no longer be diverted from his path." (Nietzsche)
17. "The State is never concerned with the truth, but only with the truth which is useful to it, or to be more precise, with anything which is useful to it whether it is truth, half-truth, or error." (Nietzsche)
18. States control education, and are responsible for indoctrination.
Which state are you referring to? There are some nifty secular countries out there.
Unless you consider working towards the happiness and freethought of citizens is bad.
In general, yes, he is spot on and it seems we are migrating away from there with a chance of not escaping his truth.
Omerik wrote:
19. Children cannot be "educated" to be good by their parents, if their parents are dishonest, violent and/or justify violence (including punishment by state).
Again, I would need to know what good means.
Omerik wrote:
20. Children show empathy without education.
Without education you wouldn't know what empathy means.
Omerik wrote:
Conclusions:
1. Human have a natural feeling of empathy, which is destroyed by society and the state. When people don't mind those influences, or live without them, they feel more empathy than others, when they recognise it. This feeling, which people naturally have, is considered good. If so, we can that human beings are essentially good, aren't they?
No. Humans are not essentially good. Though I am kinda placing a value on good that may not cohere with yours.
Omerik wrote:
2. Cruelty such as revenge has no reason, so if people think about it, they can get rid of the will to punish. So I feel, so other aspies I know, and Nietzsche himself was against punishment, as I understand him.
Revenge has reason.
Justice and satisfaction. We already understand why revenge is sought.
Punishment is not the same thing as revenge.
If I murder your family, you wouldn't want punishment for the act? Odd.
Omerik wrote:
4. Humans have a natural tendency to empathise, but also to harm. If they use logic, and trust each other, they won't feel the will to harm others.
What do you mean by use logic?
I may need to hunt down the research material for you.
I believe I understand most of what you are presenting and let it be clear that I think you sound like one of those nice and caring types that we need more of in the world. What must be addressed though is a greater comprehension to several aspects which includes evolutionary psychology and that of what empathy and such stem from. It's not some goodness that is drank from a wellspring of what is to come by natural course.
These things come from innumerable amount of pain and suffering and the selective pressures that yielded a cooperation advantage that later worked to elucidate mirror neurons that make most people reel when others show pain for example.
Anyways, that's all for the moment.
Last edited by psychointegrator on 28 Feb 2010, 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
27 Feb 2010, 9:30 am
