Holly's Law

[derek]

Originally posted by AdRiaN
Oh, I see. This sort of thing never happened 500 years ago? Or is it 1000 years ago? What exactly is "modern civilization"?

modern civilization started approx 5000 bc with the advent of agriculture (irrigation) & written communication (cuneiform). it's also when humans started to live in larger and more diverse communities we now call cities.

foraging socities can be seen today (aboriginals) and date back millions of years, and existed in other strain of hominids.

so civilization on the grand scale of things is new, and we still haven't worked out all the kinks.

i could get into a speel about why thes e atrocities don't happen in foraging societies (hint: teamwork), but you should fiqure it out on your own. do some reading.

cheers,

derek

 

[KickIT]

Originally posted by derek
modern civilization started approx 5000 bc with the advent of agriculture (irrigation) & written communication (cuneiform). it's also when humans started to live in larger and more diverse communities we now call cities.

foraging socities can be seen today (aboriginals) and date back millions of years, and existed in other strain of hominids.

so civilization on the grand scale of things is new, and we still haven't worked out all the kinks.

i could get into a speel about why thes e atrocities don't happen in foraging societies (hint: teamwork), but you should fiqure it out on your own. do some reading.

cheers,

derek

I think you're comparing apples and oranges.

*c*

 

[derek]

Originally posted by KickIT
I think you're comparing apples and oranges.

*c*

how so?

 

[KickIT]

Originally posted by derek
how so?

Why compare differences between current day society and that which pre-dates water irrigation or even compare our society to that of indigenous peoples? There are completely different dynamics.

If you are going to compare, what exactly are you comparing? Social and family structures? Population densities? Social moraes?

A more valid comparison would be to compare two regions that are similar in population, social codes, etc. compare crime rates for specific crimes and try and derive why crimes in one region are much lower than that of another region.

*c*

 

[derek]

Originally posted by KickIT
Why compare differences between current day society and that which pre-dates water irrigation or even compare our society to that of indigenous peoples? There are completely different dynamics.

If you are going to compare, what exactly are you comparing? Social and family structures? Population densities? Social moraes?

A more valid comparison would be to compare two regions that are similar in population, social codes, etc. compare crime rates for specific crimes and try and derive why crimes in one region are much lower than that of another region.

*c*

agreed they are completely different dynamics, but the fact remains we can still learn from other societies different or not. i am attempting to display that social structures did and do exist that don't have the sociopath problem. which in my opinion is still only an anomoly in modern society. a clitch in the system if you will.

i am not suggesting that we all the sudden start living as foraging societies. simply that there are ways humans had better methods raising their young. the family structure in a foraging society is a completly different paradigm. the tribe helps one another out with the upbringing of offspring. modern civilization places that responsilbity on the parents who in many cases are not capable for various reasons (work, immaturity, mental instability).

our society is all about 'me', and this is a serious issue when discussing violence especially sensless violence.

all our ancestor's lived this way at some point in history, so it is a valid comparison of alternative social structure.

cheers,

derek

 

[AdRiaN]

Hmmm ... so there's a correlation between the advent of written communication and the incidence of violent crime.

Maybe we should end all literacy programs in our inner cities. And turn off the water.

 

[KickIT]

Originally posted by derek
our society is all about 'me', and this is a serious issue when discussing violence especially sensless violence.

cheers,

derek

Ah I catch your drift. I agree 100%. We have become a "me" first society. The problem with such a society is that if there isn't a sufficient social safety net, those who fall by the wayside are prone to act more out of desperation since they have nothing to fall back on and the rest of society could care less.

*c*

 

[AdRiaN]

Depends on how you define the "social safety net". Is it a support system of family, friends, and charities ... or a monthly cheque from the government?

Again, I have a problem with the suggestion that more social spending will automatically equate to a kinder and more compassionate society. Of course, it's an easy "solution" because you just increase the size of the government's budget.

I think a social safety net is closer to the first description, but unfortunately, it's a much more difficult problem to address. Especially since you cannot talk about, "family values" without rolling a few eyes.

 

[KickIT]

Originally posted by AdRiaN
Depends on how you define the "social safety net". Is it a support system of family, friends, and charities ... or a monthly cheque from the government?

Again, I have a problem with the suggestion that more social spending will automatically equate to a kinder and more compassionate society. Of course, it's an easy "solution" because you just increase the size of the government's budget.

I think a social safety net is closer to the first description, but unfortunately, it's a much more difficult problem to address. Especially since you cannot talk about, "family values" without rolling a few eyes.

I'm not saying welfare cheques for all is what you need. But I do think universal healthcare and education and old age pension goes along way to strengthening our safety net. I also agree that strengthening the family is also important.

How would you encourage less of a me-first attitude? I would say that the freer the market-place the more Adam Smith we become (maximing your utility), even if its at the expense of others.

*c*

 

[janiecakes]

Originally posted by AdRiaN
Depends on how you define the "social safety net". Is it a support system of family, friends, and charities ... or a monthly cheque from the government?

A good social safety net has to include financial support for people whose friends or family can't or won't support them when they are in need. The social safety net includes both of the definitions in your question.

 

[MoFo]

Re: Re: Re: Holly's Law

Originally posted by AdRiaN
Riiiiiight. People will stop killing each other if we make welfare cheques bigger. Why hasn't anyone thought of this yet? You should start a petition.

I thought PosTMOD's delivery was unsophisticated but this takes the cake.

 

[Puma]

I think the legalization of prostitution would cut down on violent crimes.

 

[Hal-9000]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Holly's Law

Originally posted by MoFo
I thought PosTMOD's delivery was unsophisticated but this takes the cake.

Its unfortunate that someone as bright as Adrian is unable to think beyond economics.

 

[PosTMOd]

Originally posted by Hal-9000
Its unfortunate that someone as bright as Adrian is unable to think beyond economics.

Oh, he can, he is just way more comfortable sitting in that chair, which is why he has purposely tried to steer this towards economics, that special midget child of sociology.

Originally posted by simple10
PosTMOd, save the whole fucking world. go ahead and stress yourself out over the plight of our society.

No stress here, CAPITAL LETTERS notwithstanding.

What plight? We will soon go extinct, and we will be known as the extinct plightless bird, the nonobird.

I don't want to save the world-- fuck that action.

If I had a button in front of me that I could press to kill all humans instantly, I would push it without hesitation...

Originally posted by simple10
i didn't offer any "solutions" which make more of them, if you had read my post with half a brain intact you would have seen that.

For future reference, ambiguous posts without a commitment to agree or disagree with prior posts, and with me quoted first will be treated as agreeing with the hoi polloi.

Originally posted by simple10
by the way, what organizations are you involved in to help improve our local psychological well being? you seem awfully self righteous. get off your pulpit.

I am involved in the Find Me a Button To Press That Will Get Rid of Humans Society... you see, with 98% morons, and 1.5% of the rest going along for the comfortable ride, there is no helping, except very locally, such as within 3 metres of me.

As such, I try to not belch sausage and/or garlic on people after gorging, and hope that this will help society get rid of psychopaths. One thing I will not give up is public flatulence, though I assure you I take full responsibility for the olfactory offenses produced-- most people like to blame someone else, but feel I must take a stand...try it, and you will feel awfully self-righteous as well.

A pulpit is for preaching to convert (or usually just to preach to the converted.)

I submit that I am not on a pulpit, but on a rather impressive looking soapbox.

 

[PosTMOd]

Originally posted by Puma
I think the legalization of prostitution would cut down on violent crimes.

I think that legalizing everything would get rid of crime completely.

 

[-ravetrash-]

Originally posted by PosTMOd
I gave a link... here it is again... it's rather interesting, but unfortunately, since it doesn't take the easy way out, i.e. IT'S BIOLOGY AND HARDWIRED RIGHT IN, SO WE CAN'T DO A GODDAMED THING, approach, it'll languish until we go extinct, which will be a great day for the earth.

http://www.bconnex.net/~cspcc/psychopathy/

I read through just about all of that site, and it's definitely worth the time.

Some of the material is a bit dated, but is still quite relevent when taken in context.

Thanks for the link.