Maybe. Then again, maybe you just named a Big Lie--that human beings are inherently violent, selfish and irresponsible. Such a populace, unable to take care of itself, needs laws regulating the life out of our lives, centralized production to meet our needs and government there to protect us and keep the damned children safe, all within the relative comfort of our silk-lined cage as the whole affair hurtles towards catastrophe.

IDK, just observing is all.



I am very happy that I do not know what the first 3 of those are. Well, the third one is a name I recognize, sort of. Twerking--you mean old skool african booty dance?--happily, I am familiar with that. Sadly yes, I did see Miley attempt it.

I don"t think that humans are violent, selfish and irresponsible anymore than i think that they are peaceful, selfless and responsible. Good people do bad things and bad people do good things. We are shaped by our environment and the way we develop can go either way on different occasions.

You have to admit that we have a fairly good track record for being shitty to eachother over the years. Maybe the big lie to keep us all sedated in our cages of false contentment is that love conquers all and light conquers darkness. Keep the populace docile with a false ideal of morality while they continually get arsefucked by their "betters".

I might add that i am a pacifist, my morals are beyond reproach and i don"t watch television at present (even though they have some good stuff on BBC4 and channel 4, coronation street used to be ok, i also cannot miss motogp). But i am probably not an ideal candidate for carrying on the species in this particular plane of existence.



You watch top gear consistently???? You are a sick puppy. You have one serious set of cojones for posting that comment. I would never admit to a habit like that to myself let alone anyone else.......

Says the man who watches 'the Street'

PS, I can't stand Brand.

They are not in the same league Cyb! If you had a choice between watching Deidre Barlow, Bette Lynch and Roy Cropper against Jeremy Clarkson, Richard bloody Hammond and the other one please do not tell me you would choose the latter 3! They are the human equivalent of Syrup of ipecac.

I am sorry for veering off topic but someone has to speak up about certain injustices to humanity and Russel Brand is a tv personality , so the subjects are kinda connected.

I suspect that there are a lot of illusions on the market. I would like to shed them all and re-enter the infinite shimmering orgasmic light again.

Humans are violent and greedy.
Even as children, most parents know this.
All mammals are though, not just humans.
Toddlers will lie, hit, take and act territorial etc, even when they have no examples of this behavior, our instincts as mammals are an issue.
They are also kind, generous, sharing and gentle. Those instincts are strong in mammals too.

No humans can be put in certain situations and not revert to instinct rules. The studies of this are amazing. The best hope we have is to avoid certain situations, know our limitations and be aware of what to avoid.

Lots of tribes are violent, lots of government-free and lawless areas become places where warlords gain power. When we have no laws we tend to revert to incredibly violent social groups that torture, rape, steal etc. The evidence for this is widespread and undeniable. That does not mean that at the same time there is not love and kindness. Tribes would often share and show kindness to their loved ones while toturing enemies to death as a form of entertainment. Actually exceptions for this are incredibly rare, most primitive cultures engaged in both social causes of sharing and kindness and in torture, war and other antisocial causes.

hahah I use consistently rather loosely Hug! I dont watch it every week. Im a bit of a car nut, so I enjoy the show for what its worth.

While this is true, it is an enlightened caregiver/parents responsibility to correct the behavior of a water testing toddler/infant/child creature lol. Not in a way that would damage them, but in a constructive way.

EVERYONE absolutely has it in them to fly off the handle at any second and just maim the crap out of another human if warranted. Road rage in traffic is a perfect example of how anyone can just lose their marbles.

As a parent my primary method has been to allow the children to gain increased empathy regarding their actions before hand, and after, so as to allow them to have their own internal motivation for "correct" behavior.

That's what my parents did and it was very effective too, they would just ask me how i thought i should be punished and it would usually be more extreme than what they would have done, because i felt so bad. Just be careful they don't start being too hard on themselves

Interesting article to just pop up moments ago, fitting for the last few posts
Science Suggests That Humans Are Not Innately Violent and Vicious.

http://www.dailymail.co....-human-like-bonobos.html


TheMindUnleashed site is nearly always pseudoscience.


From a source abstract:


Right there you have a loss of aggressive alleles.



Then all animals have mind and ego.
But this is actually not true that aggression is always a choice, you see, to act upon such aggression is a choice, however to feel such aggression is not. People do not tend to choose their emotions. They can desensitize their emotional reactions over time, but most people if they see certain things, like someone killing a child, have a very strong reaction that they essentially do not choose.

I would not consider however the http://themindunleashed.org to have much credibility, it mostly caters to a non-scientific crowd with opinion pieces.

One last aspect, gene-plasticity/phenotypic plasticity does not include the genes changing, only their expression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotypic_plasticity

My personal favorite example of this is paedomorphism in salamanders. In this the salamanders can retain juvenile phenotypes such as gills, until the environment and conditions triggers adult expression, however the genes do not change, only their expression. Needless to say, the article contains numerous fallacies and does not appear to be written by someone who understands their subject.

Evidence does show that we can breed more docile people, that is what eugenics is all about and society does actually put a selective pressure on humans to render them domesticated, more docile, obedient and tranquil. It is part of the ongoing project to produce perfect sheeple, the ultimate animal for making a profit.

I agree. I am the most profound, kind, humble, peaceful and caring person that i know. But when i get pushed too far i can lose it and can act like Linda Blair from the film The Exorcist. I think that getting angry and not being pushed around is important for survival. Funnily enough a lot of the people that i have locked horns with in the past have become my friend. We have gained a mutual respect on how far we can push eachother.

Violence to achieve political goals is another matter IMO.



Yeah i know. I have petrol headed tendencies aswell but adhere to the Orwellian distopia of 4 wheels ok, 2 wheels better. Just to make amends for my possibly unjust outrage i have posted a link here for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7CnMQ4L9Pc

hug 46: this clip is a little more on topic

Stewart Lee loves Russel Brand

Cheers,

JBArk

Heh heh heh , i was in two minds about posting that link aswell. But, in the name of fair play, i would have had to add this link as a follow up, leading to a glut of Stewart Lee links. Which i guess is no bad thing.

hahaha humbleclarkson. Touche! Two wheels as in motorized or bi-ped actuated? I partake in both myself, Ive got most vehicles covered. Except skate boards. I snowboard, but I dont skateboard. Too much energy is required to push oneself 4 feet at a time with a lot of lost momentum.

[quote=HumbleTraveler Two wheels as in motorized or bi-ped actuated? [/quote]

The both: Bipedal to the pub and garden and motorised everywhere else.

i heard, apparently... he was like into CRACK N BROWN for like a few weeks, basically never hardly got addicted or did any f up stuff and went to rehab and NA and thinks he runs tings and is basically saying what he knows will make him a big phat wad of cash, and doesn't believe a word of it...

but this could be antihype?

i would have to meet him face to face to make a judgement.

i hate to say this cos i kinda agree with what he chats....

but just saying....

Probably, if you read it in the British press. I do not think that the length of time that someone has been doing drugs necessarily takes away any relevance from what they have to say.

As much as I like him and enjoy what he says, there's a very distinct possibility that what he's saying, there's far more to it than face value. He says hes awake to the charade, he says all of these positive things. But, he could be playing both sides of the coin.