User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 119

  1. #91
    XES 5231311252's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    450

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blank View Post
    Oh my god, what's the point of having a conversation with you if you don't clarify what you say?
    Ask yourself that.

    Do you have communication problems IRL with people who can't magically read your mind?
    People can't magically read my mind?


    "Humans are worse than animals" doesn't imply that all humans are worse than all animals. It implies that the general human is worse than the general animal. At least, that's how everyone else seems to interpret it.
    'Humans are worse than animals' is a statement that implies all humans are worse than animals and does not include exceptions. "Humans are worse than animals in general" makes room for exceptions. Also, who is "everyone else" referring to? Because I doubt you know "everyone".

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Also, if animals can't be good or bad, how can humans be (in general) worse? To call x worse than y means that x and y are things that exist on a spectrum from good to bad.
    To me (and often for others) between bad and good there is neutral or neither bad nor good. At best I could call them "neutral" and for me, worse than "neutral" is "bad". Which is why I say in general (usually/commonly; obviously coming from my own experience) humans are worse and not 'humans are worse', because it's possible there will be humans I'll define as "neutral". Therefore making them neither "bad" nor "good" and putting them on the same level as animals. If they are on the same level as animals, how can they be worse? And at the chance I define a human as "good", I could actually say that they are better.
    “'Fuck', I think. What a beautiful word. If I could say only one thing for the rest of my life, that would be it.”

  2. #92
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 5231311252 View Post
    'Humans are worse than animals' is a statement that implies all humans are worse than animals and does not include exceptions. "Humans are worse than animals in general" makes room for exceptions.
    Really? I'm pretty sure other people don't view it that way.

    For example, if someone were to say "I like bagels", I don't think they mean they like every single bagel in existence. I doubt they like bagels out of the garbage can. It's not like people have to add the words "in general" to every sentence like this for other people to know what they mean. In this case, "I like bagels" and "I like bagels in general" have the same semantic content. If you want to make a stronger point, like "I like every single bagel", that's when the extra words are necessary. They're not necessary for the weak point.

    To me (and often for others) between bad and good there is neutral or neither bad nor good. At best I could call them "neutral" and for me, worse than "neutral" is "bad". Which is why I say in general (usually/commonly; obviously coming from my own experience) humans are worse and not 'humans are worse', because it's possible there will be humans I'll define as "neutral". Therefore making them neither "bad" nor "good" and putting them on the same level as animals. If they are on the same level as animals, how can they be worse? And at the chance I define a human as "good", I could actually say that they are better.
    If on your spectrum of good to bad, there is a neutral point, that is a different usage of neutral. Not being able to be good or bad is different than being in the middle of the good/bad spectrum. Things that are not able to be good or bad have no place on a good to bad spectrum.

    For example, if you were talking about hotness vs. coldness, it would make no sense to talk about an idea. You wouldn't say, "an idea is on the hot to cold spectrum, it's just right in the middle". It's totally nonsensical to compare an idea's hotness/coldness to a fire's hotness/coldness. You wouldn't say "a fire is generally hotter than an idea", and then later say an idea is neither hot nor cold, but still on the hot/cold spectrum.

  3. #93
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Toilets, mostly. That's the difference.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  4. #94
    Senior Member Santosha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    HUMR
    Enneagram
    6 sx
    Socionics
    iNfp Ni
    Posts
    1,521

    Default

    Since good/bad is just flabby ole relativism, not going to touch on that.

    However, I have considered the possibility that animals are more spiritually evolved than humans.

    I mean, what if consciousness existed outside of the brain (like Parnia and the Aware Study are now researching) and what if all these things that we think make us "better" like the ability to reason, abstract knowledge and complex emotions ... all these things we attribute to our own brainy elite, are actually signs of a very limited awareness (in the sense that we must individuate and seperate ourselves from a greater cosmic connectivity?) What if there is a method to the madness and our spiritual selves are intentionally born to compatible minds (for the sake of optimal growth and continuing awareness) thats basic structure is an ego construct?

    Animals dont seem to have that, do they? Ego's? They seem to be instinct driven and one with the natural environment. I could be wrong, but I dont think my dog cares too much about getting chubby, having name-brand chew toys or humping the hottest bitch in heat. Infact, his preferences are extremely simple. Isn't some of that the foundation of buddhism and hinduism? Eliminating the ego? "The perfect way is without difficulty, for it avoids picking and choosing. Only when you stop liking and disliking will all be clearly understood. Be not concerned with right or wrong, for the conflict between right and wrong is the sickness of the mind"

    But he does love me. I'm pretty sure of this. I know he always wants to be around me.. even if I'm not funny or smart or giving him treats. Even when I have forgotten to walk him, or been broke and had to feed him stale cat food.. he seems like he is the most happy when I let him cuddle up with me. And there are alot of humans that I can't say that about. There may be some conditions to his love, but still far less than humans in general. What does that say about us? What does that say about him?

    Just some thoughts I've had.
    Man suffers only because he takes seriously what the gods made for fun - Watts

  5. #95
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    So animals are superior because they lack an intellect?

  6. #96
    Senior Member Santosha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    HUMR
    Enneagram
    6 sx
    Socionics
    iNfp Ni
    Posts
    1,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    So animals are superior because they lack an intellect?
    I didn't say are/is anything. What I was getting at is that I've considered the possibility that ego construct gets in the way of spiritual evolution. Since animals do not have (any or as much) of an ego construct, perhaps they are spiritually evolved or their spiritual entity (vibration) is that of something that has surpassed the ego experience. Again, I realize this is totally unsubstantiated.. just a thought Peguy. I was really throwing it out there to see if anyone else has considered it.
    Man suffers only because he takes seriously what the gods made for fun - Watts

  7. #97
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Huxley3112 View Post
    I didn't say are/is anything. What I was getting at is that I've considered the possibility that ego construct gets in the way of spiritual evolution. Since animals do not have (any or as much) of an ego construct, perhaps they are spiritually evolved or their spiritual entity (vibration) is that of something that has surpassed the ego experience. Again, I realize this is totally unsubstantiated.. just a thought Peguy. I was really throwing it out there to see if anyone else has considered it.
    There's a few problems with this hypothesis. Ego constructs getting in the way of spiritual truth? Ok that makes sense, but you seem to neglect the human faculty of the Intellect or Nous, which would be higher than the ego and from which we grasp ultimate truths - including that of a spiritual nature. Animals do not have Nous, they operate only on instinct and sensation.

  8. #98
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    There is a difference between transcending one's ego to reach a higher truth(grasped through the intellect) and relying purely on instinct and sensation. In Freudian terms, you could say to transcend one's ego towards the super-ego as opposed to going towards one's Id.

  9. #99
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Smile Babe and Me

    As an adolescent I put a huge picture of a pig in my bedroom. I think I was discovering my animal nature, always a problem for a budding intellectual.

    But thank heavens the hormones beat the intellect - but not without a struggle.

    Yes, this was mein kampf, my struggle, which I celebrate today with a large picture on my front door of Babe, the pig, just to remind me of who I am.

    For merry chrismas from Babe, just click on -

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtA-FpTZOQw

  10. #100
    Senior Member Santosha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    HUMR
    Enneagram
    6 sx
    Socionics
    iNfp Ni
    Posts
    1,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    There's a few problems with this hypothesis. Ego constructs getting in the way of spiritual truth? Ok that makes sense, but you seem to neglect the human faculty of the Intellect or Nous, which would be higher than the ego and from which we grasp ultimate truths - including that of a spiritual nature. Animals do not have Nous, they operate only on instinct and sensation.
    Oh I'm sure there are and readily admit that not all my considerations consult logic. (To be honest with ya, I feel sorry for those who do )
    Man suffers only because he takes seriously what the gods made for fun - Watts

Similar Threads

  1. Which character from Anime would you be?
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 160
    Last Post: 06-29-2015, 04:38 PM
  2. What separates America from the rest of the modern Western world?
    By Stansmith in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 12-04-2013, 09:57 PM
  3. What keeps you from nuking the planet?
    By ladypinkington in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 04:56 PM
  4. Mixing human and animal DNA
    By TickTock in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 09-19-2008, 07:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO