Science overturns view of humans as naturally ‘nasty’ - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Earthen;34817706]I see countless acts of kindness every day from ordinary people. We're getting better so either stop complaining and help out or go fuck yourself.[/QUOTE] No need to be nasty :v:

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];34808630']My leftist beliefs tell me that those problems are due to the capitalistic society, not the other way around. For much of our history we lived socially cohesive. Warlike, sure, but socially cohesive and often communally nonetheless.[/QUOTE] your political beliefs should come from your beliefs about the world not vice versa [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=imptastick;34810264]Yes we have empathy and can do great things but we are also capable of evil. I don't think there are any other species that has presented sadistic behavior, humans are (as far as I know) the only species that can derive joy from the suffering of others.[/QUOTE] there are species of insects whose reproductive cycle involves the male physically stabbing his penis through the abdomen of the female [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;34816047]can't wait to use this in an argument against all those idiots who say "marx was dumb because there's no way anything other than capitalism can work because humans are born to be greedy and evil"[/QUOTE] if you're really grasping at shoddy articles like this for ammunition to use in debates you should reconsider whether your stance is actually true [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Earthen;34817706]I see countless acts of kindness every day from ordinary people.[/QUOTE] because you live in a western society where acts of kindness are comparatively cheap

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34808209]none of them knew dick about modern psychology, I don't see why we have to pay lip service to them I mean yeah they were very important in their day, and our society still has echoes of them, but we shouldn't elevate them anything more than that[/QUOTE] still has echoes of them? did you even read them they weren't talking about how society was back then, they're talking about how society works. not to mention what they wrote went on to shape political philosophy forever if you're going to talk about human nature in society, and you don't fucking talk about Hobbes, Locke or Rousseau's ideas, you've missed a fucking chunk of shit. it blows my mind you just push them aside like that shit loads of their ideas are still as relevant now as they were in the 18th century

[QUOTE=Contag;34814337]I'd fire the programmer That's like saying, just because can't observe a wide range of quantum effects on the grand scale, they don't exist The statement is 'humans are not these things', not 'humans are not these things in very small groups'[/QUOTE] Well my misreading of what you meant notwithstanding, there are so many factors contributing to how humans behave in large groups that it's literally mind boggling. There are so many potential factors as to why our kindness does not translate properly to that scale. That's all I meant.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;34833646]still has echoes of them? did you even read them they weren't talking about how society was back then, they're talking about how society works. not to mention what they wrote went on to shape political philosophy forever if you're going to talk about human nature in society, and you don't fucking talk about Hobbes, Locke or Rousseau's ideas, you've missed a fucking chunk of shit. it blows my mind you just push them aside like that shit loads of their ideas are still as relevant now as they were in the 18th century[/QUOTE] I'm not pushing them aside. Modern society stands on the shoulders of these giants, but we should be looking up rather than down.

ITT:People who think they can talk psychology and sociology without [I]most likely[/I] taking a single class in it.

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;34820378]your political beliefs should come from your beliefs about the world not vice versa [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] there are species of insects whose reproductive cycle involves the male physically stabbing his penis through the abdomen of the female [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] if you're really grasping at shoddy articles like this for ammunition to use in debates you should reconsider whether your stance is actually true [editline]22nd February 2012[/editline] because you live in a western society where acts of kindness are comparatively cheap[/QUOTE] I currently live in a third world country where half of the children are malnourished and half the country is illiterate. Acts of kindness are cheap here too.

[QUOTE=Swilly;34835811]ITT:People who think they can talk psychology and sociology without [I]most likely[/I] taking a single class in it.[/QUOTE] You don't have to take so sociology to talk about society. Everyone is entitled to a view on this shit.

[QUOTE=Contag;34800552]Really? Because last time I checked we're in a capitalist society while plenty of wars rage around the world, with virtually all governments using violent force to keep people paying taxes and not cracking each others skulls open[/QUOTE] And you'll find an increasing number of people are actively against that

I thought it was common sense that humans were altruistic by nature. Competitive, of course. Who takes the view that humans are naturally hostile and cruel beasts. Have you no friends?

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;34804473]This is pretty dumb and unscientific.[/QUOTE] Dammit, I was just going to jump in myself and post that, or something very similar. What he cites as evidence of Morality is actually evidence of Cooperation - Which are entirely different concepts, especially where Behaviour/Psychology are concerned, even seemingly Altruistic Behaviour can simply be to enhance Cooperation (I help you now, you'll help me later, we both might survive) But leaving that aside, as a Zoologist/Conservationist, can I just state - One study does not overturn science, unless you're a naive idiot.

[QUOTE=Slight;34845847]I thought it was common sense that humans were altruistic by nature. Competitive, of course. Who takes the view that humans are naturally hostile and cruel beasts. Have you no friends?[/QUOTE] Tactically altruistic, it ties into the idea of "Group Fitness"

I once read that people turn to altruism in order to forget their worries for a brief amount of time. So, assuming what I read is correct, technically everything mankind has ever done would be a self-centered act, no matter how many people it helped. So I guess you could that we are naturally somewhat selfish - it's just that what helps me feel better may not help people like Muamar Gaddafi so much, and he logically chooses what makes him feel better. I guess it all depends on the rush one gets from helping others, and if that rush outweighs anything else. Really, (again assuming what I read was true) it's just a choice of two pleasures, one of which may be more valuable than the other. Though again I don't have any kind of formal education in this.

[QUOTE=Cone;34846037]I once read that people turn to altruism in order to forget their worries for a brief amount of time. So, assuming what I read is correct, technically everything mankind has ever done would be a self-centered act, no matter how many people it helped. So I guess you could that we are naturally somewhat selfish - it's just that what helps me feel better may not help people like Muamar Gaddafi so much, and he logically chooses what makes him feel better. I guess it all depends on the rush one gets from helping others, and if that rush outweighs anything else. Really, (again assuming what I read was true) it's just a choice of two pleasures, one of which may be more valuable than the other. Though again I don't have any kind of formal education in this.[/QUOTE] Well despite your lack of formal education you are heading the right direction. Even cooperation and empathy are ego-centric. That doesn't mean they're bad or wrong, but it does mean that our multiple perspectives affect our conclusions, even if we are trying to help each other. (Example: religious fundies telling us to stop having pre-marital sex. They think they're helping us, not all of us agree. They're not likely trying to [I]hurt[/I] us though) Ego-centrism is not a bad word in psychology, it's a fact of human nature because we can't read minds. Even if we could, our perspective of events and life (perspective in the sense of where you were and what you saw/heard/felt/etc) would still affect our conclusions. If we could share perspectives we would be a totally different species. Best you can hope for is people working together to help themselves: achieving your objective and creating allies => better chance of survival => better chance of sharing your genes. Cooperation is the logical choice most of the time.