[sanctus]

• on one handside I tend to think that mankind learned from past mistakes, I mean one can believe in the human race as being intelligent enough to not repeat the same mistakes over and over. This is what I like to believe, but...

• ...on the other handside, it's enough to look how in the past, the afrikans were enslaved (there the occidental technolgy was more advanced), there has been a first world war afterwrads, even if everyone said never again, there has been the second; or we can even look at the present there has been a gulf-war, now there is another one (some people may say it's already over, I don't agree). This makes me think if it wouldn't be more realistic to lose my belief in mankind.

Eventually, it turns to be a question about evalution of the risks: the risk to be really badly deceived or not. The only thing that makes me still believe in mankind, is that I think a positive worldview influences positively the people surrounding you and that's worth the risk to be deceived.

What do you think?

[BEAKER]

I don't think it's worth the risk to be decieved if you know that you're being decieved.

Having a positive world view is more dificult than having a positive self image, but I don't think we are going to enter into a utopian society by having eather one.

[sanctus]

Originally posted by: BEAKER
I don't think it's worth the risk to be decieved if you know that you're being decieved.

That's the problem, do I really know I will be deceived?

[geko]

I tend to agree with Plato when it's said that "only the dead have seen the end of war"

Humans seem to have high self-importance, and we defend and retaliate when our identity (principles, ethics, laws, etc.,) and property are attacked. Wars are simply an extension of this into the realm and size of a state. War is not inherently a bad/negative thing; I would likely go to 'war' if my identity were attacked, and so would the majority. This i see as a good thing.

.......

If you know you're being deceived you're not being decieved, unless of course the deception is not the deception that you thought you were being decieved by. In which case you wont know about it. Alas, paranoia, self-importance and selfishness are beneficial (being a defense against possible deception).

Also, depending on how you look at it, no one has a "right" to deceive you, making it another valid reason to go to 'war'?

[sanctus]

Geko.
What I don't understand in your post is what you mean by war as you write it as between ''.

If you mean war in the usual sense with weapons and stuff, I don't agree on one thing: I can never see war as good thing, for me it means just that not all the non-violent ways have been tried and that the ones, that were tried, have failed. So it just stays a bad thing.
This doesn't mean that I don't agree that war is never neccessary, but this neccessity is very rare. The only time in history I remember I agreed that going to war was neccessary and that at that stage there were no non-violent means left, was when the US came to war against Germany in WW2!!

If you know you're being deceived you're not being decieved, unless of course the deception is not the deception that you thought you were being decieved by. In which case you wont know about it.

I completely agree on that, I never saw it like that; thanks.

Alas, paranoia, self-importance and selfishness are beneficial (being a defense against possible deception).

You forgot to say that this attributes are beneficial to yourself, probably thay aren't very beneficial for the people spending time with you. So it's of more benefice for all if you imagine all the possibles deception, so that you will very seldom deceived and therefore you can be much less paranoi, selfish etc with a positive influence on you AND the others.

[BEAKER]

Alas, paranoia, self-importance and selfishness are beneficial (being a defense against possible deception).

I agree with Sanctus, Geko - you have a nice way of wording things.

As far as self importance goes, that's not what I meant when I said self image.

I had a friend jokingly say to me the other day, "I don't care what anybody says about you, I like you!"

And I replied, "I don't care what anyody says about me either, I like myself!"

[geko]

What I don't understand in your post is what you mean by war as you write it as between ''.

The reason for '' around the word is that i think the word has emotional attachments to many people. I suppose the highlighting of the word was my little way of showing my distaste for it. This isnt to say that ive chosen denial about the nature of war, just that i would have been in favour of a different term, such as maybe 'conflict' (<- the highlights this time are just there to single out the word).

Conflict happens at many levels, and i think it's understandable that a conflict between whole nations is likely to end with varying degrees of blood-shed. The world (the east and west, the person and nation) willingly voices there distaste in such things, yet the world is in constant conflict. This, i think, is human nature, and it's going to be a long while yet before the world changes in my opinion, but at the same time it looks to me as though it can be seen to be happening already in various ways. This i think is a good thing.


You forgot to say that this attributes are beneficial to yourself, probably thay aren't very beneficial for the people spending time with you. So it's of more benefice for all if you imagine all the possibles deception, so that you will very seldom deceived and therefore you can be much less paranoi, selfish etc with a positive influence on you AND the others.

Sure, there i am thinking about the term war as non-descriptive and at the same time fall into the same way of providing little description myself - ill rewrite it; Certain amounts of paranoia, self-importance and selfishness have benefit (being a defense against possible deception - as well as many other things as an after-thought).

...attributes are beneficial to yourself

Yes, and other people because happiness always rubs off (no im not saying paranoia etc., = happiness, just that benefit has a habit of giving you another slice of it).

...probably thay aren't very beneficial for the people spending time with you.

I dont understand. Are you saying that it's likely having a negative effect on people? Or that sometimes it can have a negative effect on people? Well i agree with the latter. It's true, sure. But other people are the same so i guess it's tough-luck on the lot of us!


[Edit: The whole post came out in italics the first time]

[geko]

Originally posted by: sanctus

So it's of more benefice for all if you imagine all the possibles deception, so that you will very seldom deceived and therefore you can be much less paranoi, selfish etc...

Actually, looking at this with non-tired eyes i noticed that thinking ... if you imagine all the possibles deception is paranoia. Why do we care about being deceived? Self-importance. And trying to stay one step ahead of deception, and thus gain as much benefit from such a situation for ourselves as possible, is selfishness.

......

Just an after-thought and i dont really mean anything by it.

Geko

[Freethinker]

I was thrown by the Subject title. Of coourse I "believe in mankind". We exist don't we? And for me it would be bad if I didn't. Well actually I would not know if I did NOT live I guess, but I am glad I do. :-)

I guess you are actually asking if "believing" (putting out trust in?) in "mankind" is a good thing, or should the human race not be considered basically good or not?

If this is the question, once more I can see where I am going to get in trouble here.

There seems to be two major camps involved. Those that think this outcome is determined by humans alone or those that find that some outside force is needed/ involved.

But for now, regardless of the approach, I can not see how anyone would find that huamns typically do not operate basd on what they truly feel is best for humanity. No matter if they are taking actions that are based on peaceful friendly intiatives or the pilots of 9/11, their personal drive was to support philosophies that they felt would ultimately advance humanity.

I would suggest that this shows a very favorable inherent drive hardwired into humans to work for the betterment of humanity. A clear species prejudice. I see no question that the vast majority of humans strive to move society in a positive direction.

It is more a question of what process to achieve what end goal than whether humans are inherently "good" and desire to help humanity.

[sanctus]

Geko, you wrote:

.probably thay aren't very beneficial for the people spending time with you.
I dont understand. Are you saying that it's likely having a negative effect on people? Or that sometimes it can have a negative effect on people? Well i agree with the latter. It's true, sure. But other people are the same so i guess it's tough-luck on the lot of us!

You understood exactly, what I meant if you're always paranoid and selfish, you have a much higher probability to upset people around you.

I know, everybody is selfish (in the thread about god I wrote it somewhere), I mean whatever action we do is selfish (i. we help somebody to feel good, if not we wouldn't do it!), but there is selfish and selfish: actions are not always perceived as selfish (i.e helping somebody), while others are. It is this seconds one that I think have a negative effect on your surrondings, as you don't give something good to the others.

But, I agree if you imagine all possibles deception you are paranoid.
When I wrote it, I mainly thought about selfishness (needed to not be deceived).


Writing this, I notice another important point, it's better not to build a wall of paranoia and selfishness against being deceived, because if this wall breaks, then you'd be in much bigger trouble!