›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

"Humans Are Bastards"

13

Comments

  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    It makes sense to me because I think being evil is worse than being a bastard, but I have a feeling that probably isn't what Anonym meant.
  • TheMightyAnonymTheMightyAnonym
    ~♥YES♥~! I *AM* a ~♥cupcake♥~! ^_^
    The difference is that "bastards" implies that we are all filled with horrible intentions, do nasty things, and are generally horrible nasty fellows with bad intentions.

    That is, of course, an over-generalization.

    However, we are very flawed. Extremely so. Each person is capable of far more than what they ever actually do, and is inclined to make lots of mistakes that hurt others. Our greatest flaw, is our failure to help others. If a person were to go out on a limb and make a desperate effort to help people, they could surely save thousands of lives over the course of their own life.

    Mother Teresa was able to aid a great deal of people, for example. Most of us, instead of being inspired, place her upon a sort of "hero" pedestal as if to say "gee, that's pretty great, good thing I don't have the same responsibility...".
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    "Code of behaviour" necessarily involves generalisation and simplification by definition.  Were it not to, it wouldn't be a "code of" anything. It would just be "behaviour".
    A code of behaviour is necessarily a set of rules... standards. Narrow and systematic responses to an unknowable array of possible situations in accordance with certain particular criteria.  Generalisation and simplification mandatory.
    Undesirable, I'd call it.

    One cannot possibly accomodate all that life will throw at you in advance. It is to do a disservice to everything around you.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    *pushes Mother Teresa off her pedestal*

    But yeah, you make a good point, Anonym, I think.

    @ Soti: A set of rules need not be narrow or systematic.

    Or actually, "code" might have been a bad choice.  Suppose I were to say "always do that which will, as far as you can see, further the most happiness and cause the least suffering".  Is that overly restricting?
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    *Sighs*

    No. Not overly restricting.... but I'd call that a goal, or an objective maybe... aim, perhaps.
    To stick the word "morality" on that would be redundant, as previously noted.
  • InsanityAddictInsanityAddict
    edited 2011-06-14 16:52:32
    Diet NEET
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    edited 2011-06-14 17:00:51
    Because you never know what you might see.
    So it is redundant, by your estimations.  OK then.  I would say it wasn't, since a goal connotes to me a set target rather than a behavioural standard which one aims to abide by as closely as possible, but there's little point in arguing about connotations as they can vary so greatly.

    But yeah, so, we are indeed using the words differently, therefore there is no point in us debating the concept when I am not advocating the concept you are opposing.  Isn't it nice to be on the same page?
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    I'm glad to say there is no fixed standard to my behaviour.  It adapts to fit the situations it finds itself in... at least in as much as I'm able. Also changes with my mood, but that is by the by. ALSO changes with my goals, which is more relevant.

    And I reckon I'm better off this way... or that way.... the ideal I'm aiming for, sans personal shortcomings. 
    I reckon everyone would be better off that way. All this talk about things being "right" or "wrong" is just oppressive.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    Eh, whatever floats your boat.

    I don't think it's oppressive.  Used to, but then I realised I still had principles, and that they didn't always relate directly to immediate desires.
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    There is a distinct sense of liberation to be found in consciously and deliberately breaking one's own principles.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    I'm all for trying new things, but I find that particular kind of behaviour usually leaves me feeling like shit, actually.
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    I'm not sure you've discerned the massive difference between intentionally and willfully violating your own principles.... and being made to do so by necessity or duress.  The latter feels like shit, but the former is highly liberating.

    But generally, not to spoil it for you deliberately or anything.... what is most liberating about it is the sense of personal mastery you have afterwards....   It is the realisation that while you keep your principles intact, you are compelled to adhere to them. Once you have willfully violated them once however, it is entirely your choice whether you wish to partake of them or not... and you can know that your actions and decisions are your own.

    For a more specific example.... anyone can say they would never kill and stick by it....  but doesn't it mean so much more for someone who has killed of their own free will to simply never choose to do so again?  It is a whole new level of freedom.

    I've done all sorts of things I hate... to prove to myself that it is my freedom to choose whether I do them or not, rather than fear or some other compulsion.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    I know I could kill somebody, I just don't feel the need.  Nor do I think the benefits of knowing I had violated my own principles could possibly outweigh the drawbacks of jailtime.
  • BobBob
    But what about all the delicious prison buttsex?
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    OH GOD.

    Yeah, I'd be fucked.  Literally and figuratively.
  • IanExMachinaIanExMachina
    I am Dr. Ned who is totally not Dr. Zed in disguise.
    ^ You'd have to cultivate an image of being 'mental' kill in a crazy way, wear their skin or whatever.
    When put in prison just act very creepy.
  • BobBob
    And then you get to be the one doing the penetrating! :D
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    ^^ I dunno, that's probably a turn-on for some people.
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    First thing you need to learn is how to make a shiv out of anything and everything....
    Then you make them. Many MANY shivs, piled high to the sky.
  • IanExMachinaIanExMachina
    edited 2011-06-14 17:38:43
    I am Dr. Ned who is totally not Dr. Zed in disguise.
    Become gay(or bi) and develop a rape fetish.
    Foolproof.
  • BobBob
    Doesn't that happen the moment you step foot inside a prison anyway?
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    Who knows. I couldn't handle being in prison anyway... butt-rape or no.
    It bothers me a lot.
    Wouldn't be so bad in a country with a death-sentence for stuff.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    edited 2011-06-14 17:54:39
    Because you never know what you might see.
    Well, I guess not living with the knowledge of being a worthless piece of shit would have its advantages, though personally under those circumstances I'd still rather not be killed.
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    Knowing we're all worthless isn't so bad, in and of itself.  I assure you.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    Knowing that life was pointless was liberating for a while until somebody pointed out to me that we could create our own meaning, which sent me straight into existential wangst.

    I'm cool with having no objective worth, but I'd rather not regard myself as scum.
  • BobBob
    Then don't.

    Duh.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    I don't.

    That was easy.
  • SotiCotoSotiCoto
    RE-ANIMATOR
    Well... it is all quite simple to me.

    That which is ... is inferior to that which is not.
    i.e.
    Things << Nothing.

    No further differentiation needed.
  • KhwarizmiKhwarizmi
    Because you never know what you might see.
    Good for you.  I like having a consciousness.
  • MyrmidonMyrmidon
    "is not."

    Contradiction.
Sign In or Register to comment.