Erik Hoogcarspel wrote:
>
> Op 09-apr-97 schreef Lubna Nadvi:
>
> >Hi,
>
> >I think there might be something to Freud's notion of Eros and Thanatos,
> >iow's as humans we posess "drives" that make us want to either kill or
> >preserve life, and it is the institutions of power that mould these drives
> >into moral acts or categories. The question is, why do we not kill ? Is
> >it because we have been taught by various institutions since childhood
> >(ie, religious, educational, parental etc), that we will be punished, if
> >we do something bad, so theres an element of fear in morality, or is it
> >because, the Kantian imperative is simply a matter of adhering to a sense
> >of moral responsibility, based on human dignity, respect etc.
>
> >I think that there is an essential human nature, but the only thing that is
> >essential and primordial about this nature is its potential to be
> >constructed into a particular kind of nature. The potential is the basis
> >for the manipulation. Which raises all sorts of questions
> >about the human individual. To what degree does s/he have a choice over
> >who or what s/he becomes. Are the institutions of power etc, all
> >encompassing.
>
> >Your thoughts ....???
>
>
no, you're the one who is asserting the extraordinary: that our species
killing one another is natural. so the burden of proof is on you.
therefore, the question is not why do we not kill, but rather why do we
kill.
feral children were never homicidal maniacs, yet no social institutions
had taught them not to kill.
and, come on! first of all, you are muddying the waters between idioms,
actualities and drives. let me ask you: have you ever REALLY wanted to
kill someone? i mean, have you ever wanted to pick up a hammer, and
REALLY wanted to smash in someone's skull? i don't believe that you
have. you mat have FRAMED you displeasure or aggression in those terms,
as do little children and adults, neither of who literally mean what
they say. and the fact that some people HAVE killed does not mean that
everyone WANTS to kill. only a true psychopath WANTS to kill. so
saying that you "want to kill" someone or that people kill WHEN they
assume that they HAVE to kill is not wanting, in a natural way, to
kill.
and yes, there is an essential human nature: that which we are engaging
in right now. let me ask you, could we communicate, as is our nature,
were we to kill one another? or do you simply not believe that humans
are social creatures? and if we are, which we are, then isn't killing
when something has gone awry? and if killing is part of being social,
then asking why do we not kill is like asking why do we not rape? or
maybe you believe that to rape is natural too?
well, i've picked on you for long enough. and i'm looking forward to a
response.
>
> Op 09-apr-97 schreef Lubna Nadvi:
>
> >Hi,
>
> >I think there might be something to Freud's notion of Eros and Thanatos,
> >iow's as humans we posess "drives" that make us want to either kill or
> >preserve life, and it is the institutions of power that mould these drives
> >into moral acts or categories. The question is, why do we not kill ? Is
> >it because we have been taught by various institutions since childhood
> >(ie, religious, educational, parental etc), that we will be punished, if
> >we do something bad, so theres an element of fear in morality, or is it
> >because, the Kantian imperative is simply a matter of adhering to a sense
> >of moral responsibility, based on human dignity, respect etc.
>
> >I think that there is an essential human nature, but the only thing that is
> >essential and primordial about this nature is its potential to be
> >constructed into a particular kind of nature. The potential is the basis
> >for the manipulation. Which raises all sorts of questions
> >about the human individual. To what degree does s/he have a choice over
> >who or what s/he becomes. Are the institutions of power etc, all
> >encompassing.
>
> >Your thoughts ....???
>
>
no, you're the one who is asserting the extraordinary: that our species
killing one another is natural. so the burden of proof is on you.
therefore, the question is not why do we not kill, but rather why do we
kill.
feral children were never homicidal maniacs, yet no social institutions
had taught them not to kill.
and, come on! first of all, you are muddying the waters between idioms,
actualities and drives. let me ask you: have you ever REALLY wanted to
kill someone? i mean, have you ever wanted to pick up a hammer, and
REALLY wanted to smash in someone's skull? i don't believe that you
have. you mat have FRAMED you displeasure or aggression in those terms,
as do little children and adults, neither of who literally mean what
they say. and the fact that some people HAVE killed does not mean that
everyone WANTS to kill. only a true psychopath WANTS to kill. so
saying that you "want to kill" someone or that people kill WHEN they
assume that they HAVE to kill is not wanting, in a natural way, to
kill.
and yes, there is an essential human nature: that which we are engaging
in right now. let me ask you, could we communicate, as is our nature,
were we to kill one another? or do you simply not believe that humans
are social creatures? and if we are, which we are, then isn't killing
when something has gone awry? and if killing is part of being social,
then asking why do we not kill is like asking why do we not rape? or
maybe you believe that to rape is natural too?
well, i've picked on you for long enough. and i'm looking forward to a
response.