In a message dated 97-04-19 05:53:09 EDT, lobster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mitchell
wilson) writes:
<< child has ever been reported to be the savage killer that you claim
>people naturally are. >>
be careful. i NEVER said people are naturally savage killers. i'm saying
that it's possible that to not kill is a societal norm, not a natural one.
second, why do you assume all killing to be savage? we're never going to
agree, but i must say that you are forming your argumnet around some
assumptions or premises that you consider to be a priori.
regrarding habitus, i never agreed with your first premise that killing is a
disposition of habitus, so my conclusion is sound. i still can't believe that
you are boldly asserting that absolutely no human that ever existed in the
history of humankind has ever had the drive to kill. if you admit that there
is the possibility of some ever having this drive, you've defeated your own
argument. now, if you do assert that no human ever has had a natural drive to
kill, again I say prove it. there is no way you can. your premise is an
assumption at best. prove to me (or anyone) that 10,000 years ago there was
no human with a natural urge to kill.
furthermore, i am saying that it is possible that humans at one pointmight
have had to be inculcated to not kill. i do know what inculcate means, i also
what society means. certain societal natures don't need to be taught to every
new individual that enters the world. once something becomes ideology, it is
part of the socialization proicess and is not always explicit and need not be
reintroduced to everyone.
again, i'm done with this line, but you must be careful not to present as
fact certain beliefs you have about the world. certainly you believe them to
be fact, but that doesn't make them true in every possible world. how many
people believe most religious teaching to be fact, and yet most of us see the
false premises in them.
john
solipsist9@xxxxxxx
wilson) writes:
<< child has ever been reported to be the savage killer that you claim
>people naturally are. >>
be careful. i NEVER said people are naturally savage killers. i'm saying
that it's possible that to not kill is a societal norm, not a natural one.
second, why do you assume all killing to be savage? we're never going to
agree, but i must say that you are forming your argumnet around some
assumptions or premises that you consider to be a priori.
regrarding habitus, i never agreed with your first premise that killing is a
disposition of habitus, so my conclusion is sound. i still can't believe that
you are boldly asserting that absolutely no human that ever existed in the
history of humankind has ever had the drive to kill. if you admit that there
is the possibility of some ever having this drive, you've defeated your own
argument. now, if you do assert that no human ever has had a natural drive to
kill, again I say prove it. there is no way you can. your premise is an
assumption at best. prove to me (or anyone) that 10,000 years ago there was
no human with a natural urge to kill.
furthermore, i am saying that it is possible that humans at one pointmight
have had to be inculcated to not kill. i do know what inculcate means, i also
what society means. certain societal natures don't need to be taught to every
new individual that enters the world. once something becomes ideology, it is
part of the socialization proicess and is not always explicit and need not be
reintroduced to everyone.
again, i'm done with this line, but you must be careful not to present as
fact certain beliefs you have about the world. certainly you believe them to
be fact, but that doesn't make them true in every possible world. how many
people believe most religious teaching to be fact, and yet most of us see the
false premises in them.
john
solipsist9@xxxxxxx