Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

Nope, you didn't belittle anyone. I was actually referring to the web in general. Sorry for not making myself clearer. My bad.

I can't speak for "gateway behaviour" but it seems that there is a correlation between animal cruelty and serial killers. Then again, there is a stronger correlation with childhood abuse, and obviously many abused children grow up to be far more humane than their childhood abusers.

Stepping on ants is, at least, not torture, and way better than hassling mammals. For the ant, darkness would loom and then becomes total. I personally would rather die quickly under a giant's foot than, say, suffering severe degenerative diseases in an old person's home. Many don't think that insects have qualia, believing that they don't experience their lives. I think they would experience their lives but I have killed countless of them myself when they have invaded my kitchen, so I'm no saint.

Invasive, fast-breeding animals have a special ability to erode the empathy of even the most docile of humans!

[Thrylix]

I think the correlation between serial killers (or the psychopathy that underlies some of them) and animal cruelty is salient during a certain window of development, probably childhood to adolescence. Otherwise, psychopaths as far as I know are "fully formed" by the time they reach adulthood. I would hazard a guess that their personalities are pretty crystallized by mid 20s at the latest. I also think the correlation you mention becomes more problematic when the victims are mammals rather than ants. I would also be leery of someone who shot squirrels with a BB gun or burned a cat. Bugs seem to not matter. Like I said, most girls love it when I step on a spider for them... and why not? It gives me an opportunity to emphasize my machismo even if in a small way.

With that said, finding varying degrees of cruelty and destruction appealing on some level is natural to every guy I think, not just psychopaths. Men have a very palpable wish to dominate and oppress, expressed most comfortably under certain conditions. Physical advantage over opposition and lack of social consequences are main factors. being a lone giant among an entire population of tiny people whose tallest buildings don’t go higher than my waist would satisfy those conditions. I'd be an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again.

[Thrylix]

Interestingly, I wonder what the logic is of people condemn stepping on bugs while also making a hobby out of sport fishing. Some people catch fish only to remove the hook, which is not always easy and may cause significant injury, just to throw them back into the water with lethal consequences for the fish... assuming they hadn't suffocated out of water. People do this to "pass the time." It's a "hobby."

[Sy Borg]

I'm no fan of fishing too for the reasons you gave.

As for having a predatory drive - a killer instinct - it's all humans, not just men. Women have such tendencies squashed early on, while "boys will be boys". Look at the ferocity of some women in broken relationships, or what happens when children are at threat. Really, just about everything in nature needs to be fierce in its own way to survive. Societies suppress our wild aspects to maintain order, but it's all still there; "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy".

Being an anthropomorphic Godzilla seems unappealing. No clothes or shoes. No housing. No mod cons. No transport. No food!

[UniversalAlien]

How would you act if given absolute power over an alien civilization?
- Now that you ask Humans - It is not a problem you need concern yourselves with.

As it now stands Man has no definitive power, let alone absolute power, over his own civilization, or should I say his excuse for a civilization?

You, Human, you do not have to concern yourself with this problem {alien civilizations} now - maybe never?

You see until you can show us that you can control your own civilization, control it so we can call your species civilized, you will not have any control or significant influence over any other civilization.

Be careful of the ants you may step on - In our estimation you have not shown yourselves to be that much of a higher life form
- Ant colonies often have better organization and are often less belligerent.

[runaway]

I think the correlation between serial killers (or the psychopathy that underlies some of them) and animal cruelty is salient during a certain window of development, probably childhood to adolescence. Otherwise, psychopaths as far as I know are "fully formed" by the time they reach adulthood. I would hazard a guess that their personalities are pretty crystallized by mid 20s at the latest. I also think the correlation you mention becomes more problematic when the victims are mammals rather than ants. I would also be leery of someone who shot squirrels with a BB gun or burned a cat. Bugs seem to not matter. Like I said, most girls love it when I step on a spider for them... and why not? It gives me an opportunity to emphasize my machismo even if in a small way.

With that said, finding varying degrees of cruelty and destruction appealing on some level is natural to every guy I think, not just psychopaths. Men have a very palpable wish to dominate and oppress, expressed most comfortably under certain conditions. Physical advantage over opposition and lack of social consequences are main factors. being a lone giant among an entire population of tiny people whose tallest buildings don’t go higher than my waist would satisfy those conditions. I'd be an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again.

Interesting to say that you would be “an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again” yet you think it’s problematic when the victims are mammals. If I was the size of an ant would you crush me? I would be unable to stop you and there would be no consequences as I would be so small nobody would notice, but I would also still be a mammal, albeit a much smaller one.

[Thrylix]

How would you act if given absolute power over an alien civilization?
- Now that you ask Humans - It is not a problem you need concern yourselves with.

As it now stands Man has no definitive power, let alone absolute power, over his own civilization, or should I say his excuse for a civilization?

You, Human, you do not have to concern yourself with this problem {alien civilizations} now - maybe never?

You see until you can show us that you can control your own civilization, control it so we can call your species civilized, you will not have any control or significant influence over any other civilization.

The question was hypothetical.

Be careful of the ants you may step on - In our estimation you have not shown yourselves to be that much of a higher life form
- Ant colonies often have better organization and are often less belligerent.

Suggesting there are consequences to stepping on ants?

Ants are organized, yes. If you think ants are less belligerent than humans, then you are misinformed. I'm not going to lionize humans, but please shed any notion that ants are less belligerent. Their conflicts with other insects and with each other are more frequent and more lethal in scale. The outcome of their conflicts is total eradication/genocide of the other. Ants don't have PoWs.

[Thrylix]

Interesting to say that you would be “an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again” yet you think it’s problematic when the victims are mammals. If I was the size of an ant would you crush me? I would be unable to stop you and there would be no consequences as I would be so small nobody would notice, but I would also still be a mammal, albeit a much smaller one.

A miniature city could organize and accomplish things; they could be influenced and manipulated on a large scale. A single tiny person, much less a stranger, would be uninteresting and could provide nothing. There would be no point in doing anything to such a being.

[Sy Borg]

If you think ants are less belligerent than humans, then you are misinformed. I'm not going to lionize humans, but please shed any notion that ants are less belligerent. Their conflicts with other insects and with each other are more frequent and more lethal in scale. The outcome of their conflicts is total eradication/genocide of the other. Ants don't have PoWs. :)

Aside from slave-making ants ...

Every summer, blood-red ants of the species Formica sanguinea go on a mission to capture slaves. They infiltrate the nest of another ant species, like the peaceful F. fusca, assassinate the queen, and kidnap the pupae to raise as the next generation of slaves. Once the slaves hatch in their new nest, they appear none the wiser to their abduction, dutifully gathering food and defending the colony as if it were their own.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04 ... -snatchers

But yes, ants are basically fill the niche that humans do on small scale - omnivorous hunters and scavengers that terrorise all other insects, plus spiders, small reptiles and even small birds.

[Thrylix]

Interesting to say that you would be “an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again” yet you think it’s problematic when the victims are mammals.

Why would that be interesting? They're just ants. When I step on them, it's a spontaneous act. I don't go out looking for them. When I see them though, sometimes I just mess with them. To kill fish and mammals is pretty different. People who sport fish literally plan ahead, prepare for, and travel long distances to go and do something that they are fully aware will injure and can potentially kill. It's quite literally going out of your way to harm something. There is long term planning and time investment that goes into recreational fishing, there are gears turning in the person head, they actually look forward to it. Think about that... even if the people aren't cruel-minded, their commitment to an activity that hurts significantly more complex animals than bugs seems to be. What is the intent? I'm not saying bug squashers and sport fishermen don't sometimes overlap. But I'm critical of how one activity is embraced while the other one is written off as immature or cruel.

And that's to say nothing of the people who travel overseas to trophy hunt elephants or other intelligent animals. That elevates "going out of your way to kill something" to a whole new level. Some people have been critical of me because I admit to stepping on bugs for no real reason. But I wonder if they compared what I do to ants to other activities that for some reason get a stamp of approval.

[runaway]

Interesting to say that you would be “an evil kid crouching over an anthill all over again” yet you think it’s problematic when the victims are mammals.

Why would that be interesting? They're just ants. When I step on them, it's a spontaneous act. I don't go out looking for them. When I see them though, sometimes I just mess with them. To kill fish and mammals is pretty different. People who sport fish literally plan ahead, prepare for, and travel long distances to go and do something that they are fully aware will injure and can potentially kill. It's quite literally going out of your way to harm something. There is long term planning and time investment that goes into recreational fishing, there are gears turning in the person head, they actually look forward to it. Think about that... even if the people aren't cruel-minded, their commitment to an activity that hurts significantly more complex animals than bugs seems to be. What is the intent? I'm not saying bug squashers and sport fishermen don't sometimes overlap. But I'm critical of how one activity is embraced while the other one is written off as immature or cruel.

And that's to say nothing of the people who travel overseas to trophy hunt elephants or other intelligent animals. That elevates "going out of your way to kill something" to a whole new level. Some people have been critical of me because I admit to stepping on bugs for no real reason. But I wonder if they compared what I do to ants to other activities that for some reason get a stamp of approval.

The point I was making was that you have no problem being a giant and stomping on tiny humans yet you are against animals, even those much less complex than humans, being harmed and I don’t know why that is.

[Sy Borg]

Because there's too many of us and not enough of most other species.

[Tegularius]

I would leave it alone. Just because I had absolute power does not cause or obligate me to use any of it. I'd call that my Prime Directive. Why should power always be used against those less powerful? Power is best applied by those who don't possess any of the vulgar ambitions humans normally possess to rule and force others. An alien civilization is none of my business if it doesn't intrude in mine. It's disgusting that we haven't given other creatures on this planet the same consideration.

[Thrylix]

Because there's too many of us and not enough of most other species.

That's kind of what I mean. Trophy hunters are celebrated: Super rich men, such as the adult children of Donald Trump, who literally fly overseas and pay tens of thousands of dollars to corrupt foreign government bureaucrats so they can obtain permits to kill sometimes endangered animals.

These guys receive congratulations...As I suggested above in the post, it takes the expression "going out of your way to kill something" to a whole new level. Even still, there are likely people who disapprove of me stepping on ants for no reason even though they will never be endangered...but would condone (or perhaps even celebrate) the killing of the above mammals. The two pictured above have even kill elephants, rhinoceroses, and rare species of mountain goats. Makes you think.

[Thrylix]

I would leave it alone. Just because I had absolute power does not cause or obligate me to use any of it. I'd call that my Prime Directive. Why should power always be used against those less powerful?

Because it can be! That is part of the appeal -- at least to me. Using power on the similarly powerful is likely to fall flat.

Power is best applied by those who don't possess any of the vulgar ambitions humans normally possess to rule and force others. An alien civilization is none of my business if it doesn't intrude in mine.

The tiny alien civilization not intruding would sort of be irrelevant because they couldn't if they wanted to. What matters is whether you decide to intrude upon theirs and in what manner. Imagine today how satisfying it would if you had the power to instantly crush or cow anybody who pissed you off. Any friend who insulted you, any rival you've ever had; cowering at the sight of you and who you could obliterate under one fingertip or add to a tiny bottle of personal slaves inside your pocket.