In Case You Still Had Any Faith in Humanity

[Sigmund]

Im going to have to repectfully disagree @telescopes

I dont think people engaging in terrible behaviors have a clue about humanism. They typically believe in nothing. they are not religious, they are not humanists, they typically have no idealogy at all. They arent even nihilists. Any of those idealogical constructs are foreign to them. They are simply lost, confused, and most often they are dim.

I think these levels of crime occur from a general break down in society that begins in the absence of any real ideology. They are beyond our understanding becuase most of us have some frame of reference...be it religous, moral or humainiarian.

I worked for years in correctional settings. Perps are not evil....at least few of them are. They are simply lost, confused and outside the range of functioning of humans that are socialized. Im not suggesting we pitty them. Behind bars for some is the best place for everyone. Im only stating that the ideaology that you think they hold, or gave birth to them is not as you are presuming. If you asked most of them if they belived in god they would say yes. However, they fail to function within their own belief systems. Not becuase they are evil, but becuase they are failures...failures in so many ways that its difficult for functioning humans to grasp.

 

[sablebrush52]

I don't know if it's the pollution in the air we breathe or in the water we drink but in my nearly 63 years on this earth I have witnessed a slow but very definite decline in humanity and fragmentation of society in general.

Jay.

I dunno, Jay. Seems to me that history is strewn with high ideals brought down with shattering blows and a constant struggle between people who want freedom and those who want an authority to lead them, and struggle over points in between.

Humans are just vessels of instability. I'm an idiot because I believe in certain principles and strive to practice them as best as I understand them in a world largely populated by people with no principles, except whatever they briefly adopt because they think it benefits them at that moment, as in highly situational ethics or morals.

We've accepted powerful tools, such as the Internet, whose ramifications stretch far beyond our comprehension. Perhaps the ability for countless voices to barrage you 24/7 has something to do with the fragmentation to which you allude.

The only true constant I've seen in all of this is the following, and it's at the center of all human strife: People are loath to give up an unearned advantage.

 

[K.E. Powell]

Since everyone is weighing in on the nature of our species apparent moral decline, I will offer my own take.

People are very good at finding whatever it is they are truly looking for. If one is wanting reasons to be cynical and misanthropic, then they will find them. If one is wanting reasons to be hopeful and humane, then they will find them. The nearly infinite variety of human experience in our species's history furnishes ample supply of all things virtuous and vicious.

At the risk of sounding ironic and contradictory, I think what we are not good at is accepting the complexity of our world and our experience within it. We try to simplify such by trying to come up comforting narratives or erecting grand theories on what human nature is. But the fact of the matter is we are grossly overwhelmed by the task of making sense of ourselves. To quote Kierkegaard, "Life must be lived going forwards, but it is understood by thinking backwards."

But make sense we must. "And so it goes."

 

[mawnansmiff]

We've accepted powerful tools, such as the Internet, whose ramifications stretch far beyond our comprehension.

Indeed we have.

Something that had/has enormous potential for the betterment of all mankind has been turned against the very people it was/is supposed to benefit by those who crave control and power over the masses.

That genie is well out of the bottle now and I genuinely fear deeply for my children and grandchildren.

Jay.

 

[Sigmund]

The founders and defenders of free speech never had in their imaginiation the internet and anti social media. I wonder I wonder what their thoughts would be.

 

[sablebrush52]

That genie is well out of the bottle now and I genuinely fear deeply for my children and grandchildren.

Yep. Such a tool requires critical thinking, the ability to analyze and dissect arguments, solve problems, etc and a very small percentage of the population has the physiological capacity to think critically, with estimates running from a high of 20% to a low of 4%.

So basically it comes down to who has the better skills for manipulating the populace.

In other words, we're screwed.

 

[Chasing Embers]

Something that had/has enormous potential for the betterment of all mankind has been turned against the very people it was/is supposed to benefit by those who crave control and power over the masses.

It allows for easy answers and mostly killed the desire for looking for answers for one's self. Some even believe the false answers just because they are on the internet. It also allowed for the mentally deficient to find their flock. Idiocracy was a prophetic movie.

 

[anotherbob]

What really strikes me about it is the transit cop who just strolls by...unless there is some explanation for why he didn't even attempt to do anything...but it's hard to imagine what that would be.

Two ways to look at that. We are talking about the same police force that let the public handle the guy that went on a stabbing rampage in the subway. And don't forget that it was a while ago that the Supreme court basically said the police have zero obligation to protect you. I have to wonder too what cadets they put on transit. I certainly get the impression that it's not where they send their best and that their job is mainly to catch kids that steal rides and to be a visible presence.
Wait till you hear about some of the stuff that happens in small towns.

 

[anotherbob]

When I was younger, I scoffed at the idea that secular humanism was a “thing”. I was wrong. It is an ideology that places our core Id and ego at the center of all things. The idea that we are subservient to anything “higher” than ourselves leaves most humans Disconnected from a sense of a higher and more Nobel guidance. We are taught that love immenates from within us and that our own feelings are as sacred and as important - a primary source of our own truth. It all goes downhill from there.

I have to disagree with your sentiment. I have seen it work as well and as poorly as any other religious ideology. A bad person will find a way to justify their badness and be willing to bend whatever truth they can. And if there is nothing but our biology and nature then we came up with sacred and also morality and ethics must be coded and imbedded in us. Either way it's still "grace" and people make that choice on their own. If they chose to honor the sacred or be debased. Just my two cents but I can't agree with it. Now the overly materialistic and fundamentally nhilistic outlook that permeates so much of modern life....

 

[anotherbob]

Yep. Such a tool requires critical thinking, the ability to analyze and dissect arguments, solve problems, etc and a very small percentage of the population has the physiological capacity to think critically, with estimates running from a high of 20% to a low of 4%.

So basically it comes down to who has the better skills for manipulating the populace.

In other words, we're screwed.

life has always been pretty nasty. Back in the day they had these things called Vikings. They did stuff so bad and brutal other people thought we must have pissed off God big time to even met these guys.

 

[georged]

Humans are living in an environment that is completely different than what they were designed to live in.

The end.

Upright bipedal hunter-gatherers who procured food with thrown rocks, pointy sticks, sneakiness, ruthlessness, planning, and treachery.

Every detail of our development was in response to that environment over millions of years.

Then, in a few dozen human lifespans of time (and only then in some places), the "human interface portion" of that environment changed into something completely different.

Tools were invented and refined in a fractal expansion that resulted in nuclear power plants, interplanetary travel, DNA splicing, and quantum manipulation.

The NEED to fight for territory, to deceive and be ruthless, to steal, lie, and cheat became obsolete virtually overnight.

But our hardwiring still causes us to "behave like animals"...

Because that's what we are.

 

[hoosierpipeguy]

What really strikes me about it is the transit cop who just strolls by...unless there is some explanation for why he didn't even attempt to do anything...but it's hard to imagine what that would be.

I have zero confidence in the accuracy of the reporting.

 

[telescopes]

I have to disagree with your sentiment. I have seen it work as well and as poorly as any other religious ideology. A bad person will find a way to justify their badness and be willing to bend whatever truth they can. And if there is nothing but our biology and nature then we came up with sacred and also morality and ethics must be coded and imbedded in us. Either way it's still "grace" and people make that choice on their own. If they chose to honor the sacred or be debased. Just my two cents but I can't agree with it. Now the overly materialistic and fundamentally nhilistic outlook that permeates so much of modern life....

It's easy to disagree until one finds themselves working in the education system. What we teach in our school system is akin to a religion, but it is a religion none the less because it poses a certain orthodoxy - each person is the center of their own universe and each person must be truthful to themselves. Of course, being truthful is juxtaposed to the mentality of being a victim, not owning accountability for ones own actions, etc, etc. Yes, bad people can justify their behavior no matter what they say they believe or whatever group they belong to, but the era of secular humanism - and I think that is what some might be referring to in terms of disagreement - proposes that humans are the center of moralism and self-determination. I should add that no where did I bring up religion as the solution. Yes, I referred to having accountability to something higher than ones self, but that can be taken a good many ways.

I am only wrong until one takes the time to read the approved curriculum that is mandated to be taught to our children. Once you read it, you can't unsee it. But I suppose mine is only one observation and I welcome alternative view points. Thank you.

 

[georged]

I have zero confidence in the accuracy of the reporting.

It was caught on film by several people from several angles.

The transit cop indeed gave a glance and kept going.

 

[K.E. Powell]

Critical thinking is important, but pointing to people's general inability or unwillingness to exercise it as the cause of human discord is too neat an answer. There are at least two reasons for this.

First, critical thinking is a skill, and like all skills, it is something that must be taught and practiced to be employed effectively. And like all skills, not everyone has the same natural capacity for it. Most human beings, for example, can throw a ball. A person who trains themselves to throw a ball well will likely eventually be able to do so better than most of her contemporaries. But not everyone, regardless of effort, can be Greg Maddux. In fact, few can. And the discipline needed to be able to constantly be objective and rational is great. In short, it is not reasonable, as it were, to expect everyone to be rational or capable of being so.

Second, critical thinking is a tool. And like any tool, it can be employed for both good and bad ends. A person can use critical thinking correctly and still come to false conclusions, or worse, use their reasoning to come to conclusions they were already inclined to agree with in the first place. There are some people who will do heinous things for their own sake, but for most people, if they are to commit to a great harm or evil, they must rationalize it, either by convincing themselves initially of the justice of their cause or by post-hoc justifications. Indeed, here we are talking about a news story where many of the facts and information necessary to have an informed opinion are currently not available to us, yet many have already taken this as evidence for their world view.

To be clear, I am not chastising anyone here; the actions taken by the perpetrator in that video are shocking and provoke very strong reactions. You would have to be very lacking in empathy and rational thinking both to not be disgusted by them. But I cannot be help but be skeptical of any prescription for human flourishing that relies too heavily on reason. Reason is a necessary but not sufficient thing for our flourishing.

 

[Richmond B. Funkenhouser]

 

[Chasing Embers]

The more I see, the happier that I am that the end of the road is in sight.

 

[warren]

Critical thinking simply requires too much effort for many. Also, some equate "critical thinking" with searching for validation of already formed viewpoints.

You are shocked by the event. I can't even raise an eyebrow. I've been involved in worse events. Nothing one human does to another surprises me. Such occurrences are simply a part of life. Society decided some years ago that providing for the public's safety through incarceration and/or involuntary commitment was simply more than it wished to pay for. What followed was simply logical and to be expected.

At some point, perhaps, the voting public will reach a level of intolerance and agree to pay the costs of public safety. I doubt that will ever happen though, wringing of hands and vocal denouncement, perhaps a parade protesting the level of public protection, maybe a gathering of candle carrying sympathizers will suffice. Many folk love to decry such abhorrent behavior. Such is easier, cheaper and, well ... an awful lot of people prefer to believe in the "innate goodness of man." If such goodness existed we would not need laws and the constrictions many religions put on their followers.

or worse, use their reasoning to come to conclusions they were already inclined to agree with in the first place.

I'd hardly call that critical thinking.

 

[jpberg]

I just stopped by to say I’m not going say anything.

 

[georged]

I just stopped by to say I’m not going say anything.

But... but... You just did.

(Are you trying to flush out the board's AI invaders by frying their brains with recursive errors?)