Whats your view on human nature

[DeletedUser19483]

Just to start new discussion, I noticed no one thinks that they're cold. Why's that?

 

[Vergazi]

Just to start new discussion, I noticed no one thinks that they're cold. Why's that?

Perhaps your sample of the population is too small or perhaps a whole person is made up of all of these aspects and they cannot reduce themselves to a mere two traits, especially if one or more of them is a negative one. There are arguably more than one "self". There is the self that is one's own perception, then there is the self that is each other person's perception, then there is the self that society perceives, etc. Not to get off-topic unnecessarily, but there is a pretty good anime series that kinda tackles these questions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon_Genesis_Evangelion

 

[DeletedUser20951]

Just to start new discussion, I noticed no one thinks that they're cold. Why's that?

If I were to hazard a guess, it would be that "cold" suggests "unfeeling", and while many may seem cold to others, very few have significantly flattened emotions.

Now, if "callous" had been an option, I likely would have picked it over "whimsical".

And, since it's somewhat related, I didn't choose "calculating" because it indicates premeditation to me. Despite my intentional affectation of mannerisms, I don't plot to act a certain way, but wing it, improvise, as necessary, depending on the circumstances I run into. Giving a bunch of thought to what may or may not happen is too much like worrying for my taste, and I find worry to be unpleasant and ultimately useless, so I avoid the practice as much as possible.

 

[DeletedUser19483]

I don't plot to act a certain way, but wing it, improvise, as necessary, depending on the circumstances I run into. Giving a bunch of thought to what may or may not happen is too much like worrying for my taste, and I find worry to be unpleasant and ultimately useless, so I avoid the practice as much as possible.

I end up just going with the flow(hacks up blood from the cheesy line) I find whenever I make a plan if it doesn't go perfectly........um.........I sorta go into a control freak rage..........which ends up with me destroying a plan and making a new one..............THAT'S RIGHT (put random name here) MY PLAN WAS BETTER THAN YOURS(mad laughter and twitches)

 

[DeletedUser20951]

I'm currently contemplating the nature of personality flaws, something that everybody has, yet are handled in myriad ways for both self and others, with the most common being the obvious hypocritical stance. I find them much more interesting than virtues, as they reveal much more about an individual, and are often of greater entertainment value. Like any sort of personal preference, there are some I am fond of and some I loath, while believing each has its place as long as the consequences are accepted. Those for whom subtext flies over their heads with alacrity and they respond with poignant earnestness are absolutely adorable to me, even while I tend to have respect for people who are self-aware and unrepentant for their mulishness, and are examples of faults I hold in esteem.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

A Brief Treatise on the Nature of Confidence
​

Or as I like to call it, arrogance (the two terms are fairly synonymous in my mind). The rise of what I hope to be the zenith of social media has brought about a sort of crisis of anxiety in the general populace, a heightened sense of our own actions being ruthlessly judged by outside forces, but I believe it to merely be a matter of increased feedback of said judgment. We all judge everything we encounter, even if it's only to decide that the subject is not of any significance to provoke an opinion. In the online realm, a relatively new, but extensively documented, phenomenon is how we often lack consequences of particular worth for stating whatever impulsive commentary rattles around in our braincages, yet this protection is undermined by a human being's endless ability to assign overblown importance to the reception of self. In real life, we are bound by the very fact of our physicality, where the stakes are much higher, but the weight of approval is comparable.

Now, what does it take to reject the dissolution of self-esteem in both cases?

Of course, there is the obvious faked assurance, and while that can certainly be effective, it wears down the performer, rarely can be sustained, usually falls apart when stressed, and I don't consider it to be true confidence. There are many who ascribe more competence to their skills than is actually present, a common overestimation made. Some lucky souls are simply happily oblivious to, or disaffected with, the rat race of garnering outside validation, whether through fortunate circumstance or neural wiring, and are content with themselves and life. Still others recognize the game, play it to an extent, but realize that the vast majority of interactions, how one is regarded, is of limited seriousness and import, assuming your social needs are basically nonexistent.

In conclusion, as I can only accurately speak for myself, I am not arrogant due to outstanding expertise (I'm unremarkably average or below average in almost all respects), but because, in most situations, next to nothing can result from the manner in which I behave that would have a notable negative impact on my livelihood and mental peace, so I inhabit a, perhaps unhealthy, sphere of nearly total surety that can be insufferable to others.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

Verbosity Versus Concision, An Undefinitive Rambling​

​

I love being overly wordy. It brings me great joy to monkey around with syntax, attempt (and usually fail) to use unconventional words in place of their more common synonyms, like fitting pieces into a puzzle. What I write in this thread is a shining example of that, an exercise in nonsense solely for my own entertainment, to see how I fare without much deep contemplation or a word processor with decent grammar checking to correct my efforts, but I cannot adequately describe how much hatred I hold for the method when it comes to literature. I won't deny the brilliance of Tolkien and my significant adoration for the plot, lore, and characters he created, but reading the actual books is akin to injecting a painfully boring poison into your bloodstream that corrodes any sense of the meaning of fun and enjoyment. Rice is another author who stands out, in King's words referring to himself, as "having diarrhea of the word processor", but I would rather read one of his works any day over hers, and I couldn't stomach those she spewed out after about the midway mark of The Vampire Chronicles. This is not to say that it never has a place, elaborate storytelling, descriptions, and the like; it does when it is not filler meant to obscure the fact that nothing is happening, that there is no substance other than showing how much you worship your own phrasing and going into depth about details no one but yourself cares about.

Brevity, on the other hand, I have limitless respect for, if it conveys the necessary information in a way that is easy to follow. I have a strong belief that those who cannot explain a concept in straightforward terms is either ignorant of the matter they are discussing or are purposely seeking to confuse their audience (I have a penchant for employing this technique to antagonize people who annoy me when I feel like toying with them). I think the style shows innate concern for the recipient over that of the self, as well, since it strives to be provide coherency without a gratuitous waste of time.

(alternate title adjusted to properly express egocentricity: How to Tell When I am Authentically Engaged in a Topic)

PS: Poetry manages to combine elements from both in an unholy union that inflicts a strange purgatory upon any with the misfortune to stumble into its grasp, and I've yet to read a poem that didn't immediately cause an intense compulsion to destroy whatever it is engraved on, aside from the charming tales of that guy from Nantucket.

(Gods damn it all! I will start to remember to change the format before I hit post! I SWEAR ON MY QUESTIONABLE HONOR)

 

[DeletedUser22374]

Human nature is a front to the baser truths that are commonly misunderstood questions each asks of themselves sometimes in their lives. Is this it? Where does it lead to? Who am i? Pending on how you were raised and how truthfully you answer these type of questions realistically could define your nature. In many cases people will defer or not want to go deep because that means introspection of self where in you define or garner insight as to your own nature ..

 

[DeletedUser]

Oh, bugger all this for a lark.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

In many cases people will defer or not want to go deep because that means introspection of self where in you define or garner insight as to your own nature ..

People like this frustrate me to no end. Not knowing yourself doesn't change truths you'd like to deny, but it does make it nigh impossible to change, if you wish, not even being aware of where the problem originates. I believe understanding why you do things is perhaps the greatest strength you can develop. Ah, and we all have 'good' and 'bad' traits, they are nothing to be ashamed off, but if the havoc they wreak is not what you can endure, or want to endure, you often can train yourself to behave in a different manner... Just keep smacking yourself with a rolled-up newspaper when you mess up until you stop or at least cut back on frequency. Works like a charm. *nods sagely*

Oh, bugger all this for a lark.

Oops... I, uh, thought everybody was in on the joke? You know, accessories to my late-night armchair philosophical and psychological typing practice? MY SCREAMINGS INTO THE VOID? No? My bad.

*wanders back in from setting production* If it's any consolation, I do mean everything I say. My lying of choice is either by omission, deflection, seeming to answer a question without actually providing an answer, and faked enthusiasm (I don't feel much besides amusement and annoyance).

 

[DeletedUser20951]

A Dissertation on Dishonesty
​

I don't morally object to those who speak lies that cause no harm, but I do find it reprehensible from a logically standpoint, and remain undecided on whether my mannerisms and obfuscation are a different son of another mother. Regardless, it doesn't prickle my conscience the slightest bit, and I will move on to what does, which is outright false statements. My root disapproval of the practice stems from the sheer complication untruths cause to personal logistics. Repetition can plant any information in the brain and mislabel it as 'fact', and I wish to be far away from those who spread myth, to lessen the amount of time I am forced to waste in order to deprogram myself. Then there is the common knowledge that, more often than not, you will eventually be caught in a lie, and this can have significant fallout. I prefer not to take unnecessary risks, and I do believe that lying is unnecessary, unless you or others are faced with death or injury, while I vary, depending on the exact set of circumstances, on whether I feel lying to keep your occupation or home is justified. Many of whom who lie to protect from the later have done something to deserve to be fired or evicted, and I see it as appropriate consequences for abhorrent actions when they are found out. Now, I have committed horrible offenses in my life and was never ashamed, even though I cursed what I wrought in retaliation at times, so it's possible I can't actually experience shame, but I still rigorously avoid doing or saying anything I would be uncomfortable with all and sundry being aware of (this also fuels my absurd self-confidence). Ah, and there is the effort in trying to maintain deceit, as well, which has always seemed like too much bother.

TLDR: It's easier not to lie.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

a different son of another mother

Oh Jesus Christ, I'm too tired for thinking. Had to look up my own wordplay on a saying because the original eluded me and I realized that, while I knew what I intended to mean with it, I didn't actually know what it meant. *makes wounded animal noises* I don't hike enough mountains to hike as much mountain as I did today. Yesterday. Whatever. N/A out.

 

[DeletedUser19483]

I've always been intrigued, amused, confused by whole human right/good and wrong/evil conundrum, and I had the good luck of finding one of my old notebooks I wrote all kinds of edgy-Linkin Park-loving-Green Day-vibing-Disturbed-worshipper stuff in. So hang on to your seats kids we're going down memory road...(I did add some commentary and changed a few things cuz it was really edgy before I posted this)

Ever since I could understand the fascinating world of literature I had read about the whole Good vs Evil trope. Bad guy does bad thing, good guy stops bad guy, and everyone gets their happily ever after.......besides the bad guy. This ingrained in my head, be good because the good guy wins. But one day I was introduced to a new concept......the bad guy winning, then after that the hero being turned into the villian. I was a innocent(hacks up blood) six year old child that didn't understand this and simply forgot it as nothing but literary trash for as long as I could......I made it till I stumbled across a book about Greek Mythology. I was seven when I read an unchild friendly-detailed version of greek mythology and can I just say that boy. But anyway this spark my memory of the books I head read before. I was feeling my faith in the world shaking and I, like an untamed animal tore through books of all types. Lucky me that my family has very little rules regarding reading. If you can read it then go ahead. Using my families rule I came upon books of what is now my all time favorite subject.......History. Ooooh there is no better way to stay out of prison and rip a child's innocents away then making them read about history with the parental filters taken off. What I read boggled my seven year old mind.....how? How could humans treat each other like that? How? The question hounded me on and on. I developed a cynical sarcastic attitude that gave the clear message, "(bad word here) off" I delved deeper into the history of the worlds greatest killers, homosapiens. The more I found out the less I believed in the childish, Good guys will win, way of thinking. I started thinking......wish I could duel someone to the death like the old days. I of course up to this time was a energetic go getter so I........uh tweaked my rep on the old school yard. I went from energetic go getter to hyper crazy spaz who couldn't take (bad word here) seriously. I mastered this over the years and now it's me you hear about and see(not like....see see you know....cuz this is online and stuff....) When I was eight the final nail in the coffin of my belief in human humanity was placed and the coffin was burned to ash. My parents started listening to the news with me with them. Now ever since I was younger than eight all my parents would play in the car was music and junk but never news. I got to get an earful of all of the worlds problems and what's a kid to do right? My edgy I don't give a (bad word here) attitude grew. Lucky me I have a bunch of positive everything is awesome friends that tell me that the glass is gone because they got bored with my moping about it. But I did learn a good lesson out of everything.(wow after letting out so much edgynes to random people on the internet I can be happy and carefree for so long now) The lesson I learned was....Humans as much as they want the world to be a great Good vs Evil were all the lines are defined and drawn, subconsciously or consciously know that the world isn't like that. The Good guy loses. The bad guy wins. A lot of the time there is no Good guy or Bad guy. There is just two guys equal shades of grey that are gonna try to kill each other so they can write the story how they want to. As history progresses and more things are learned social norms are going to change. What is good now could be evil later. What is evil later could be good then. Humans will never be able to find the happiness at the end of the (bad word here) rainbow of life until they realize that there is no hero out there looking out for them. So make sure you have goo....no great friends and stick with them till the bitter end. Because this is the only way one will ever be able to flip off the world.

END
​

I swear I'm not this edgy anymore. Shoot I also swear that I wrote this up in a contest with my friend......what we do for money right....right? Where are you guys going? *starts chasing fleeing mob* GET BACK HERE!!!!!

 

[DeletedUser]

Have you ever seen "Schindler's List", or "Valkyrie"?

True horror is not found in literary fiction. It is found in historical fact. The real monsters in this world are the humans who choose to do evil, fully cognizant of what they are doing.

 

[DeletedUser]

@Nonchalant Antipathy "Oh, bugger all this for a lark" is a reference to Good Omens. Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett, 1990. One of the greatest books I've ever read.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

confused by whole human right/good and wrong/evil conundrum

Until I learned that the brain takes a whole slew of shortcuts in order to free up computing power to devote to new stimuli, stereotyping and even filling in information that isn't actually present and the like, this confused me, as well. Luckily, I've grown to being able to fight off the urge when I want to in most cases, since I enjoy contemplating complications, hypocrisy in motivations versus reality.

I was seven

That's about the age I realized everybody/everything dies, there is no afterlife, and life itself has no meaning except what you give it. Perception shapes what is real, not the other way around.

If you can read it then go ahead

Same, although it was more a lack of parental oversight than anything. *cackles*

Humans as much as they want the world to be a great Good vs Evil were all the lines are defined and drawn, subconsciously or consciously know that the world isn't like that. The Good guy loses. The bad guy wins. A lot of the time there is no Good guy or Bad guy. There is just two guys equal shades of grey that are gonna try to kill each other so they can write the story how they want to.

Believing things happen for a reason is highly comforting, granting a sense of control when there is none or very little. I'm a wee bit envious of those who can happily bop through the world with such ignorance, despite all the evidence to the contrary, but feel no small amount of disdain towards them if they choose to preach at me.

Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett, 1990.

I should really check out the works of both authors; heard a lot about 'em, which is part of my resistance, as I usually don't want to read or watch something due to falling prey to hyperbole backlash. Regardless, since most quotes fly over my head, I treat even the ones I recognize, in the majority of instances, as being used to mirror a quoter's sentiment.

 

[DeletedUser]

there is no afterlife

In your belief; my belief differs. And that's alright.

 

[DeletedUser20951]

"Smack an adult and you’re a criminal. Beat a child and it’s “discipline.” This, despite the fact that science has determined corporal punishment to be harmful and ineffective.

“We have a double standard for children,” said Elizabeth T. Gershoff, a professor of human development and family sciences at The University of Texas at Austin. “Right now, they do not have equal protection under the law.”

In 2016, Gershoff co-authored a meta-analysis of over 50 years of research on spanking. It found that even mild spanking can cause significant harm, including increased aggression, mental health problems, anti-social behavior and cognitive difficulties."

https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article230224029.html#storylink=mainstage_card5
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article230224029.html#storylink=mainstage_card5
I find the continued, pervasive justification of spanking and other similar punishments disgusting. Don't care one whittle whether someone's daddy and mama did so to them, at its core, it is most often a rush of instant gratification at the expense of a minor that is fully accepted in numerous cultures. I also feel the same way about yelling for intimidation purposes; unless you are about to get into, or are in, a physical altercation, keep your damn voice down. Both behaviors are a symptom of immaturity, ignorance, and/or a lack of self-regulation, and nobody else should have to pay for this particular flaw, especially not children or pets (I treat kids and animals the same, only I am more fond of one than the other. GUESS WHICH).

 

[DeletedUser19483]

I treat kids and animals the same, only I am more fond of one than the other. GUESS WHICH).

ummmm.......going off your past history and what I can make out of your attitude, I would have to say you treat the sharp objects better......oh wait that's not an option. Shoot! Just when I thought I had it all figured out. Oh well then I would have to say *flips coin* heads its animals, tails it's kids. *coin lands perfectly balanced on its edge* (bad word here) WAIT! I just remembered, humans are animals soooo what's your definition of an animal good Nonchalant?

 

[DeletedUser20951]

humans are animals soooo what's your definition of an animal

I almost went back and clarified that as "two-legged creatures", because, yes, humans are animals, too, but I didn't want to fact check my own statement on whether I dislike all two-legged creatures. XD

treat the sharp objects better

You win on the merit of choosing a correct new option, though, with this. My stabby knife is pleased. PLEASED.