War is not part of human nature

[Horn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tHZ6u6lHbY

[Book]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51YZDPH135L._SL500_AA300_.jpg

Sure it is.

::)

[iOWNme]

Im skeptical of anything UNESCO puts out, but i tagged this for later viewing....

[EE_]

violence is a part of human nature, so war must be too

In the news today


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQWb7NCUTOk

[osoab]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjer4fTUA-I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjer4fTUA-I

I do not give merit to anything that UNESCO puts out.

[Horn]

Im skeptical of anything UNESCO puts out, but i tagged this for later viewing....

Of course there maybe a secondary subplot of anything within the educational system.

The counter would be that peace should not be either than.

Where the video ended at Authoritarianism being number one in the COW, i thought it fitting for all the authorities around here lately. :)

[StreetsOfGold]

The final authority on wars is God and he told you where they come from

James 4:1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
James 4:2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.

The ROOT cause of EVERY war comes from someone wanting something that they don't have.

The simple answers are usually the correct answers.

[DMac]

violence is a part of human nature, so war must be too

In the news today


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQWb7NCUTOk


Holy crap EE, that clip got my BP up a dozen points!

I know this sort of thing used to happen when I was a kid also, lucky for me I had a big brother. That poor kid. :/

[Hatha Sunahara]

Many years ago i was a fan of Marvin Harris who was a cultural anthropologist that wrote a lot of books. One of his books was called Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches in which he explained a lot of things about human cultures and why people do things. War was one of the things he explained. There is some parallel between what David Adams says in the video(s) in the OP and what Harris covered in his book. You can read a review of Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches here:

http://endofcapitalism.com/2009/06/20/review-of-cows-pigs-wars-and-witches-the-riddles-of-culture/

War is a tool of the elite to achieve their goals of controlling the rest of us. It is absolutely not inherent in human nature.

I didn't have to read any books or watch any videos to come to this conclusion. I came to this conclusion simply by watching people. Most people I know would prefer to not be a part of any war. They go because they do not want to social ostracism the elite impose on them for being pacifists. War is a tool of the elite, primarily for control over the rest of humanity.

I think this issue is, more than any other issue, what distinguishes Ron Paul from all the other politicians. He points out the absurdities of the culture of war we live in, and this appeals to those who stand to lose the most from any war--they young people. The other candidates, and the MSM see this appeal he has to the younger voters, and they absolutely refuse to break the illusion that their culture of war is the biggest hoax on the planet. They won't engage in rational discussions about Ron Paul's foreign policy because that would give away their scam. Instead they marginalize RP and apply labels to him that most rational people would reject. RP is effectively forcing the warmongers to intensify their propaganda on an increasingly aware public. I doubt that the elite will be able to put the genie back into the bottle. RP is like the little kid who said that the Emperor wasn't wearing any clothes. Anyone with eyes wouldn't argue against this.

Hatha

[Horn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_SOxHPyaMY)


You would think by this time these "foundations" would be tried as enemy combatants?

Their contract involvement & treachery being so blatantly obvious to the Republic.

[MAGNES]

violence is a part of human nature, so war must be too

In the news today

Looks like kids in high school, they can't fight, punch, kid ain't even
bleeding after quite a few hits. Kid should learn to stand up for himself,
greater bullies can be stopped just by punching out the leader fast.

Here is a baby being kicked in the head constantly by grown men.
Joe King makes excuses for the beatings.
White Child is Beaten and Has His Hand Broken and Stepped (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?52066-White-Child-is-Beaten-and-Has-His-Hand-Broken-and-Stepped-On-in-China)

[Serpo]

Its not my nature and Im a human

[letter_factory]

It just means peace for the elite, so they can keep taking from us without us having to put up a fight. Eventually, they'll take control of our very own body, mind, and soul and our children's bodies, mind, and soul, and we'll just give it to them.

[Shami-Amourae]

If war isn't part of human nature, then doesn't that mean that people who advocate war aren't human? Just saying.

[nunaem]

If war isn't part of human nature, then doesn't that mean that people who advocate war aren't human? Just saying.

It just means they are engaging in an unnatural activity. Which begs the question: If war is unnatural why does it come so easy? Most people fall in line with very little fuss, at least at the beginning of a war.

[Horn]

If war isn't part of human nature, then doesn't that mean that people who advocate war aren't human? Just saying.

Super, or Sub hard to say, witch.

[Santa]

If war isn't part of human nature, then doesn't that mean that people who advocate war aren't human? Just saying.

That's correct. Those who advocate war are NOT human.

[TomD]

Give an example of any society, anywhere, any when, that did not engage in war. Even take it down to the tribal level and back to pre-agricultural. I'll go so far as to say that a trait that is universally exhibited within a species is "part" of that species. How about further/ Competition for resources is universal to life. Ever seen Animal Planet showing pods of dolphin ramming and killing sharks? Rival ant colonies? Time lapse plant wars?

I like this quote: That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[Santa]

Man, to be human, to be a human being, must be humane in order to remain in a state of humanity.

[Santa]

Give an example of any society, anywhere, any when, that did not engage in war. Even take it down to the tribal level and back to pre-agricultural. I'll go so far as to say that a trait that is universally exhibited within a species is "part" of that species. How about further/ Competition for resources is universal to life. Ever seen Animal Planet showing pods of dolphin ramming and killing sharks? Rival ant colonies? Time lapse plant wars?

I like this quote: That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

We aren't fucking ants.

War is homicidal mass murder. And as such is antithetical to the basic premise of humanity.
War is much more than defending ones life or property. It is a calculated state of being. A political operation. A psychotic break from human nature.

Being human is not the same as being a Homo Sapien. Walking erect, reproducing and stealing scraps from others does not qualify one as being human.

To believe the dogma that human civilization was built upon
a series of wars throughout history by "great" warriors and kings is right up there among the greatest deceptions and control memes ever perpetrated.

Humanity is prerequisite to civilization. There is no civility in war. War and civility are opposites.

It requires humanity and civility to qualify as a human civilization.

War destroys humanity and imprisons its occupants under a perpetual state of servitude, enslavement and grovelling pain
that leads only to idiocy and eventual termination of our species in general.

War is antithetical to humanity and therefore anti human.

War begets war. War is destroying us.

Here's a photo I took just yesterday that shows what the acceptance of war brings us.

War is a part of Demon nature, not Human nature.
:p
http://i915.photobucket.com/albums/ac358/jackconrad/file-123.jpg

[TomD]

We aren't fucking ants.



You seem to totally missed the point. If I am to believe that war is not a basic part of human nature, give just one example, just one, of a society anywhere, anywhen, that did not engage in it.

BTW: I'm not advancing the concept of war but step one to solving any problem is to FIRST understand the problem. If you want to stop war but proceed on the premise that it is an aberration when it is, in reality, central to the species, you are defeated before you start.

[Hypertiger]

There are two ways to aquire power to sustain something...taking more than you give or sharing as equally as possible.

Basically chopping down trees faster than they regrow which is taking more than you give.

Or chopping down trees as fast as or slower than they regrow which is sharing as equally as possible.

Human beings share power as equally as possible.

Animals take more than they give.

War is not part of Human nature.

Peace is sustained by sharing power as equally as possible.

War is sustained by taking more power than it gives.

If you choose to chop down trees faster than they regrow to sustain Peace...War will be the result once you run out of trees.

If you choose to chop down trees as fast as or slower than they regrow...You will never run out of trees and peace will be sustained as long as there are trees to chop down to sustain it.

You all think you are Human beings because you have been told or more specifically...socially engineered to believe that is what you are.

But you all are not...You all are basically animals pretending to be Human beings.

The current economic system...Which is an apparatus that was invented to supply power is based on taking more than it gives.

Taking more than you give, chopping down trees faster than they regrow, or absolute capitalism is plunder.

When plunder (taking more than you give or absolute capitalism) becomes a way of life for a group of men (absolute capitalists) living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal (Rule) system that authorizes it and a moral code (Religion) that glorifies it.--Frederic Bastiat

Just because you have been told that you are a Human being...Does not mean that you are.

I'm sharing as equally as possible...but absolute capitalists can't exist by sharing as equally as possible.
absolute capitalists or the animals pretending to be human beings sustain their existance by taking more power than they give.

Human beings sustain tehir existance by sharing power as equally as possible.

absolute capitalists always must be supplied with more than they give or they die.

It's why they claim war is a part of Human nature...because ultimately they resort to war if another does not supply their demand for more than they give.

War has to be a part of Human nature or their ability to masqurade as Human beings suffers.

It's an equation...and in order for the equation that supports their claim to be Human to be valid...War has to be a part of it.

War is part of human nature = Lie

Has to be changed into war is part of human nature = Truth

In order for those who choose to take more than they give like animals do to sustain themselves to be able claim they are not mindless animals but human beings which share power as equally as possible...war must be shown to be part of human nature...it must be believed to be a part of human nature.

The lie must be believd to be Truth.

Ultimately if you refuse to believe their lies...Or supply their demands for more than they give to you which is what a lie does...

They will eventually have to kill you...

That is WAR not Peace.

The first lie that a liar tells you is the most important one...because once you believe the first lie...the following lies are easier to accept as Truth.

If you believe you are a Human being...Then all the various lies that depend upon acceptance of the first lie as Truth will be believed by default.

Below try to spot how a Human being operates and how an animal pretending to be a Human being operates.

Sure I will help you friend in your time of great need...I just ask that you try as hard as you can to supply back to me all that I give...

or

Sure I will help you in your time of great need...Just as long as you promise to supply back to me twice as much as I give to you...and if you fail...I will take everything you have.

the latter example is how teh current economic systam works...it's basically how a Mortgage or death pledge works.

Basically newborns into the absolute capitalist system are socially engineered to the point where they accept the latter as Human behaviour.

Basically taking more than you give as correct human behaviour and sharing as equally as possible as incorrect.

You all for the most part are take more than you give thinkers...it's called absolute self indulgent reason...all your interactions must result in you being the taker of more than you give.

I'm employing Responsible altrustic logic to construct this post.

Absolute capitalism or taking more than you give...Is a product of Absolute self indulgent reason

It's the cause of the power struggle all absolute capitalists are caught in trying to maintain Peace by taking more than they give that ultimately leads to WAR

When you reject what you need as not enough and can't obtain what you want...Which is more power than you give.

It's not my fault you all refuse to wake up from the dream you are enjoying that you are awake.

[DMac]

^ that about sums it up.

Well said.

[osoab]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk

[Santa]

You seem to totally missed the point. If I am to believe that war is not a basic part of human nature, give just one example, just one, of a society anywhere, anywhen, that did not engage in it.

BTW: I'm not advancing the concept of war but step one to solving any problem is to FIRST understand the problem. If you want to stop war but proceed on the premise that it is an aberration when it is, in reality, central to the species, you are defeated before you start.

Correction...If you want to end war but proceed on the premise that it is central to the species, when it is in reality a sick aberration, a disease, you are defeated before you start.

Why end war if it's merely a part of human nature?

[Santa]

So what is a human being, as opposed to an animal being?

[Hypertiger]

Animals take more than they give in order to sustain their existance.

Human beings share as equally as possible to sustain their existance.

That is the difference.

[AndreaGail]

no way! he's back...

[TomD]

So many of you claim that war is not intrinsic to humanity but offer nothing in evidence other than vague idealistic homilies. I claim that war is not only intrinsic but central to the species and offer as proof the better part of 10 millenia of the observation of the species. You offer nothing to back up your claims.

How in hell can any of you claim that the totality of recorded human existence is an aberration but that the normal state of humanity is one that has never existed?

Don't ascribe any motivation to my statements; observation is not advocacy.

Again: That which can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Do any of you understand that statement?

[TomD]

Human beings share as equally as possible to sustain their existance.



Yes they do but within their tribal structure. Other tribes get killed.

[osoab]

Animals take more than they give in order to sustain their existance.

Human beings share as equally as possible to sustain their existance.

That is the difference.

So we evolved to human beings and are in the process of de-evolving to animals?

Or are the human beings being herded by the animals?

[MAGNES]

Nobody talked about War and Human Nature more than the ELLENES.

Both topics are studied strongly to this day for that reason.
They can be highly complicated topics and usually go to 3rd
year advanced courses in University.

Many people make assumptions, the Iliad is many things,
strongly anti war being one. The Iliad is one of the first
Western Books ever written, scholars say this, not me,
they also say " the Iliad is the cornerstone of the Western World."

War and Peace are forces in nature and they are represented
by the same Gods, Zues, Athena, the Eagle, and War and Peace
is directly related and inseparable from Justice. Along with
Good Order and Freedom, all of which are represented by
lady Goddesses, and all are inseparable from each other.
Remove one and you cannot have the rest.

No Peace, War, No Justice, War, No Freedom, War, etc.

Constitutions were called " good order " Constitutions. Eunomia.

The Classical Age Philosophers were not fans of the Iliad and
that period.

The Romans were not fans of those very same Philosophers that
taught critical thinking, logic, reason, Justice, doing good, they didn't
like " the sophists " and old Rome preferred it's militaristic society.

Just some points.

They ain't my ideas, nor do they come from one book.

Question, Why were the Spartans known as the " guarantors of freedom "
in the Classical period. ?

Question, What was the period of the Iliad all about 1200 BC ?

They are directly related, involve resources, true defense, checking Empire.

These are two big questions that I have answered on here more than once
in few words but whole volumes of books and analysis have been written.

These two questions answered are a true education, on man.

Pieces of which are taught in US War College to this day, some complicated
reading as well, like Thucydides.

[Horn]

War has to be a part of Human nature or their ability to masqurade as Human beings suffers.

Highly quotable, step out of the Limelight.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYnH49COePY

[DMac]

The Romans were not fans of those very same Philosophers that
taught critical thinking, logic, reason, Justice, doing good, they didn't
like " the sophists " and old Rome preferred it's militaristic society.


I'd like to touch on this point you're making because it is not quite accurate.

The Sophists in early Greece started off as being some of the 'good guys'. They, through the use of language, taught people how to think. As time went on, the Sophists became enemies of the real philosophers (SOCRATES et al) because the Sophists, using rhetoric, became a sort of political party that used their techniques to teach people what to think. They became the master manipulators of the time.

In fact, the reason I am reminding you and the board that the Sophists were not the good guys was that by the 5th century BC, during Socrates time, they were the dominant political party in Athens. Socrates was charged by the Sophists with "corrupting the youth" because he was teaching them how to think, a direct violation of all the manipulation the Sophists worked so hard to achieve.

With regards to the Romans, the Stoics are usually thought of as being 'cold hearted' and 'serious minded' philosophers. While on the surface this is true, at the root it is false because one of the main passions was a love of life - liberty, virtue and reason. This is very much in line with the questions and wisdoms Socrates taught.

Roman philosophy fell after the death of the last of the good emperors, Marcus Aurelius, who was an important stoic philosopher.

Rome flourished under Socratic thought. It died when it abandoned reason and virtue (Socrates --> Stoics) and instead pursued decadence and thirst for power.

[Horn]

Still all these guys were stuck in Togas, and didn't have brains enough for button creation.

[Hypertiger]

Again you think you know what a Human being is...

But don't because you think when you look in a mirror you see a Human being...

I pointed it out to you...In order for the lie that war is part of Human nature to masqurade as Truth...

Your belief has to be compatable...You have to think you are a Human being.

Once you have been socially engineered into believing you are a Human being by default by birth...Then all your actions by default become part of Human nature.

All that you do that is incompatable with Human nature then becomes compatable....Lies masqurade as Truth.

I'm not here to convince you of anything...I provide information and you can either choose to accept it or reject it.

Absolute capitalists or those who sustain their existance by taking more than they give are not satisified until you give them what they want.

Which is more than they give in return.

But because absolute capitalists fear Truth...They are basically searching for something they never want to find.

They are ultimately at war against Truth.

They fight Truth with lies...

The only way to satisfy an absolute capitalist or give them what they want is if you believe what they believe is Truth.

You can of course point out the lies I'm telling you at any time.

I know you think you are a Human being...Without the slightest doubt...but I also know you are not a Human being...Without the slightest doubt as well.

If you don't supply the animals pretending to be Human beings with what they demand...They eventually resort to war in order force their demands to be satisfied.

[iOWNme]

I finally watched the vid, and ironically was having a deep conversation with a close friend just last night about this very idea.

Something at play behind the scenes here is this: Evolution v Creation

For those here who think it is part of human nature, i bet most of you are evolutionist. Those who think man is induced into war, are more likely to be in favor of a Creator.

Man is not an animal. An animal has no choice over his actions, no matter how cruel and violent his actions may be. They are not moral. Man has choice, and therefore his actions are either moral or immoral because he has choice.

When man chooses to go to war, it is proof that he is not an animal, and that the theory of human-evolution is false. Very easy to prove.

So is it some ancient primal instincts that make man go to war? Or is it fear and coercion? The answer is SIMPLE: Fear and Coercion drive man to war.

So where does the fear come from to man?

I dont care if it was 5,000 years ago, and you tell me there was war with primitive tribes. Just like today in modern times, the young of the tribes were taught very early on that they have enemy tribes just over the hill, and to be prepared to fight at anytime. Again it is FEAR that is artificially instilled into man, from a non-organic outside source.

Some here say was is prevalent all throughout history, and they are right. But it was because all those people learned about past wars, came from war families, were told as men its what they must do, and thus had fear instilled into them as well.

Hatha and Serpo nailed it. Im human and i will not go to war, and since i have choice, i choose to not be fear induced into war, either.

I could never morally go to war, unless i was defending life, liberty or property. And you cant defend while you are unlawfully (immoral) offensively invading another country.

[TomD]

[QUOTE=Sui Juris;509289 Im human and i will not go to war.[/QUOTE]

What a stupid statement. I truly hope it will never be demonstrated to you just how stupid.

[Horn]

I've made some silly statements on thread, but please TomD save your spitfire for another.

[D sciple]

War is inevitable whether anyone likes it or not. There are a lot of F'd up people here in Hell.

[MAGNES]

I'd like to touch on this point you're making because it is not quite accurate.

Thanks for the break down and detailed explanation, I was speaking
in general, used the term " sophist ", a lot of what you speak to comes
later, I am sure you are aware of this famous quote from a few people,
" Rome the enslaver forever became enslaved ", this happened over time.
Philosophy isn't my area, you just outed yourself, that is your area,
I would never be able to write what you wrote without referring to notes.

DMac and I have had some good conversations and I welcome
him to elaborate and pick me apart.

A while ago I gave DMac two key book references, related to our conversation,
and offered him an SAE for each one if he thinks they were not worthwhile.
With links provided to buy them cheap. That offer only applies to DMac.

A major podcast I did on Roman and Greek relationship.
Keep in mind, these are University courses, different Profs
have different material and different perspective.

These are exact titles and more recent, Plutarch's Lives is key too.

TTC- Greece and Rome - An Integrated History of the Ancient Mediterranean
Professor Robert Garland

"Greece, the captive, made their savage victor captive." Roman poet Horace.

Another one.

" Practical Philosophy - Greco-Roman Moralists " Johnson

[iOWNme]

What a stupid statement. I truly hope it will never be demonstrated to you just how stupid.

I like how you conveniently left out the very next thing i said. So you blatantly quoted me out of context. On top of that you had to resort to name calling and character assassination, another tell tale sign of a man with no intellectual acumen to debate the issue. I posted a lot of information and another view that hadnt been discussed and that i thought was relevant.

I simply gave my opinion on the matter, and you can only muster an ad hominem remark back at me. A class act you are TomD.


Troll much?

[MAGNES]

I like how you conveniently left

You should take it easy a bit, don't be so sensitive,
I know TomD from way back, he has a kid in the
military fighting most likely right now, TomD believed
in these wars a few years ago, lots of time has passed
though, so I have no clue where he is on this
now. There is no reason for TomD to avoid general
discussion, but he does for the most part. I hope TomD
doesn't take our posts and comments personal about
what we think of the wars. I support the troops and don't
believe in using people for lies upon lies of others policy.

[Book]

Man is not an animal. An animal has no choice over his actions, no matter how cruel and violent his actions may be. They are not moral. Man has choice, and therefore his actions are either moral or immoral because he has choice.



http://gold-silver.us/forum/Sui%20Jurishttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/__EqZfpXZrxE/TRsYquIHgII/AAAAAAAABe4/7mHtricwUY8/s1600/6rarah.JPG
This Is War.

I can respectfully disagree with you Sui Juris. Fighting with our neighbors or against the pests that invade our garden is just Life. They want what we have. They try and take it. All Lifeforms have organized defense mechanisms.

:) even you

[Book]

I support the troops...



I don't.

:)

[iOWNme]

You should take it easy a bit, don't be so sensitive,
I know TomD from way back, he has a kid in the
military fighting most likely right now, TomD believed
in these wars a few years ago, lots of time has passed
though, so I have no clue where he is on this
now. There is no reason for TomD to avoid general
discussion, but he does for the most part. I hope TomD
doesn't take our posts and comments personal about
what we think of the wars. I support the troops and don't
believe in using people for lies upon lies of others policy.

Sensitive? Because i chose to defend a personal attack on here? WTF MAGNES? Thats all you do around here. Gimmie a freakin break. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black....

So TomD has a child in the Military. Now i know why he is so biased against PEACE. I on the other hand choose to not be blinded by my opinions, and choose to talk about the matter to try and learn more. More proof that anger and war are not part of human nature.

I find it quite ironic that the people who advocate for Pro-Active Offensive violence, also think that war is part of human nature.

This place is turning into a troll HAVEN. Personal attacks are a thing of the norm now. If you notice, the same members ARE ALWAYS infighting, and then there are the other members who constantly choose to stay out of it. And gee, those same trouble making members, think that there is a problem with the outside world, and not a problem within themselves.

[iOWNme]

http://gold-silver.us/forum/Sui%20Jurishttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/__EqZfpXZrxE/TRsYquIHgII/AAAAAAAABe4/7mHtricwUY8/s1600/6rarah.JPG
This Is War.

I can respectfully disagree with you Sui Juris. Fighting with our neighbors or against the pests that invade our garden is just Life. They want what we have. They try and take it. All Lifeforms have organized defense mechanisms.

:) even you

Book, that is 2 different species fighting for food. That is not the same thing as human v human war. Again, nice try though.....

Can you find me evidence of packs of squirrels choosing to go kill another pack of squirrels for their food and shelter, instead of going out and earning the food themselves? Show me 2 of the same species who choose to go to war for food and shelter, instead of working, earning and building what they need.

Thats what i thought.

[Book]

Show me 2 of the same species who choose to go to war for food and shelter, instead of working, earning and building what they need.


https://fasttimesinpalestine.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/four-panel-map.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2009/9/15/1253042453868/Gaza-war-001.jpg

http://voxrox.co/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/gaza-war-crimes.jpg

::) fighting over food and shelter

[Book]

Can you find me evidence of packs of squirrels choosing to go kill another pack of squirrels for their food and shelter




http://vimeo.com/7975491

I've witnessed many group fights between neighboring squirrels over food turf.

::)

[iOWNme]

https://fasttimesinpalestine.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/four-panel-map.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2009/9/15/1253042453868/Gaza-war-001.jpg

http://voxrox.co/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/gaza-war-crimes.jpg

::) fighting over food and shelter


Exactly. Man has chosen to go to war, not instinctually. And if it were instinctual, you would find it EVERYWHERE throughout nature. And you dont.

And seeing a couple squirrels fighting is not war. War is choice made by a collective group or pack to go kill and steal from another group or pack.

You really are stretching here Book......

[hoarder]

If I am to believe that war is not a basic part of human nature, give just one example, just one, of a society anywhere, anywhen, that did not engage in it. They all did. That pretty much proves that war IS human nature.

Should human nature be different? That's a whole 'nuther subject.

[DMac]

A while ago I gave DMac two key book references, related to our conversation,
and offered him an SAE for each one if he thinks they were not worthwhile.
With links provided to buy them cheap. That offer only applies to DMac.


They are still in my list, I just haven't gotten to them yet:

The Miracle That was Macedonia,

The Macedonian State

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=hammond&bi=0&bx=off&ds=30&recentlyadded=all&sortby=17&sts=t&tn=%22+the+macedonian+state+%22&x=0&y=0

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=the+miracle+that+was+macedonia&sts=t&x=0&y=0

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=%22+the+rise+of+the+dorians%22&sts=t&x=0&y=0

[Book]

Can you find me evidence of packs of squirrels choosing to go kill another pack of squirrels for their food and shelter, instead of going out and earning the food themselves?



::)




And seeing a couple squirrels fighting is not war.



Moreover, he adds that moving a squirrel to a new area means introducing a newcomer to territory already claimed by other squirrels. The newcomer will have to roam and fight to find new territory, and usually ends up dead in the process.

“You can live in accordance with them,” says Hare. “We have a sixth-generation family of squirrels under the shed in the back yard. If you give them a place to stay, they’ll stay there, and they’ll defend the area against all comers.”


http://pegmag.com/index/?p=121

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/britains-squirrel-turf-war-12386789

[Hypertiger]

You still don't see it because you can't.

You are not Human beings...Your arguments are all based on a belief in something that is not true.

None of us are Human beings.

We only think we are because we have been told we are...It's the answer of a question on a test your masters give to you to see if the social engineering is working.

You all believe...but Human beings don't believe in anything.

Human beings either know or they don't know...They never believe.

Why then do we choose to take more power than we give instead of sharing power?

split 100 into 3 perfectly....you get 33.333333333333--->Repeating forever.

It's easier to split 100 3 ways by chopping it into 33,33,and 34 with 34 going to the chopper.

It's easter to take more than you give then to share equally.

It takes zero thought...all life and everything in the Universe takes more than they or it gives...all animals, rivers flowing to the sea, and electricity flow or follow the path of least resistance.

It is only Human beings that have an ability to choose to follow the path of most resistance.

When you follow the path of least resistance...You can't claim to be a Human being...you are operating just like that which is not...like animals...if you are operating as an animal but cliaming you are a human being...you are lying.

Sure Human beings are forced into war and must fight Wars...that Animals start.

In the Middle East both sides in the conflict have fallen so deeply into depravity that it's become Animal vs Animal.

Personal attacks?

How is someone that is being told that everything they believe is Truth are lies supposed to react?

Human beings share power as equally as possible...Meaning they operate based on need...not want.

When you don't want to be the victim of personal attacks...You are rejecting what you need in an attempt to get what you want.

That is what absolute capitalists do.

Human beings reject want and accept what they need.

Responsible capitalists reject want and accept what they need.

Absolute capitalists reject what they need to accept to attempt to get what they want.

Which is always more than they give in order to sustain their exisatnce.

An absolute capitalist which believes they are Human...Is destroyed by Truth...The fact that they are not operating like a Human being...that they are operating like a mindless animal following the path of least resistance to it's logical conclusion...annihilates their ability to claim they are operating as a Human being.

chopping down trees faster than they regrow or taking more than you give takes the least effort.

chopping down trees as fast as or slower than they regrow or sharing as equally as possible takes the most effort.

People have an ability to choose to and sustain following the path of most resistance.

In the 6000+ years of recorded history....We have tried to and failed to follow the path of most resistance and have instead followed the path of least resistance..."believing" it is the path to salvation.

it's not.

The just think positive ignore negative religion is a product of absolute self indulgent reason which is absolute capitalism.

The embrace fantasy reject reality equation

The embrace lies and delusion reject Truth equation at the core of the drone reasoning algorithm.

The path of least resistance is the path that animals follow...Human beings don't.

Chopping down trees faster than they regrow or taking more than you give to sustain the march to salvation ends in damnation once the trees run out.

You can only sustain the path you are on until you run out of power to sustain it.

Chopping trees down as fast as or slower or sharing as equally as possible to sustain the march to salvation does not end.

But the devout believers of the just think positive ignore negative religion keep telling me.

If at first you don't succeed following the path of least resistance...try try again.

You all have been try try trying again to make the impossible possible for 1000's and 1000's of years.

Then the devout believers of the just think positive ignore negative religion tell me that nothing is impossible if you put you mind to it.

Ultimately animals pretending to be human beings wage war against Humanity...As long as the continued existance of Humanity is not threatened...Humanity does nothing...But as soon as the continued existance of Humanity is threatened by the animals pretending to be Human beings.

Humanity is forced by the animals pretending to be Human beings to supply their demand for WAR.

Humanity is forced to annihilate the Animals pretending to be Human beings.

and then with the threat gone...people go back to following the path of least resistance again.

Ignorance of Truth is the root of all evil in teh affairs of humanity.

there is never a lasting victory over lies while the war against Truth has no exit strategy and always ends in defeat.

It is easy to claim you are right...It is hard to admit you are wrong.

You all are not Human beings...You can choose to be if you stop follwoing the path of least resistance trying to prove yourself right and follow the path of most resistance and prove youself wrong.

It's why all absolute capitalists or those who take more than they give...which is following the path of least resistance...the creatures that are Animals pretending to be Human beings are attempting to transform Human beings into animals...So they can justify their inhuman actions.

Oh well it's just Human nature they say.

Human beings employ responsible altrustic logic to solve the problem of existance within the Universe.

Animals, lighting bolts and water flowing employ absolute self indulgent reason to solve the problem of existance within the Universe.

By default because it's the path of least effort...It's the default path that all power in in the Universe flows...

When you choose to follow the path of least resistance...You have as much control over your destiny as leaves blowing around in a hurricane do.

[Horn]

I've witnessed many group fights between neighboring squirrels over food turf.::)

Hunger isn't a source of human wars. Once hungry you're too weak to fight.

[Horn]

War is inevitable whether anyone likes it or not. There are a lot of F'd up people here in Hell.

Makes all the prayers pointless then... thy shall be done, nonsense.

[D sciple]

You still don't...ect

Are you Indian by any chance? (I'm trying to see if I can detect a pattern....try not to be offended)

[D sciple]

Makes all the prayers pointless then... thy shall be done, nonsense.

not really

[TomD]

Sensitive? Because i chose to defend a personal attack on here? WTF MAGNES? Thats all you do around here. Gimmie a freakin break. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black....

So TomD has a child in the Military. Now i know why he is so biased against PEACE. I on the other hand choose to not be blinded by my opinions, and choose to talk about the matter to try and learn more. More proof that anger and war are not part of human nature.

I find it quite ironic that the people who advocate for Pro-Active Offensive violence, also think that war is part of human nature.

This place is turning into a troll HAVEN. Personal attacks are a thing of the norm now. If you notice, the same members ARE ALWAYS infighting, and then there are the other members who constantly choose to stay out of it. And gee, those same trouble making members, think that there is a problem with the outside world, and not a problem within themselves.

Good Lord man, get a grip, you're losing it.





I simply gave my opinion on the matter, and you can only muster an ad hominem remark back at me. A class act you are TomD.

Allow me to help you with the definition of an ad hominin attack. That would be attacking the messenger rather than the message. Note please that I said that I considered your statement to be stupid. Now if I had said that I thought you were stupid, that would be an ad hominin attack. Capiche?

[Santa]

In order for a problem to be solved, there needs to be a starting premise that the problem can even be solved.

It seems to me that to argue that war is a part of human nature
is to maintain the inevitability of war, which ends the argument before it even begins.

War is the condition or state in which humankind is at odds
with it's own nature, its spirit, its soul. To be human is to reclaim one's soul, and therefore to reconnect with humanity.

If we accept the premise that war is a part of human nature, then war cannot end... because we accept it as part of our innate being, or nature. To say war is a part of human nature is to say that war is a required component of being human.

To argue that war is part of human nature, is to argue that without war, we're no longer human.

My argument is that to be human is to practice being humane so that humanity can survive. Not only the body, but the spirit. The purpose. The soul. One Mind. Unus Mundus. Those who practice war are at odds with human spirit. Only the inhumane practice war.
Words themselves carry our history. The words themselves which carry meaning in symbolic form are telling us that to be inhumane is to be inhuman. Not human. What can possibly be more inhumane than war? War is the definitive expression of inhumanity.

Those who are human beings practice being humane so that the soul of humanity can survive.

War is the ultimate expression of BEING NON HUMAN.

To say that war is part of HUMAN NATURE is an oxymoron. A contradiction of terms. An incongruity. Can a human being be human and inhuman simultaneously?

The price we pay for playing the part of inhumanity is the loss of our human soul, our purpose, our spirit of humanity, our one mind, leaving only animal nature, which is to say nature without purpose. Without soul.

The very purpose for our existence is at stake.
Without purpose for our existence, there is no humanity.

Our fight is for our soul.

This is not to be confused with God. God is far greater than humanity, but the one mind(soul) connects all of humanity to God.

[hoarder]

Allow me to help you with the definition of an ad hominin attack. That would be attacking the messenger rather than the message. Note please that I said that I considered your statement to be stupid. Now if I had said that I thought you were stupid, that would be an ad hominin attack. Capiche?Regardless of your definition of ad hominem, calling the statements of a person you're debating with "stupid" is not using logic to refute it.

[TomD]

Regardless of your definition of ad hominem

My definition??? Are you serious?

And as for not using logic, please notice that I made several prior posts in the thread pointing out the fallacy of the premise based on 10's of millenia of human history, all totally ignored by the proponents of the title thesis, specifically including Su Juris.

[iOWNme]

My definition??? Are you serious?

And as for not using logic, please notice that I made several prior posts in the thread pointing out the fallacy of the premise based on 10's of millenia of human history, all totally ignored by the proponents of the title thesis, specifically including Su Juris.

How did i ignore your posts about the millenia of human history when i posted this:


I dont care if it was 5,000 years ago, and you tell me there was war with primitive tribes. Just like today in modern times, the young of the tribes were taught very early on that they have enemy tribes just over the hill, and to be prepared to fight at anytime. Again it is FEAR that is artificially instilled into man, from a non-organic outside source.You conveniently ignored this post of mine also.

You seem to like to ignore the posts and ideas that are in direct conflict with your own biased opinions, which blind you from even seeing things in any other way except for your own.

By the way, ad hominem attack means attacking a characteristic or belief of another person, instead of actually focusing on the meat of the subject. Both of which you have done here.

[EE_]

Male sex drive to blame for world wars: scientists
By Nick Collins, The Telegraph January 23, 2012 Comment 9 •Story•Photos ( 1 )

The "male warrior" instinct means that men are programed to be aggressive towards any-one they view as an outsider.Photograph by: iStockphoto, ThinkstockThe male sex drive is to blame for most of the world's conflicts from football hooliganism to religious disputes and, even, world wars, according to scientists.

The "male warrior" instinct means that men are programed to be aggressive towards any-one they view as an outsider, a study says.

In evolutionary terms, an instinct for violence against others helped early men improve their status and gain more access to mates, but in modern terms this can trans-late into large-scale wars.

In contrast, women are naturally equipped with a "tend and befriend" attitude that means they seek to resolve conflicts peacefully in order to protect their children, re-searchers said.

The study, published in a journal, Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B, is a review of the evolutionary evidence for the so-called "male warrior hypothesis."

It claims that in every culture throughout history, men have been more likely than women to use violence when confronted by people they consider outsiders.

The "tribal" attitude of men, ultimately aimed at boosting their chances of reproducing, is similar to the territorial behaviour of chimpanzees, it was claimed. The study also examined evidence that suggests men have a stronger sense of group identity than women, and that they will develop closer ties with others in their group if they are in competition with rivals.

Although men's hostile responses most likely evolved to combat the threat from outsiders, they "might not be functional in modern times and are often counterproductive," experts said.

Over time, this has resulted in full-scale wars between countries and empires, and also in scraps and skirmishes between rival groups of soccer supporters and urban gangs. Prof. Mark van Vugt, who led the study, said: "A solution to conflict, which is an all too common problem in societies today, remains elusive.

"One reason for this might be the difficulty we have in changing our mindset, which has evolved over thousands of years.

"Our review of the academic literature suggests that the human mind is shaped in a way that tends to perpetuate conflict with 'outsiders.' "

Prof. van Vugt said the re-search established that conflict with other groups of men presented our ancestors with opportunities to improve their status and gain more access to territory and potential mates. He added: "We see similar behaviour in chimpanzees. For example, the males continuously monitor the borders of their territory.

"If a female from another group comes along, she may be persuaded to emigrate to his group.

"When a male strays too far, however, he is likely to be brutally beaten and possibly killed."

Research by Californian scientists in 2008 showed that the evolution of aggression and bravery in men was down to competition for mates and territory. Their study showed that genes can have a significant impact on traits like belligerence, meaning that in the course of history the most aggressive group was singled out by natural selection.

Hunter-gatherer communities engaged in skirmishes with other, neighbouring groups, taking land, goods and women as a reward for victory.


Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Male+drive+blame+world+wars+scientists/6037194/story.html#ixzz1kKADqfnA

[Horn]

The "tribal" attitude of men, ultimately aimed at boosting their chances of reproducing, is similar to the territorial behaviour of chimpanzees, it was claimed.

Still, does this really explain the many crusades towards Jerusalem?

These battles end up mostly mono en mono (monkey on monkey).

[EE_]

Still, does this really explain the many crusades towards Jerusalem?

These battles end up mostly mono en mono (monkey on monkey).

Maybe the article should be renamed "Poontang to Blame for World Wars" ?

[learn2swim]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIOL6XJ23cs&feature=endscreen&NR=1

[Horn]

Maybe the article should be renamed "Poontang to Blame for World Wars" ?

"Frontline Reinforcement - A Tyrant's guide on Social Programming thru Freudian Psychology"

[Santa]

The study, published in a journal, Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B, is a review of the evolutionary evidence for the so-called "male warrior hypothesis."
The behavior described above has been attributed to the "reptilian" portion of the brain. That is to say the portion of the brain in which even the lowest on the scale of animals, the cold blooded reptiles have.

No one's arguing that animals are violent.

Totalitarian top down control thrives on us remaining animals.

My argument is that human nature transcends three dimensions. Material animal nature. The physical realm. That human nature is informed by our collective psyche, our unconscious, our one mind, and that it is upon us to nurture, to give credence to, to hold sacred, to have faith in "God;" which in turn informs us as individual humans through our unconscious collective mind.

This is what makes us human, as distinct from others.

This notion is not religion, or superstition, but the basis of philosophy.

Philosophy was created for exactly this purpose, to define and hopefully to understand, to know our "human nature," as opposed to giving in to the lazy, stratified, cold blooded nature of reptiles. Base animal nature.

The confusion lies in the lack of distinction between whether "human" means just another animal, or whether "human" means more than that.

Honestly, I don't see the point in arguing that humans are just animals. "We think, therefore we are." "We think we're animals, therefore we are animals."

If we allow ourselves to believe that we're just biological animals, then by implication, there is a biological species above us, that owns humans.

That species which thinks they are our shepherds, or cowherds, and therefore "are,"... want very much for us to continue believing we are in fact, dumb animals, which is, admittedly difficult to argue against,... since it rubs up against the root of civilization's hierarchical paradigm.

Also, war means something more than brute force, or violence. War is the institutionalization of force over others.

And because it is institutionalized, people depend on it for their livelihood. Their lives depend upon others suffering and dying. Or so they believe.

War is the final systematic control meme used by government to maintain it's own existence.

It is as natural as the centralization of authority into One World Government.

This ain't no fun and games. What we "think" is extremely important to our very existence. What we "think" actually predicates who we are in relation to existence.

If you "think" that "one world government" is representative of human nature, then one world government IS your representative.

If you think war is part of human nature, then war is what represents your nature.

"Thinking" that war is part of human nature needs to be understood as fundamental to human kinds annihilation,
somehow similar to what a Moth might think as it is being drawn to the flame.

War is Hell. Hell is where humans go when they no longer "think" God exists, but instead replace Him with the Demi-urge, long known as "god of the world," or Satan.

Satan, among other demi-urges or small time gods, is that urge to make war against humanity. The god of war.

The god of the world is that demi-urge, that urge to "think"
reality consists only in what we can see and touch.

Which is patently absurd, especially since "we" are existing in
essentially an alternate reality for our thoughts to congregate. The internet.

"We" are not even physical beings. "We" are thoughts.

And yet, even though "we" are only our thoughts, "we" still find it difficult to comprehend the actuality of this non corporeal existence. We drag pretend bodies around, our avatars, insisting they are somehow real.

Hohoho, I'm Santa... and you hate me because you didn't get your toy for Christmas. Lol

[Horn]

"Thinking" that war is part of human nature needs to be understood as fundamental to human kinds annihilation,
somehow similar to what a Moth might think as it is being drawn to the flame. As far as absolutes go, I think you've tread the line fairly well between them, Santa.

What about feelings? Aren't they much easier to remember than thoughts?

Feelings also being most indecisive for all (on the matter of war), would tend to oppose the absolutism of taking another man's life.

Or on a lesser level permanently banning his avatar... :)