Posted by sdb on February 14, 2009, at 15:28:08
In reply to Lou's request for identification-dhngllngmdifyer? » sdb, posted by Lou Pilder on February 14, 2009, at 15:20:03
> > I remember chapter 4 of 'human zoo' by desmond morris. Myself I have not the view of a politician but the view of somebody who tries to understand nature.
> >
> > 'question: what is the difference between black natives slicing up a white missionary, and a white mob lynching a helpless Negro? Answer: very little - and, for the victims, none at all. Whatever the reasons, whatever the excuses, whatever the motives, the basic behavior mechanism is the same. They are both cases of members of the in-group attacking members of the out-group.....The reason is obvious enough: we are, each one of us, a member of some particular in-group and it is difficult for us to view the problems of inter-group conflict without, however unconsciously, taking sides. Somehow, until I have finished writing and you have finished reading this chapter, we must try to step outside our groups and gaze down on the battlefields of the human animal with the unbiased eyes of a hovering Martian. It is not going to be easy, and I must make it clear at the outset that nothing I say should be construed as implying that I am favoring one group as against another, or suggesting that one group is inevitably superior to another....
> >
> > ...I have already discussed these conditions, but it will help to summarize them briefly. They are:
> > 1. The development of fixed human territories.
> > 2. The swelling of tribes into over-crowded super-tribes
> > 3. The invention of weapons that kill at a distance
> > 4. The removal of leaders from the front line of battle
> > 5. The creation of a specialized class of professional killers
> > 6. The growth of technological inequalities between the groups
> > 7. The increase of frustrated status aggression within the groups
> > 8. The demands of the inter-group status rivalries of the leaders
> > 9. The loss of social identity within the super-tribes
> > 10. The exploitation of the co-operative urge to aid friends under attack.
> > The one condition I have deliberately omitted from this list is the development of differing ideologies. As a zoologist, viewing man as an animal, I find it hard to take such differences seriously in the present context. If one assesses the inter-group situation in terms of actual behavior, rather than verbalized theorizing, differences in ideology fade into insignificance alongside the more basic conditions. They are merely the excuses, desperately sought for to provide reasons highsounding enough to justify the destruction of thousand of human lives.'
> >
> > I am sorry if you think that this does not apply to Hitler, Bush and historically irrelevant persons like me and you.
> > When theres no mutation or a gen therapy man will be at war with man.
> > I post this here for educational purpose. I am no longer participant in the politics forum because it is unethical.
>
> sdb,
> You wrote,[...I am no longer (a) participant in the politics forum becaue it is unethical...]
> I am unsure as to what your are wanting the {it} to refer to. Could you identify as to which of the following you are wanting to mean by the {it}?
> The {it} refers to in {it is unethical}:
> A.that the forum for politics is unethical
> B.that participation is unethical
> C.something else
> If you could identify which of the above is that you are wanting to mean, thhen I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly
> Loumost likely A.
poster:sdb
thread:876261
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081228/msgs/880112.html