921
I sure as hell don't. (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml
316 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 3 years ago (4 children)

The video does not ignore that humans have a hand in creating our material conditions... you can't state that as a flaw in the reasoning when that point is kinda central to the whole argument. Yes, we created these systems, and the argument given is that it reflects human nature. This video refutes that argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Yes. And that is where it falls apart on a naively optimistic note.

    How can you separate people creating the social conditions from the social conditions themselves? It is human nature that brought upon those conditions. Humans made it happen and I'm pretty sure nobody said 'hey let's set aside our nature of being good for a moment and do this evil thing real quick, I promise it'll be fun!'. Active or passive participants, we're all participants.

    Furthermore, you cannot just say 'we did some bad stuff, but it's because of the conditions around. we're actually good people that happen to be in a tight spot'. Those are by definition not good people. Everyone can be a nice person if the times are good. Actions, rather than intent, are the indicators of one's alignment.

    Asked to do something you don't want to or find morally reprehensible but you do it anyway (usually because of fear of consequences if you don't)? Not an inherently good person, as I suspect is the case for most of us.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    How can you separate people creating the social conditions from the social conditions themselves

    I don't.

    It is human nature that brought upon those conditions.

    Human nature isn't a thing.

    Humans made it happen and I’m pretty sure nobody said ‘hey let’s set aside our nature of being good for a moment and do this evil thing real quick, I promise it’ll be fun!’. Active or passive participants, we’re all participants.

    No, of course not. I have to assume you didn't even watch the video I sent. And being a participant does not make you a willing participant.

    Furthermore, you cannot just say ‘we did some bad stuff, but it’s because of the conditions around. we’re actually good people that happen to be in a tight spot’.

    That's not what I or the video I sent have said. Such an absurd strawman. You have already mentioned that it concludes we aren't inherently bad or good.

    Those are by definition not good people. Everyone can be a nice person if the times are good. Actions, rather than intent, are the indicators of one’s alignment.

    Hot take, bro.

    Asked to do something you don’t want to or find morally reprehensible but you do it anyway (usually because of fear of consequences if you don’t)? Not an inherently good person, as I suspect is the case for most of us.

    Cool, but you're not knocking down anything I've said with that take.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I am puzzled as to what exactly you mean. I watched the video until min 17 out of 19, then realized it's got no deeper message beyond that point so stopped it. Lad spoke about philosophies, how different philosophers thought people were good or others thought they were bad then had a weird intermezzo blaming imperialism. The weird part was the style change not the actual blaming, mind you - that's all valid, but still serves to prove an actual human nature.

    Spoke some stuff about look at all cultures in Africa being friendly, and then babbled on about how humans aren't good or bad but they are victims of their circumstances.

    Overall a mediocre video from an argumentation standpoint, but figured hey, why not give it a shot?

    I never said we're all willing participants. Active or passive participants - willing or unwilling. Still participants. Maybe it clears it up, hm?

    Paraphrasing the video it does indeed say that humans aren't bad or good, but their actions are due to the social environment. Do tell me how this is completely disconnected from what I said? I took it a couple of steps further.

    Social environment bad (somehow, not tied to human nature because social environments come into being by themselves and exist even without humans, if I'm understanding this as you mean it - cause otherwise, if people were responsible, they would be bad people. but the video tells us there are no bad people);

    BUT people not bad or good means it's basically not their fault for anything cause they aren't bad if they do bad stuff. But look people are good because they come together sometimes.

    I honestly don't understand what point you are trying to make. If it is that human nature isn't a thing and that's it, well... best of luck to ya. Is it not in your nature to argue with random people on the internet?

    Maybe if you are trying to make a point don't just drop a youtube link and expect people to understand the same thing as you did or expect them suddenly be enlightened. Did you understand it? Care to elaborate on what you understood from it? I did. Let's compare notes.

    Edit: Obligatory I'm not your bro, guy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago*

    Social environment bad (somehow, not tied to human nature because social environments come into being by themselves and exist even without humans, if I'm understanding this as you mean it

    I've said this three times: neither I nor Andrew said societies are not created by people.

    if people were responsible, they would be bad people. but the video tells us there are no bad people);

    They are indeed bad people. I don't know why you think i would disagree, or that the video suggests people can't be bad. Of course they can.

    What??

    But look people are good because they come together sometimes.

    Stick to your point. You were first claiming it said people aren't inherently bad or good. That's right. Then you slipped it to people can't be bad or good. That's a totally different statement no one claimed. Now, somehow the claim has morphed to saying that people are inherently good.

    What?

    Maybe if you are trying to make a point don't just drop a youtube link and expect people to understand the same thing as you did or expect them suddenly be enlightened. Did you understand it? Care to elaborate on what you understood from it? I did. Let's compare notes.

    I can't decide if you're trolling or genuinely incompetent. It's not hard to understand.

    Human nature is not a fixed concept. It's a buzzword thrown around by people trying to sell their philosophy to you. People do what they can based on their material conditions. We are not inherently pulled toward being pro social or anti social.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent