Okay I know kind of a heavy title but I felt the need to post after getting an inkling of what has been going on over the past two days and also the past weeks and months.
So my question is are we as human beings intrinsicly self destructive?
Look at the world today there are reports of wars in all corners of the globe, we continue in the western world to rely on energy sources that are polluting our planet and potential spelling the destruction of our planet yet it will not be us that suffer for this it will be our children and our childrens children. We look accross the world and we see that we in the west have food mountains and huge surplus' and yet people accross the third world are starving to death each day it is not a insurmountable problem but in the world where profit is king we seem unable or unwilling to solve the problem. Third world countries accross the world are crippled by a debt that they cannot repay, money that could be spent on health services and infastructure instead gets spent on repaying an everincreasing debt. We the "civilised" west feel we have carte blanche to go into countries and topple "Rogue" regimes and take the moral highground when we do this yet we sit by and do very little about oppressive "regimes" like the military junta in Burma do we have the moral high ground or are we "rogue regimes" ourselve hiding under the veneer of civiliasation. Where will it all end I wonder???
Oh well I suppose part of this is to say why can't we all just get along? when you look at the troubles accross the world it to me anyway makes the problems that we have here somewhat small.
Well thats my rant over feel free to contradict me or disagree or agree as you will.
Namáriâë! Nai hiruvalyë Valimar. Nai elyë hiruva. Namáriâë!
|
|
|
 by -
CTS-1
(Fri Jun 20 05:50:39)
|
|
Let me rephrase the question:
Are humans short sighted?
Perhaps the issue is a matter of prioritizing short and long term goals.
And, as far as starvation goes, in this day and age there is always a political dimension. Somebody wants people to starve, and it does not have to do with ADM's bottom line, or some paranoid cabal involving the military-industrial complex. Blaming market economics is blaming the wrong primary force. Famine is usually a by-product of civil war.
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
You calling me paranoid CTS-1  all I'll say is grassy knoll ............... .
And, as far as starvation goes, in this day and age there is always a political dimension. Somebody wants people to starve, and it does not have to do with ADM's bottom line, or some paranoid cabal involving the military-industrial complex. Blaming market economics is blaming the wrong primary force. Famine is usually a by-product of civil war.
Famine certainly can be a be product of civil war CTS-1 but I'm sure that you will agree CTS-1 that usually is a long way from always 10 year droughts in Africa for example and then we could go into the resons for a lot of the civil wars in the first place and when you go into that who is that usually supplies these armies especially if the side that we support will be indebted to the supplier you can go on and on and it is very much a viscous circle. You are right I think in a sense that these things are not caused by one particular problem but to exlude the common market process and the world bank would be I think unfair in that while not the sole cause they certainly have an effect. I think what you are saying about the human race being shortsighted is very true though, at the moment a lot of the time we seem to be going for progress for progress' sake and perhaps not thinking about the long term effects. I think a lot of people in the world need to think about what kind of planet they wish to leave their children to inherit.
Namáriâë! Nai hiruvalyë Valimar. Nai elyë hiruva. Namáriâë!
|
|
|
I can't say I disagree that humans are intrinsically self destructive. I think it's a natural consequence of that most basic of human traits: selfishness. It seems that exactly the opposite of this is needed for us to survive and ultimately flourish. It's just so sad that, in this ongoing tension between the impulse and the necessity, selfishness so often seems to win out. The problems of a global scale appear to be of the same nature as our smaller ones here. Who knows, indeed, where it will end?
"in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing"
|
|
|
| by -
Uinen
(Fri Jun 20 06:39:46)
|
|
Yes, I think selfishness is a huge part of it. Also mixed in there are strong convictions (whether everyone else thinks they are right or not). Around the world, single people or entire countries get in their mind that something is wrong, and they feel it is their job to fix it. Now, the rest of the world may agree, and they might not. But it causes huge conflicts. And here at the boards, it's the same way. We get our panties in a big bunch because someone is opinionated, and it blows way out of proportion. I wasn't here for the big conflict yesterday, I had to get someone to explain it to me by PM. But it seems that tensions are a bit high. I've seen it over and over again (and done it myself), where someone will be out to prove a point. Well, with all the different opinions and ideas floating around in here, you're not going to get everyone to see it your way. I know I've struggled with that, but hopefully, I've learned not to stick my nose in where it doesn't belong.
Anyway, we're here at the boards, and this is (as Aragorn_Elassar's site has it) "A community of Tolkien lovers". No matter what, that's what we have in common, and that small (but huge) bond should be enough to overlook most differences between posters.  to all.
 And you have my bow...
|
|
|
Yeah, (((Uinen13))) right back at ya. Isn't it amazing how we choose to focus on the things that divide us rather than the things that unite us, even though our similarities are so much greater than our differences? And that doesn't only happen on this board, either. I also missed the great blow-up - pretty grateful for that, actually - but hopefully time will give some perspective.
"in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing"
|
|
|
| by -
Elwe-Singollo
(Fri Jun 20 06:58:13)
|
|
 UPDATED Fri Jun 20 07:16:26 |
I'll second and third your to all Uinen13.
Well, with all the different opinions and ideas floating around in here, you're not going to get everyone to see it your way. I know I've struggled with that, but hopefully, I've learned not to stick my nose in where it doesn't belong.
Perhaps that is part of the essence of the problem that we are not tolerant enough and people end up feeling they are not welcome I don't know I do not have the answers but I hope the situation here will simmer down. As for the world I don't know you just have to look at the stats I suppose since May 1st when Bush declared the war in Iraq over ther have been 50 US Soldiers killed and many more Iraqis as I said before who knows where it will end?
Ohh well like you say Uinen13 big kiss to all ringnuts out there here is a little ifi origianal for you all.
www.oxfam.org Lets give peace a chance huh!
|
|
|
I don´t think it matters anymore. Our history has proven that human beings are not ment to survive. My guess is that we will not survive the 21st century. People born in the nineties are going to see our end. Why? We fear the unknown, well most do. Ignorance is a plague upon the human race. We are too many! People don´t care how things work as long as they work. And Bush! That explains itself. I have a lot of extreme issues against the ´American´ goverment. Notice: I said goverment.
Well all species is doomed for extinction. It´s just a matter of time.
Even the smallest creature can change the course of the future. Well Hitler prooved that.
|
|
|
| by -
Aule
(Fri Jun 20 08:26:52)
|
|
Certainly we, as human beings, are not instinctively self-destructive. In fact, quite the opposite. That is, on an individual level, and with regards to those in our immediate community. But, it's one person pitted against another, or one community against another, as they pursue self-preservation and prosperity.
The world is crowded now, and we are separated into many groups, each trying to survive and flourish, and often at the expense of those outside our group. We have different perspectives and perceptions of the way things are or should be, and that is a problem. Misunderstandings occur because of this, our own problems on this board being a good example. Religious and cultural differences being an example on a larger level.
The reasons for starvation are complex and varied, but basically when the population outgrows it's resources, it's bound to occur. If this is because of famine or natural disaster, it's one thing, but when it is endemic, we need to address the causes, and not just put a band-aid on them.
|
|
|
I can't agree with you...at least not entirely Aule. I really think humans are always driven by selfish wishes and thoughts, even when they are looking for something like love or friendship...humans are forms of life that can't deal very well with loneliness, unlike other animals, we have a sense of community, but a selfish sense, our main purpose is to avoid being left alone, in loneliness. That is what makes us the way we are our profound desire to avoid self-destruction, to avoid been forgotten, because to humans being forgotten, is equal to self-destruction...to death in life... that explains the "showoff" of our power and that's why i can't agree when you talk about the way we care that much about others around us.
Well i don't know if this really makes sense...it made to me when i wrote it, but maybe you won't agree with me on this.
God also created the monsters. Even you. And he wishes us to speak of all.
|
|
|
| by -
Aule
(Fri Jun 20 09:06:05)
|
|
That's pretty much what I was getting at, actually. I was trying to say that we are selfish individually, and we are selfish for our community in relation to others, and so on, but it is all about self-preservation and, in varying degrees, selfishness. So yeah, you are agreeing with me - you just didn't know it because I wasn't clear enough. 
|
|
|
Well, in that case we do agree, because that was exactly my point: what drives us it's clearly the instinct of self-preservation.
God also created the monsters. Even you. And he wishes us to speak of all.
|
|
|
It sounds to me like some people are equating selfishness with self-destructiveness. I think there is a distinction to be made between the two, although one can at times lead to the other depending on the situation and the extent of it (selfishness--->self-destructiveness).
|
|
|
"We look accross the world and we see that we in the west have food mountains and huge surplus' and yet people accross the third world are starving to death each day it is not a insurmountable problem but in the world where profit is king we seem unable or unwilling to solve the problem."
Firstly, there are food mountains in capitalist nations countries, but there are also many areas in central and northern African countries where there are surpluses of food. Despite high levels of food, some of the problems include poor distribution strategies, lack of distribution funding, pride, racism, corruption, civil war etc.
Some countries do not have the transport to get the food to the people, some countries need more medical supplies alongside the food, some have corrupt leaders that use the aid and food for their own selfish needs. Some burn the aid trucks as they enter their regions due to pride. Many people do not allow white people to enter the areas in need simply due to the colour of their skin or their nationality and lastly, many aid workers find it almost impossible to enter certain regions due to the threat of civil war among tribal groups. Zimbabwe is a good example of a country where racism has ruined its opportunity to prosper.
For these many reasons it would be wrong to believe that the capitalist west is unwilling to solve the problem of debt and hunger.
"We the "civilised" west feel we have carte blanche to go into countries and topple "Rogue" regimes and take the moral highground when we do this yet we sit by and do very little about oppressive "regimes" like the military junta in Burma"
There are probably about 30 countries around the world that have oppressive and rogue regimes. The humanitarian and economic costs of giving aid or demilitarizing these countries would be far too much to handle, if done all at once. If an attempt was made to do this, there would probably be a nuclear war.
|
|
|
| by -
kiplingkat
(Fri Jun 20 09:27:55)
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Jun 20 10:42:04 |
A good question ifionlyknewwhy. Looking at it from a historical/anthropological standpoint, while I don't agree that "self-destructiveness" is the actual trait causing all these problems, there are a combination of traits that may end up destroying *(or severely reducing) the human race. In other words, we do not have a self-destrucive drive like lemmings supposedly do (despite our seeming addiction to trends), but we have a combination of traits that are self destructive.
As pinpointed above "selfishness" is a major factor in warfare. There has been warfare as long as there has been settled communities/civilization. In fact, there is a school of thought that warfare grew as a direct result of agriculture: one group settles on a plot of fertile land and then either wants more fertile land to suuport their community or must defend themselves from their neighbors who want more fertile land for their community. This has grown from simple land ownership to involve religious ideals and political power, but the core issue is the same: Selfishness in the desire to be on top of the heap.
I good quote from Lao Tzu I recently came across: "When we know when enough is enough, there will always be enough."
When we stop selfishly desiring more than we need, there will be enough for all.
But I think it probably goes back much, much further than that. Jane Goodall's research showed that chimpanzees (though not our closest cousin they are close, which is a shame, Bonobos are actually pretty peaceful) do engage in inter group warfare with simple tactics. I don't remember what reasons she observed, but I would theorize it's territorial/resource driven.
Which brings us to another factor that will drive us towards self extinction: violence. Human beings have the greatest capacity for violence of any species in this planet. And not because of their technology. Not only do we kill for sport, we react with deadly force more than any other animal. Most animal species in conflict, say mating fights or territorial disputes, put up a show of strength that may be followed by combat. But it is very rare that the combat is actually deadly. In fact many animals when engaged in combat with their own species will not use their most powerful defense weapons (which might kill), but instead just try to push the other guy around.
We skip the pushing the other guy around and go straight to "extreme predjudice".
These two factors, combined with our inventive technological knack to find ways to kill the most amount of people with the least amount of effort, makes us very self-destructive indeed.
I thought we had passed through the worst of our self destructive stage when we began dismantling our nuclear arsenals (Yeah! Go Us!). But while two super powers will not anihilate the world entire, we still have to worry about someone's greed and violence obliterating a small section of the planet. So now instead of going out all at once, we may pick ourselves apart piece by piece. And given our lack of compassion and the fact that our leaders seem to have very little ability to put themselves in someone else's shoes, the human race will not stop at one nuclear detonation, or two. They will not stop until a WOMD is set off on their own soil and they have to deal with the horror themselves.
Perhaps then the few survivors will have learned something.
"If they find me racing white horses, they'll not take me for a buoy"
|
|
|
| by -
damianarlyn
(Fri Jun 20 10:50:17)
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Jun 20 10:50:41 |
Another important distinction that ought to be made I think is that of the difference between selfishness and self-interest. It has already tuched upon briefly in the mention of self-preservation. There is absolutely nothing wrong or unnatural at all with self-interest/self-preservation but at some point it crosses a line into selfishness and that's when it becomes not only self-destructive but ALL-destructive.
In fact, I have been starting to think lately that there may not really be such a thing as a strictly self-destructive individual. I've been thinking lately that every action that we take, every word that we say and every decision that we make has some sort of an effect on those around us. Even those individuals who are so-called self-destructive personalities always sesm to drag others down with them.
You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers and whether he is wise by his questions.
|
|
|
In the matrix, the idea is proposed that humans define their existance through suffering and adversity.
I'm not sure that I'd disagree with that view.
Open up any history text, and you'll see wars all over the place.
Look at our most popular art medium, film, and what do you see there ... more conflict.
So yeah, I guess I'd have to agree with the matrix to an extent.
But, I also believe people are inherently good. That we all try to do what we feel is right, just seem to fall short because as Gandalf says, even the very wise cannot see all ends
You do not truly know someone until they see the Matrix 
|
|
|
| by -
Uinen
(Fri Jun 20 13:42:43)
|
|
Athene, I'm thinking this post should go in the next updates of "The Good Posts"...what do you think?
And you have my bow...
|
|
|
| by -
Aule
(Fri Jun 20 15:04:59)
|
|
Send her a PM to be sure she gets the message.
|
|
|
| by -
Uinen
(Sat Jun 21 19:22:08)
|
|
That I did, Aulë. Thankz
And you have my bow...
|
|
|
Hi all,
First of all thanks to everyone that replied to my thread, in a way the thread had some therapeutic value for myself in a way... certainly I have to say that it is probably the quickest I ever wrote a semi-substantial thread such as this and it probably came mostly from the heart than the head but perhaps that was a good thing. Anyway now to the reply I am doing a general reply as unfortunately I do not have the time to reply to each individually at the moment but I shall try my best to cover the bases as it were.
Okay first up Aule. I understand where you are coming from with regards to the way humans are and I think you could argue that that is the exact reason why humans are self-destructive.
The reasons for starvation are complex and varied, but basically when the population outgrows its resources, it's bound to occur. If this is because of famine or natural disaster, it's one thing, but when it is endemic, we need to address the causes, and not just put a band-aid on them.
Agreed if you are examining the problem on a local level you could indeed say that starvation is caused by the population outgrowing there resources but my point which you may or may not agree with is that if you look at the situation on a global level then you can also say that we have not outgrown (so far) our resources and hence there should be no starvation. Now obviously that is a simplistic reasoning but I hope you understand where I am coming from. With regards to your last part I agree we need to stop the "band-aid" and actually address the route cause as in a lot of situations it is endemic, how we address that I am not sure but I hope someone figures it out!
Next up Mr Branston.
For these many reasons it would be wrong to believe that the capitalist west is unwilling to solve the problem of debt and hunger.
Right firstly on the debt situation while it is true that the G8 countries agreed to cut the debt of approx 40 countries it was a case of not enough done I will refer you to this website for further info on the subject as they put it much better than I ever could http://www.christianaid.co.uk/campaign/debt/0209upda.htm secondly while the west does participate in aid efforts that also can perceived as a case of could do better while I agree that western nation do help to an extent it is often a case of to little to late we only get involved when CNN or ABC brings it to our attention that oh by the guess what another five million Africans are at risk of starvation by which point the damage to an extend has been done. I agree that there are difficulties in getting the aid when it arrives to the places it is needed but should we not be aiming to reach a situation where it should not be such a mad rush to supply the aid I always thought that the old adage "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, Teach him how to fish and he will eat forever" said it best. another good site you may wish to visit Mr Branston and anyone else who is interested is http://www.maketradefair.com
Kip good and interesting post thank you.
Damian interesting way of putting it and as you say when one person indulges in self destructive actions it often takes others with them as is the case with pollution the people that will suffer worst for that will not be us but our children.
But, I also believe people are inherently good. That we all try to do what we feel is right, just seem to fall short because as Gandalf says, even the very wise cannot see all ends
Right MM this is where I can't agree with you I am afraid I do not believe that all humans are inherently good. I think if you are saying that humans are inherently good then it would be more in our nature to do the good things, be the good Samaritan as it were but when you look at the world I believe that humans are intrinsically selfish and I think that is displayed in the cruelty that we see across the world and when you turn your TV onto the news if we were inherently good surely it would be much more difficult than it seemingly is for us to do these things to our fellow man. As to where it all ends that is all to true.
If I have ignored anyone my apologies it is 2.30am in the morning here and I am getting a bit tired, again my thanks to everyone for responding to this thread. Please feel free to contradict, object, disagree or agree with what I have written above again.
www.oxfam.org Lets give peace a chance  !
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Sun Jul 6 14:18:16)
|
|
Hi Elwe-Singollo; Nice thread. (Thanks Athene for the link.)
I'd like to add certain other factors of the human psyche which Tolkien also deals very well with.
We have the potential to be a violent people. We have conquered every continent, and every animal species. Every hunter gatherer society and agrarian culture is now dominated by some industrial military power around the world.
I am not talking about direct self defense. No we human beings could live in harmony with nature and each other. But we have chosen a different path thousands of years ago. It is part of who we are.
1. A lot has already been written about self interest and selfishness. This is obviously a factor but I don't need to add to what has already been said except to highlight that it is often in human nature to lack self restraint, to never be satisfied. Over population, resource depletion, are natural consequences of always wanting more.
2. Fear; Fearful thoughts are a constant companion to everyone. But one great source of fear is the unknown, fear of the stranger and fear of death. We want protection from fearful things or even the thoughts of fear itself.
3. Imagination & Paranoia; While imagination is our great human asset, imagination coupled with fear and self interest creates solutions which are horrible to believe. Such thinking sometimes leads to mass hysteria, a cultural paranoia; leading to the pre-emptive strike, the massacres, the genocides and thinking such as "the only good Indian is a dead Indian" once a common phrase in the US.
4. Vengeance; Here hate and paranoia take on a life of their own where it becomes a belief system. The vendetta and the feud can go on for generations where the original cause is often forgotten.
5. Religion; Whatever religions say about the Golden Rule and respect for the stranger, IMHO the appeal of religion is to calm the fears that people have about death. It can also be a social club, a focus of community ritual. But once the factors mentioned above such as mass paranoia are set in motion, then the religious rules are out the window and society goes about the job of killing people, often innocent people.
6. Playing God; What religion or ideology does selectively contribute to mass murder is the belief in absolute right of a cause. I say selectively because society conveniently ignores human rights and focuses instead on the absolute will of God or the state or the group which feeds to mass paranoia to take brutal action.
THESE FACTORS IN TOLKIEN'S MYTH
These issues are only touched upon in LOTR (by Aragorn in the film). Most of this story after all takes place in the middle of a desperate war. But Tolkien certainly explored these topics (in the Silmarillion) and IMHO did a fine job doing it.
1. Numenor; The last kings of Numenor embody a lot of what we are discussing. The kings are obsessed with greed and the desire for power. Yet world domination is not enough. They want to be immortal. In this quest they will do anything. They will worship Melkor with Sauron as their priest. They will sacrifice their children. They will plan to kill anyone who opposes them.
To me these are very modern characters these kings in an ancient tradition. For some modern industrialists, plantation owners, dictators often have these traits. Desire for total power, fear of enemies, and a willingness to sacrifice their own people (even children) to poor working conditions, pollution, or to simple murder. All this is supported by the masses of the people persuaded by propaganda in some brainwashing processes reminiscent of Orwell's book, "1984".
But the last king of Numenor, paranoid and greedy to the extreme, went to the next step. He thought he could become equal to the Powers of God, to be immortal and all powerful. In the Tolkien myth he was actually able to attack God’s realm in the king’s own preemptive strike, with the desire to kill God’s servants and one can imagine God if he could.
2. Feanor; Here we have a more subtle exploration by Tolkien of fear, paranoia and vengeance. Feanor in his desire to covet his riches, the Silmarils, ends up hating pretty much everyone in the Blessed Realm of the West including his brothers, the Valar, and most of the other Elves. I guess he doesn’t hate his father or sons but it seems this is only because they became his obedient servants almost to the point of slavish devotion.
And talk about vengeance! Feanor and his sons swear this oath to basically kill anyone who has a Silmaril except them. This leads to a lot of killing and the sad, bloody story because they are immortal, doesn’t get resolved for 600 years!
TO SUM IT UP; The Tolkien stories have one very pleasant resolution to all of this. In his world God and God’s Law is an absolute fact. So, these problems are often settled eventually through divine intervention or by judgement in the afterlife. Since Tolkien as a World War 1 veteran experienced first hand the madness of humanity described above in the extreme, his religious faith was a comfort in a very difficult early life. But Tolkien was as perceptive as anyone I've come across in seeing who we are; good and bad.
Have a good one, BB ;-)
|
|
|
Hi BB-15,
Wow excellent post BB and thank you for replying, as ever your response is insightfull and well put. I always like to reply to posts but at the moment I'm stumped to actually add anything of worth to your already excellent post.... If I come up with anything I will get back to you  .
Again many thanks for replying to my thread BB.
Iain
www.oxfam.org Lets give peace a chance !
|
| |
| | |
company.
Advertise on IMDb.
License our content.
