Red, I’m glad we can talk through this reasonably.

As I explained, my main problem was in the ‘pleasure’ some seem to take in…you know, ‘smoting thy enemies’. As I explained, you may very well be right when you say that violence is inherent in human behaviour. I put it to you then, (and this is probably breaking into philosophical territory) that if it is something that is unescapable in the same way as lust, then why would violent actions not be forgivable? After all, violent behaviour is a ‘fact of life’ in society as you claim. The perpetrator is merely acting out an inevitability of global consciousness. Why then, would punishment do any good, if we’ve already accepted violence won’t go away? Just a thought.

You said my logic would lead to people stopping screwing in order to control the population. Well, I would suggest maybe birth control would be a far more logical option. This may seem niggly, but it’s an important distinction, because if we were to stretch the metaphor, it would be to create an environment where humans can act out their natural sexual/competitive/violent/whatever urges without doing the damage. Sport, instead of war, maybe? Have you seen rugby players? They’re obviously born to fight. They could reasonably be considered nature’s warriors with nothing left to fight about.

I think we are at a major turning point in human history. For the first time ever, through science, psychology, philosophy and a sort of ‘global’ perspective, we are able to objectively view human behaviour, all the way from one person through to whole societies, and go: “yeah we do that because that’s how we used to survive in hunter and gatherer days. It’s an instinct that’s no longer need though.”

Recognising the ‘why’, I believe, is the first step towards overcoming the problem. I just don’t see just the acceptance of violence to be a very productive attitude.

Apologies for getting off track a little...

PS: I get the costs thing. To me it seems like a reasonable price to pay for a kickass free society.

In answer to redneck - I have stated my case but lets go over it again:

Capitol punishment is morally wrong: It exists in some jurisdictions to make a few people fell good - some even feel aroused by the concept; killing is futile: kiling begets killing - killing murderers is little more than a vengefull act that begets revenge; the judiciary make too many mistakes and kills too many innocent people and or kills those who are mentally impaired; killing criminals is no proven deterrent.

There are close paralles between those who kill for fun, profit, passion, politics and those who kill for revenge guised as justice - it is a destructive state of mind that perpetuates a down ward spiral of hatred and bitterness and more killing will not stop it and fails to benefit any one; capitol punishment does not protect a community it just exposes it to more death fostering an exceptance of violent acts.

I will say no more on the subject.

Almost every human being has the capacity for extreme violence. If a large predatory animal attacked your young son you would hardly stand back and watch the animal devour your child. Violent behaviour is perfectly natural, whether that behaviour is judged to be right or wrong at the time depends entirely upon situational context.

That does not mean that since violent behaviour is natural that it should be considered inevitable and legal. Laws exist primarily to prevent violence within the group. But extreme violence towards out groups can be considered admirable behaviour, depending upon situational context again. Soldiers who can slaughter their nations enemies like civilised men usually have medals, honours and laurels heaped upon them for their efforts. No society on this Earth proscribes violent behaviour towards any threatening out group. Even the Christian Ten Commandments do not state “Thou Shalt Not Kill.” They say “Thou Shalt Not Murder.” (That is, kill within the group.)

I can see that my example which I gave to you last time which illustrated that human behaviour is much more dependent upon human emotional needs and drives than upon logic or reason did not sink in. So I will give you another.

Billions of people on this planet have a compelling emotional need to imagine that they are immortal, and that their conscious mind will somehow live forever. To this end, they will worship ephemeral spirits or wooden idols in their quest to gain that immortality. It is no use using reason or rationality to convince them that they are stupid, because they do not want to know. Their deep emotional need to acquire immortality transcends any logic, but this does not mean that they are inherently stupid. Many of these people are very successful.

Finally I would add that whereas you claim that humans have reached a new age where we can transcend our emotional minds and become less violent. Sorry to disappoint you, but violent criminal behaviour in this and almost every Western society is rising exponentially. That is why so many US states reintroduced the death penalty.

Uh…..huh. Yeah, the death penalty in the US sure did stop all that crime!

Firstly, when I said I believe we are capable of being less violent, I didn’t say we *are* being less violent. You say that violence in society is rising exponentially. I never said otherwise. So don’t worry, you haven’t disappointed me.

Of course I trust you know what exponential means and couldn’t possibly have been using the term literally, right? But I digress.

I’m not sure what your example proves. You are likening those who ignore rationality for spirituality to those who ignore rationality for…what? Killing? I don’t get it.

I understand perfectly the idea that you’re attempting to convey. I was just telling you that you got the metaphor wrong. You said my logic would extend to stopping screwing. I was saying no, my logic would extend to birth control (which is actually far more logical). The same logic can be extended to the main point - rather than real war, perhaps a less damaging way to express these natural human urges, video games maybe, or that thing where you get into those huge sumo suits and jump on each other. Safe war, just like safe sex! Makes for a far more well rounded metaphor, don’t you think?

If you really want to talk logic, I think my ‘Killing = bad, Living = good’ logic is pretty hard to beat. It’s worked for me pretty well so far, anyway.

…I’m looking for points to respond to, but your post is so wishy washy it’s hard to know what point (if any) you’re trying to make. Ok, so a lot of what I’ve said has been just thoughts. The only real statement I’m standing behind is that it’s sick to take pleasure in any killing. Are you arguing against me on that point, or not? Because that’s all this started with. I was questioning why you would take any pleasure in death. Pretty basic really.

Well?

spendocrat, “perhaps a less damaging way to express these natural human urges, video games maybe”. The use of video games and other simulated violence, has been shown to increase, rather than dispel violent attitudes. Because so many of us see the futility of violence, yet fail to agree as to why, shows that it may not be natural at all.

It is more than likely to be indoctrinated and programmed into us, socially and culturally. As to why, can be for a variety of reasons, those old mythical ideologies that continue to express themselves violently around the world is a major cause. The need in the past to provide security and devise methods to bring down food and attacks from hostile carnivorous. The development of superstitions that created differences between different groups.

Many things would bring about this programming. In this day and age we have other methods for living, but have failed to remove the old indoctrinations.

To alter this would require a total change to education and society. In the past, the excuse, I know not what I do, was acceptable. Not now, those that commit heinous crimes, are fully aware of life and what it means. So it is more important to provide a relevant deterrent for these crimes that is fully understood by all. Those that have a brain, will adhere to social and legal standards.

Those that are just so self centred as to see nothing but what they want and use what ever means they can to get it, don't deserve to live within a civilised society. You can only make society safe to live in, if you remove the problems. That is the real logic, not what we would all like to see or feel good about.

We have a growing technology that is making it easier to determine the actuality of a crime. Used in the right way, mistakes would virtually disappear. If you tell someone that they will die if they do a certain thing, and they still do it. Whose fault is that, certainly not the victims or societies.

Human beings are the most successful predators on this planet. The normal human reaction to the act of a hunter gaining a kill is usually pride or even elation. If you do not understand that, then I presume that you have lived an unnaturally deprived life entirely within a city, have never gone hunting or fishing, and so have never experienced one important facet of normal and natural human behaviour.

Your philosophy on violence is that human beings must stop being human. You maintain that all humans must heed the call of their logical minds and judge that all violence is bad, because you say that all violence is bad. That is a bit like saying that all crime can be cured by simply telling all criminals that their behaviour is hurting people and they should therefore stop being naughty. Good God. Is this the level of your intellectual capacity? How old are you? 10? 11? 12?

I know exactly what the word “exponential” means. If you might trouble yourself to buy a copy of “Rising Crime in Australia” by Lucy Clarke, you would see with your own eyes the “J” curve graphs which indicate the rising levels of violent criminal behaviour in this country. Serious criminal behaviour in this country was FALLING until the beginning of the 1950’s. It then began to rise slowly and the rate of increase has become steeper each your. That is an “exponential” rise.

But it is not hard to understand why violent crime is rising. We have allowed the importation of certain crime prone immigrant groups who look upon our people in the same way that a pack of wolves looks at a flock of defenceless and non violent sheep. And we have allowed our entertainment media to glamourise the concepts of violence, criminality and drug abuse to our youngest generation, to the extent that the Australian Institute of Criminology has said it is “puzzled” by the serious increases in violent criminal behaviour (including rape and murder) being committed by Australian children.