I've decided I don't like humans at all.
Reasons:
*They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes).
*They are (when viewed objectively) ugly.
*They smell bad.
*They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale.
The end result of me not liking humans is that I am indifferent to them at best. (Loathing them at worst)
This has made me more or less in favor of the extinction of the human species (even though, at the current time, that includes myself (yes, I loathe myself sometimes))
Therefore I am unilaterally in favor of anything that results in human deaths. (the more the better).
I don't expect anyone will readily agree with this philosophy, but can anyone here at least see the logic in it, or am I completely insane?
So you'd be happy if I came round to your house and shot you? Presuming I shot myself after, of course 
^Thrilled.
If it weren't for the slight chance that I might find a way to change my species, I would have already committed suicide, preferably in a way that would kill many other people as well.
Too me, you seem like the next Timothy Mcvey.
It's pretty stupid to hate something that you are an active part of.
I suggest that you:
A)learn to deal with your fellow man and your identity as one and realize that the success of your existence is not measured by your intelligence, how handsome you are, how you smell, etc.
B) commit suicide (as you considered) so people will start taking your philosophy seriously. Of course by then you'd be dead so it won't do you any good.
Note the characteristics of humanity you complain about:
*bad smell
*ugly
*arrogant
*intrude with negative effects
One would assume that you would therefore like to be a good smelling, handsome, humble species that doesn't mess things up.
First of all, your character is something wholly unlikely, with conflicting characteristics: Your great humility would conflict with your handsomeness and so forth . . .
Furthermore, your Tao based on mostly material attributes sound very much like our societal ideal; it is what we all regard as perfection, but cannot attain ourselves.
I conclude, therefore, that you are very much a more human-like person than most: striving for impossible human ideals instead of fixing oneself to be more like those ideals.
I derive from your post the most powerful link you have to the rest of humanity; you arrogantly proclaim your hate for humans like yourself to become a sort of individualist icon.
Perhaps you should consider revising your post to look more like this:
*Humanity and I are arrogant.
*Humanity and I are ugly (how can beauty be objectively viewed?).
*Humanity and I smell badly. (again, this is relative)
*Humanity and I mess up nearly everything we come into contact with (our philosophy included).
I'll end by striking off the one positive feature you attributed to humans . . . Intelligence.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| . . . but can anyone here at least see the logic in it, or am I completely insane? |
I find it hard to see how a right-thinking person would see logic in you, nor do I think you are insane. You just weren't intelligent enough to think your theory through before you posted. If you had been intelligent you would have seen the fundamental errors in it.
Hence my creation of a new, more pertinent list:
-Humanity is not generally intelligent.
-Humanity is generally arrogant.
-Humanity cannot be trusted to make judgements about itself. | ocalhoun wrote: |
I've decided I don't like humans at all.
Reasons:
*They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes).
*They are (when viewed objectively) ugly.
*They smell bad.
*They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale.
The end result of me not liking humans is that I am indifferent to them at best. (Loathing them at worst)
This has made me more or less in favor of the extinction of the human species (even though, at the current time, that includes myself (yes, I loathe myself sometimes))
Therefore I am unilaterally in favor of anything that results in human deaths. (the more the better).
I don't expect anyone will readily agree with this philosophy, but can anyone here at least see the logic in it, or am I completely insane? |
Not insane, but hardly logical. Tearing up the philosophy doesn't take much. For instance:
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| *They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes). |
If that were true, you haven't made a case for hating all humans - only humans that "arrogantly proclaim themselves..." yadda yadda. Any humans who say "i am not the pinnacle of evolution or creation" and "my intelligence is limited" are therefore absolved (unless you just want to irrationally hate them anyway). If your conclusion is "i don't like humans at all" and this is your only reason why, your dislike is irrational.
And then:
| ocalhoun wrote: |
*They are (when viewed objectively) ugly.
*They smell bad. |
Neither of these are facts, they are opinions (in fact, none of your arguments are based on fact, but let's focus on these two for now). You attempt to spin them as objective conclusions by saying "when viewed objectively"... but that's meaningless in this context, because "ugly" itself can never be an objective conclusion (and neither can smelling bad). Your argument is thus: "i hate humans. Reason: i hate humans." It is an illogical, circular argument. If this were your only reason why you dislike humans, your dislike is irrational.
And finally:
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| *They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale. |
Once more this is entirely subjective, but specifically - define "mess up". There are humans all over the world as we speak saving ecosystems - and not all of those ecosystems were endangered by human actions. Consider this - we are very quickly coming to the point where we may be able to save the entire planet, and all life on it. One good meteor impact and poof, all life but bacteria and cockroaches will be extinguished... if the cockroaches are lucky. A big enough projectile could shatter the Earth into itty bitty pieces. There is only one species of life on this world that has the potential for stopping such an event, or for saving the Earth should such an event happen... and it ain't the cockroaches. If you really care about the Earth... why would you damn their best and only hope for survival in such an emergency? So once again, if that argument were your only reason why you dislike humans, your dislike would be irrational.
...
Now, if your initial premises had been correct, your conclusions (that you're ok with the extinction of humanity) might have been justified. But they're not. The initial premises all fail the litmus test of logic. Your conclusions, therefore, have no basis, and your philosophy is flawed. | Indi wrote: |
| Now, if your initial premises had been correct, your conclusions (that you're ok with the extinction of humanity) might have been justified. But they're not. The initial premises all fail the litmus test of logic. Your conclusions, therefore, have no basis, and your philosophy is flawed. |
Huzzay! 
| Quote: |
Be so tolerant that your bosom becomes wide like the ocean. Become inspired with faith and love of human beings. Let there be no troubled souls to whom you do not offer a hand, and about whom you remain unconcerned.
|
| ocalhoun wrote: |
*They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes).
|
With enough intelligence it matters not that another species is superior to you in a physical dimension, because you can conger up something that can make you superior to that animal. For example, elephants have a much greater strength than us. However, we invented the elephant gun, and now using our invention we are superior to the elephant.
I hate the human race I have to deal with on any given day for its stupidity too. I think with all this technology we have in the world most people are forgetting that there's an ability called reading, and there's a thing you need to read before using a product called a manual. Also, because of freedom, people now take their freedom for granted, and now people could care less about who drives their country to the ground(or more importantly, who doesn't) as long as Paula Abdul wins American Idol(God, why oh WHY does that have to be a popular show?!!!), or as long as Anna Nicole Smith is dead.
If majority of people thought with their heads rather than their mouths, this world wouldn't have problems. But the previous generation did that so we can throw all the work of Gary Kildall, Karl Marx, and Joeseph Pulitzer all down the drain just so we can idolize some third rate actor on television rather than pay attention to the poor starving kids in Uganda which have been pushed back for a 30 second shot of stars which have done nothing except give us a few cheap movies like Tom Cruise.
| Quote: |
*They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale. |
Again, this comes to the intelligence factor - we know global warming is a real threat, but look at what people are doing - they're buying Ford F-150s and running their electronics 24/7 which gets redirected to power plants which should be running on nuclear power rather than coal, creating even more greenhouse gases and putting ourselves in an even deeper hole than we are now.
I am truly scared and deeply saddened by the idiotic portion of the human race, especially since several neighborhood kids say they're not going to college because they want to gamble in the entertainment industry.
In conclusion I for one welcome our new robot overlords. I however, do not welcome a mutated strain of Ebola Reston, which at this point could burn through the entire population faster than a burning oil well. | Zampano wrote: |
It's pretty stupid to hate something that you are an active part of.
I suggest that you:
A)learn to deal with your fellow man and your identity as one and realize that the success of your existence is not measured by your intelligence, how handsome you are, how you smell, etc.
B) commit suicide (as you considered) so people will start taking your philosophy seriously. Of course by then you'd be dead so it won't do you any good.
|
A)
1) I am already dealing with both as one: I want them both destroyed.
2)How, then, is the success of one's existence measured?
B)
I don't care if people take my philosophy seriously. Why should I care about what wretched humans take seriously or not? | Zampano wrote: |
Note the characteristics of humanity you complain about:
*bad smell
*ugly
*arrogant
*intrude with negative effects
One would assume that you would therefore like to be a good smelling, handsome, humble species that doesn't mess things up.
First of all, your character is something wholly unlikely, with conflicting characteristics: Your great humility would conflict with your handsomeness and so forth . . . |
H. H. Eisenbart
in Eisenbart and Buhrer:
The Kingdom of the Horse
(1969) wrote: |
Where in all the world is nobility found without conceit? Where is there friendship without envy? Where is beauty without vanity? Here one finds gracefulness coupled with power, and strength tempered with gentleness. A constant servant, yet no slave. A fighter, ever without hostility. Our history was written on his back. We are his heirs. But he is his own heritage, the horse. |
This quote shows you how just such a paradox already exists, in the flesh. The only reason humility should conflict with handsomeness is the inherent vanity of human-kind.
| Zampano wrote: |
Furthermore, your Tao based on mostly material attributes sound very much like our societal ideal; it is what we all regard as perfection, but cannot attain ourselves.
I conclude, therefore, that you are very much a more human-like person than most: striving for impossible human ideals instead of fixing oneself to be more like those ideals. |
Want some non-materail reasons to hate humanity? How about that of all the creatures on the earth, no other has been known to make war, kill others for sport, be excessively greedy, or possess the depths of cruelty that humans will sometimes exhibit.
Does my attitude towards humans make me more human than most? First of all, what could it possibly mean to be more human or less human? I am exactly as human as the next person, except that I want to cease being human.
| Zampano wrote: |
I derive from your post the most powerful link you have to the rest of humanity; you arrogantly proclaim your hate for humans like yourself to become a sort of individualist icon.
Perhaps you should consider revising your post to look more like this:
*Humanity and I are arrogant.
*Humanity and I are ugly (how can beauty be objectively viewed?).
*Humanity and I smell badly. (again, this is relative)
*Humanity and I mess up nearly everything we come into contact with (our philosophy included). |
Of course, I myself am guilty of all these faults. Of course I have a powerful link to the rest of humanity. I am still human after all! However, I am trying my hardest to break that powerful link. | Zampano wrote: |
I find it hard to see how a right-thinking person would see logic in you, nor do I think you are insane. You just weren't intelligent enough to think your theory through before you posted. If you had been intelligent you would have seen the fundamental errors in it.
|
I assume you're leaving it up to Indi to expose the fundamental errors, as I don't see you bringing up any except for those that would not seem erroneous if you had thought my 'theory' through.
| Indi wrote: |
If that were true, you haven't made a case for hating all humans - only humans that "arrogantly proclaim themselves..." yadda yadda. Any humans who say "i am not the pinnacle of evolution or creation" and "my intelligence is limited" are therefore absolved (unless you just want to irrationally hate them anyway). If your conclusion is "i don't like humans at all" and this is your only reason why, your dislike is irrational.
And then:
| ocalhoun wrote: | *They are (when viewed objectively) ugly.
*They smell bad. |
Neither of these are facts, they are opinions
And finally:
| ocalhoun wrote: | | *They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale. |
Once more this is entirely subjective, but specifically - define "mess up". There are humans all over the world as we speak saving ecosystems - and not all of those ecosystems were endangered by human actions. Consider this - we are very quickly coming to the point where we may be able to save the entire planet, and all life on it. One good meteor impact and poof, all life but bacteria and cockroaches will be extinguished... if the cockroaches are lucky. A big enough projectile could shatter the Earth into itty bitty pieces. There is only one species of life on this world that has the potential for stopping such an event, or for saving the Earth should such an event happen... and it ain't the cockroaches. If you really care about the Earth... why would you damn their best and only hope for survival in such an emergency? So once again, if that argument were your only reason why you dislike humans, your dislike would be irrational.
...
Now, if your initial premises had been correct, your conclusions (that you're ok with the extinction of humanity) might have been justified. But they're not. The initial premises all fail the litmus test of logic. Your conclusions, therefore, have no basis, and your philosophy is flawed. |
Okay, so let me change that to that reason being only a reason to hate most humans. The other ones will have to be hated for one of the other reasons.
Neither are facts eh?
For looking ugly: Look at your fellow humans. Not just the supermodels or TV-stars; the real average ones on the street. Can you honestly tell yourself that they are beautiful? And even the ones you do like: what more is that than your brain being hard-wired to accept them as beautiful in order to procreate the species?
For smelling bad: If humans don't smell bad why are there whole industries dedicated to making them smell better? Why do people use deodorants, perfumes, scented soap, air fresheners, et cetera other than to cover up their own stench? Try smelling a human that has not used any of these products to improve their smell, and tell me how you like the scent. And that's still with being bathed daily; think what humans would smell like if they were in the same conditions as most animals...
Definitions from google: Define
# botch: make a mess of, destroy or ruin; "I botched the dinner and we had to eat out"; "the pianist screwed up the difficult passage in the second movement"
# ruffle: disturb the smoothness of; "ruffle the surface of the water"
# mess: make a mess of or create disorder in; "He messed up his room"
That describes what humans do to whatever they find well enough.
And there are a thousand times more of them busy messing up ecosystems.
An unlikely circumstance at best. According to the textbooks, Earth has already survived several such impacts. I would not have the human species 'save' the world the way one saves money; to be usurped, not wasted.
| {name here} wrote: |
In conclusion I for one welcome our new robot overlords. I however, do not welcome a mutated strain of Ebola Reston, which at this point could burn through the entire population faster than a burning oil well. |
{name here} at least sees the point I'm making, although he sees the solution in humanities' subjugation by their own machines, whereas I see the solution in the complete elimination of humanity. Both would be acceptable, I suppose. | ocalhoun wrote: |
I've decided I don't like humans at all.
Reasons:
*They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution
*They are ugly.
*They smell bad.
*They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale.
I don't expect anyone will readily agree with this philosophy, but can anyone here at least see the logic in it, or am I completely insane? |
I hope you don't mind me shortening it a bit.
* First thing is changing, we are starting to see humans are just one path (dead end ?) to the perfect creature evolution is trying to create.
* Luckily we have plastic surgery ?
I think there are some really beautiful humans walking around. And I don't like all animals. Some are very ugly(try googling "ugly animal").
*that's why we have perfume and deodorant. So problem solved?
* I have to admit most people do. But .... ....have to think of the but 
Not that insane. Just one of the few who dears to think this way. Most people don't want/dear to think (this way). Because they might find out how useless they are. | Quote: |
Want some non-materail reasons to hate humanity? How about that of all the creatures on the earth, no other has been known to make war, kill others for sport, be excessively greedy, or possess the depths of cruelty that humans will sometimes exhibit.
Does my attitude towards humans make me more human than most? First of all, what could it possibly mean to be more human or less human? I am exactly as human as the next person, except that I want to cease being human. |
First of all, not true. Secondly, let us devide it up!
| Quote: |
| no other has been known to make war |
War occurs becuase of an aspect of gain or need. Yes often times greed.
Our example is: Ants
They have been known, very often in fact, to make "war" or "invade" other colonies for the territory or simply to remove compatition over food.
| Quote: |
| kill others for sport |
Actualy I think you would find that a few preditors do actualy kill other animals for no true gain.
First we will assume you ment kill each other for sport:
-Firstly this is hardly true, humans don't kill each other for SPORT, they kill becuase something is wrong with them mentaly or they are enraged
-Secondly animals have been known to kill off members of their own family becuase of a "fued"
Second, we will assume you ment kill animals for sport.
-First this is often not the case, the resulting "kills" of hunting are almost always used.
-Secondly, animals such as lions have been known to kill things and leave them to rot. (much to the pleasure of scavengers)
| Quote: |
| be excessively greedy |
actualy some animals will consume other's food when they are not hungry often at the cost of the other animals life. Thus, greed.
| Quote: |
| or possess the depths of cruelty that humans will sometimes exhibit. |
define these depths of cruelty. Creatures can very often be cruel to eachother, the question is what kind of "depths" are we talking about here?
Many of the points that you call human flaws are aparent in many facets of nature. Now if you were to point out more factual flaws such as:
-Genetic Mutations - In natural selection they die out, in human society we keep them alive.
-Sinuses - incredubly prone to infection
-Colesteral(sp?) - only humans have it
There are plenty more but if you want other people to understand/believe your philosophy you should realy introduce more fact than opinion.
Ultimately it is not humanity that is flawed, it is the few people that exploit society to put themselves above others. (which is also part of nature, example: leader of the pack) Our issue is not that we are weak, it is that we currently populate more of the earth and therefore it is far more difficult to build a "fair" society. If you want the human race to be perfect, I would suggest removing those that refuse to have respect for each other. Your issue would be many would call you the next Hitler fo trying to engineer the perfect race. The fact of the matter is this:
-You are given the ability to reason above all other creatures, if you did not have this ability you could not question your own existence or humanity
-If in fact you could be another animal and keep your intelect you would certainly find that you would rather be something else.
In my reading your arguement it sounds more like you are not satisfied with what you have and are craving more. Which oddly enough, is greed, a part of your arguement. An interesting paradox no?
Last edited by Aredon on Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:53 pm; edited 2 times in total | ocalhoun wrote: |
I've decided I don't like humans at all.
Reasons:
*They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes).
*They are (when viewed objectively) ugly.
*They smell bad.
*They mess up nearly everything they come in contact with, on an increasingly larger scale. |
Many of the points brought up by Swift in the oft missunderstood last book of Guliver's Travels pertaining to Houyhnhnms and Yahoos.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
The end result of me not liking humans is that I am indifferent to them at best. (Loathing them at worst)
This has made me more or less in favor of the extinction of the human species (even though, at the current time, that includes myself (yes, I loathe myself sometimes))
Therefore I am unilaterally in favor of anything that results in human deaths. (the more the better). |
Which is best described by the label often (I believe) misapplied to Swift; "Misanthrope".
-meaning essentially against (mis), humanity (anthro)^Thanks for the better term to apply to my philosophy: Misanthropy.
It isn't exactly the same, but it's close enough.
| Aredon wrote: |
Secondly, let us devide it up!
|
In the interests of avoiding a never-ending argument consisting of you bringing up more examples of animals with human vices, and me trying to assert that these vices only apply to humans, I'll concede that some animals exhibit some human vices, but I maintain that no single animal possesses all of the vices I attribute to humanity. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| {name here} wrote: |
In conclusion I for one welcome our new robot overlords. I however, do not welcome a mutated strain of Ebola Reston, which at this point could burn through the entire population faster than a burning oil well. |
{name here} at least sees the point I'm making, although he sees the solution in humanities' subjugation by their own machines, whereas I see the solution in the complete elimination of humanity. Both would be acceptable, I suppose. |
"I for one welcome our new robot overlords" was just I joke I couldn't resist to put up. Humanity will eventually die out because of its own stupidity, but I think that advanced AI would be the least of our worries because AI can be controlled. Thermonuclear weapons and ever mutating deadly level 4 virii will probably do us in. | ocalhoun wrote: |
^Thanks for the better term to apply to my philosophy: Misanthropy.
It isn't exactly the same, but it's close enough. |
Let me be the patronizing arrogant pinnacle of evolution that I am when I state that I think that perhaps a better term to apply to you (as you have presented to yourself in these postings) would be a "Byronic Hero". A kind of misanthrope (as the term is traditionally applied), who finds their fellow humans disgusting, and even finds their own "human" traits distasteful (like Gulliver after returning to England). And furthermore tends to display a feeling that you (the Byronic Hero) are better, or at least have much higher goals than all other humans. Because of this you (again, as you have displayed yourself through this thread) are disconnected from others and cannot sympathize with them, nor do you believe they can understand what you have learned (like Faust, Manfred, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, etc). Welcome to the Satanic School of Romanticism...
I sincerely hope that you don't take offense regarding this post. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| I've decided I don't like humans at all..... |
I am not going to pick apart every line of your off-the-cuff post about hating humans as if it was doctoral thesis. Instead, I am going to agree with you in principle. Humans are awful. Not all the time. Not everyone in every way. But, to a large degree, we are a destructive, hateful, intolerant species. I often feel as you seem to, that the universe would be better off without us.
But then someone performs some random act of kindness. Goes out of their way, maybe even causing distress to themselves, for a stranger. It's in those moments that I see hope and think maybe we have something to offer.^Sure there are exceptions, but loathsome is the rule. Those that do act kindly are the ones that strive to overcome their worst human traits.
| Montressor wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | ^Thanks for the better term to apply to my philosophy: Misanthropy.
It isn't exactly the same, but it's close enough. |
Let me be the patronizing arrogant pinnacle of evolution that I am when I state that I think that perhaps a better term to apply to you (as you have presented to yourself in these postings) would be a "Byronic Hero". A kind of misanthrope (as the term is traditionally applied), who finds their fellow humans disgusting, and even finds their own "human" traits distasteful (like Gulliver after returning to England). And furthermore tends to display a feeling that you (the Byronic Hero) are better, or at least have much higher goals than all other humans. Because of this you (again, as you have displayed yourself through this thread) are disconnected from others and cannot sympathize with them, nor do you believe they can understand what you have learned (like Faust, Manfred, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, etc). Welcome to the Satanic School of Romanticism...
I sincerely hope that you don't take offense regarding this post. |
Well, that would apply to me except I don't consider myself better than the average human (at least not for that reason). I want to be better, but I am not: that's why I loathe myself. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Well, that would apply to me except I don't consider myself better than the average human... |
A variation of the Byronic hero then, (like Frankenstein's monster) who despises humanity just slightly more then he despises himself... sort of an enlightened Byronic Hero who realizes that they're just as despicable as the rest of usOk, so if you loathe yourself so much, why have you not yet committed suicide? Because you're a human being just like the rest of us, and you have your own reasons, whatever they may be.
I think it goes without saying that the world would be better off without us around but the instinct to survive and reproduce is pretty strong, so I don't see the human race just giving up anytime soon.
If you look at the world from a non-superstitious (religious) point of view, we're just animals like all the rest of them, and we're here living our lives. Since God didn't put us here, we're just doing what we do because that's who we are.
So, until you actually do take yourself out, you should aim to be the best person you can be:
- do unto others as you would have them do unto you
- love many, trust few, do harm to no one (the words of Yau-Man from "Survivor" last night)
- accept all people as equal, not just those in your church/city/country/religion/race
- accept that human activity is causing global warming and examine your life and see what you can do to lessen your personal impact
I love people.
I view this circumstance like rain...
When theres too much, too violent, terrible...it floods.
When hated and misunderstood, all we see the sky doing is getting out clothes wet and our shoes dirty with mud.
But when we understand the science, or simple understand it's existance, we learn that rain quenches a hungry field of grain. Flood is an unevoidable condition. The true masterpeice of rain is that it springs forth life in every concievable way, more then I can possible want to explain.
Such is with us, you can look at your neighbor like you look at the rain, and all you will ever see is wet clothes. But not minding wet underwear, imagine everything else it does, the more horrible and ever more beautiful.
Imagine a horrible situation. Your at gunpoint looking down the barrel of some weapon. Time stops, and your given hours in the frozen position, but unable to avoid the incoming bullet. Anger and hatred can swell up in you for humanity for puting you in this situation. You can rage all you like, your perfectly entitled. Now focus on the barrel pointed at you. Of the horrible humanity you've spawned from and are soon to die from, what else could of formed such a weapon? Nothing, absolutely nothing. In all it's morbid mechanical art, the gun is an abnormality of nature. It could never of come to be without us. Every soft curve, precicely calibrated gear, and deadly design is a sumation of something incredible. The gun is incredible because in nature it's an impossibility without us. Whatever contempt we have for the being that created this horrific tool, we must hold some awe and wonder for it as well. Nothing short of the best in known existance could of made it. What else could have? And once realising it's infinite potential, how can you hate it with this reason in your mind?
I can't imagine raging with that trivial hate in the face of something so universally supreme. Espeacially with the knowledge that it's potential has never been soley focused at our discomfort.
Last edited by UlrikeSE on Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:56 am; edited 1 time in total
Just a food for thought 
If you don't like humans then why you still alive? After all, you are human. 
Of course if you look at us objectively we are a terrible stain on the face of this planet, a virus sapping all the life and altering this planet without a care for the result. We treat all life apart from humans with disdain as if it is there merely for our sustenance and enjoyment. And yes, the majority of people are incredibly ugly.
BUT
We're talking about species here, you can't exactly change teams. The best you can do is strive to be the opposite of all the things in you race that you hate, and hope that is enough to keep you going.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| ^Sure there are exceptions, but loathsome is the rule. Those that do act kindly are the ones that strive to overcome their worst human traits. |
Exactly, name one other creature in the known world that is able to choose to overcome any flaws they may have. Our difference is we are not driven by instinct, humans are not fundimentaly flawed. Though some people may very well make choices that make them "flawed" in the eyes of virtue. Remember, we aren't all jerks . | ocalhoun wrote: |
| They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). |
Name one way humans (with the resources at their disposal) are inferior to any other species.
Name one scenario where humans (with the resources at their disposal) are less likely to survive than any other species.
There aren't many, I'll bet.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes). |
The "intelligence" is not about being a rocket-scientist. It's much more fundamental than that.
Your other "reasons" are equally infantile.
I can only imagine :
* Wow ! That Crustacean is gorgeous !
* Man ! That Skunk smells real good !
* That herd of goats realizes that they've grazed the field to the ground and they are now practising conservation!
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| am I completely insane? |
But seriously, hating humans because you think they're ugly or that they smell bad ??!! | Montressor wrote: |
| an enlightened Byronic Hero who realizes that they're just as despicable as the rest of us |
I'll accept that description.
| stone1343 wrote: |
| Ok, so if you loathe yourself so much, why have you not yet committed suicide? Because you're a human being just like the rest of us, and you have your own reasons, whatever they may be. |
| rheanna wrote: |
| Just a food for thought If you don't like humans then why you still alive? After all, you are human. |
Because, I have a slight hope of ceasing to be human. My overriding goal in life is to change my species. Without this hope, I would have already committed suicide.
| Kitten Kong wrote: |
We're talking about species here, you can't exactly change teams. The best you can do is strive to be the opposite of all the things in you race that you hate, and hope that is enough to keep you going. |
That statement is what I hope will prove to be false. Alternatively, I could go be a hermit and avoid human contact as much as possible, although I would still have to live with my own despicable self.
| Aredon wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | ^Sure there are exceptions, but loathsome is the rule. Those that do act kindly are the ones that strive to overcome their worst human traits. |
Exactly, name one other creature in the known world that is able to choose to overcome any flaws they may have. Our difference is we are not driven by instinct, humans are not fundimentaly flawed. Though some people may very well make choices that make them "flawed" in the eyes of virtue. Remember, we aren't all jerks . |
No other creature has such a need to overcome it's fundamental flaws.
Yes, they are. Why else should they have to overcome their flaws as you stated in the previous sentence.
This is possibly the reason humans are flawed.
But most of you are. (No offense)
| mOrpheuS wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | They arrogantly proclaim themselves the pinnacle of evolution (or creation, whichever you please), and as the reason for that conclusion give their high degree of intelligence. This, however, is only one way humans are superior (in fact there are several kinds of animals which surpass humans in nearly every way except for intelligence). |
Name one way humans (with the resources at their disposal) are inferior to any other species.
Name one scenario where humans (with the resources at their disposal) are less likely to survive than any other species.
There aren't many, I'll bet.
| ocalhoun wrote: | | Also, this highly proclaimed intelligence doesn't seem to show in the vast majority of humans, nor does it seem to make them easier to get along with (quite the opposite sometimes). |
The "intelligence" is not about being a rocket-scientist. It's much more fundamental than that.
Your other "reasons" are equally infantile.
I can only imagine :
* Wow ! That Crustacean is gorgeous !
* Man ! That Skunk smells real good !
* That herd of goats realizes that they've grazed the field to the ground and they are now practising conservation!
| ocalhoun wrote: | | am I completely insane? |
But seriously, hating humans because you think they're ugly or that they smell bad ??!! |
That is a rather large qualification, really. And how else are these 'resources' accumulated, except by the detriment of the species that humans compete with? I would ask you how a human (without resources at it's disposal) is superior to other animals (a horse, for example) in any way other than intelligence and manual dexterity.
No, there aren't many, when the qualification of available resources is met. Otherwise, how could humans have so populated the Earth?
You would say that the gap between human and animal intelligence is wide? I'll say to you that this notion is derived from another one of humanity's flaws: the tendency to treat anything different from oneself as inferior to oneself. (Based on a subconscious notion that oneself is the very epitome of perfection) From such a notion springs racism, sexism, et cetera. Just because animals' intelligences work in different ways than humans' doesn't mean that they are all that inferior. For examples:
-A dolphin can interpret the signals from it's echolocation instantly, in a manner superior to what humans can do even with the aid of computers.
-A horse has a better memory than most, if not all, humans.
Pardon me if I stick to examples that I am familiar with.
It has been previously stated that some animals are worse than humans in some ways, but I maintain that no animal is worse than a human in all ways.
Among other reasons, yes. For example, cows are also ugly and also often smell bad, but they exemplify few or none of the other traits I despise humans for.So we can focus on specific good traits of animals and assume that those single traits make them better than human beings, but we cannot take one trait that is worse than humans and assume they are worse?
Taking your statement from before that no creature exerts all the flaws exibited by humanity:
No, but they have their own set of flaws, some worse, some not so bad as humans.
From your logic we can derive therefore:
That a creature having one trait better than humanity cannot possibly have all traits better than humanity, and therefore is not supperior. Perhaps equal at best.
also, it is the fact that human beings have personality flaws to overcome that is a flaw, seems rather foolish. Many animals exibit personalities as well, the difference is that the majority of the time they lack the mental capasity to CHOOSE to overcome their traits.
No, we don't assume that animals aren't as inteligent as us, its proven through science that the mental capacity of most species doesn't quite rise to ours.
Yes, science already recognizes several species as at a level of intelect possibly at ours or slightly below (Squid, Dolphins, etc). Based on behavure and brain structure. So please don't assume that all humans make the assumtion they are the greatest thing in the world. For the most part, in the known world, we are the most advanced species. It is foolish, yes, to assume that every other creature on the planet is far inferior to us. I'm sure many species are not very far behind, but the human variable remains, and we seem to pull through things that other creatures would lack the ability, or the motivation, to escape.
So loath us and hate us all you want, at the moment we are the most advanced, and we will most likely continue to be the most advanced unless we stumble across some portion of the universe that is undiscovered and find some race superior to ours. Untill then we will have the capability to wipe out any other species on the planet at a whim, and untill another species can do that we can and will consider ourselves above them on the "food chain".
Would it probubly be easier to be simple? Yeah, maybe, with our increasing level of society and the increasing amount we know, yes, additional flaws will come up that we will probubly have to deal with. Other creatures lack these, becuase they don't have to deal with the increasing intelect of everyone around them. As society increases, so will our problems, it is not a flaw it is a fact of life. Every species has social order and problems therein.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| That is a rather large qualification, really. And how else are these 'resources' accumulated, except by the detriment of the species that humans compete with? |
Any individual acquiring resources is always detrimental to the others in the system (they each get that much less of it) - what's wrong with a human doing the same ?
There are many organisms (apart from humans) that actually eat others - that's more than just a detrimental way of acquiring resources.
All species compete with others, whatever is wrong with humans doing the same ?!
And despite all their "inferiority", they beat all other species to it - hands down.
Isn't being able to beat others to resources, proof that humans are more superior, evolutionally ?
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| I would ask you how a human (without resources at it's disposal) is superior to other animals (a horse, for example) in any way other than intelligence and manual dexterity. |
I would ask you exactly when is a human "without resources" ?
I mentioned this condition precisely to keep non-practical examples from popping up, but that now seems unavoidable.
I would also ask you which of the following is the best tool for survival :
Intelligence and manual dextreity ?
Ability of see better with naked eyes ?
Ability of hear ultrasonic sound without instruments ?
Bright colourful plumage ?
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| You would say that the gap between human and animal intelligence is wide? I'll say to you that this notion is derived from another one of humanity's flaws: the tendency to treat anything different from oneself as inferior to oneself. (Based on a subconscious notion that oneself is the very epitome of perfection) |
If you want me to list out a few things (apart from my "bias") that makes me believe humans as a species are superior to, say, slugs ... it can be done.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| It has been previously stated that some animals are worse than humans in some ways, but I maintain that no animal is worse than a human in all ways. |
Perhaps.
But how does that prove that humans aren't superior to any and all of them ?
A heptathlon winner may not necessarily be the fastest runner and the best swimmer.
Aredon has explained in much better words what I'm trying to say here.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
-A dolphin can interpret the signals from it's echolocation instantly, in a manner superior to what humans can do even with the aid of computers.
-A horse has a better memory than most, if not all, humans. |
What I don't understand is the reason why you completely discount intelligence, but give much prominence to trivial abilities which humans could easily surpass with their intelligence anyway.
Imagine the heptathlon winner from the above example using a motorbike for the running course, and a motorboat for the swimming course ... you get the idea.
To help me better understand your argument on superiority of species :
Nominate the species that you'd rather dub the "pinnacle of evolution" at this point.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| Among other reasons, yes. For example, cows are also ugly and also often smell bad, but they exemplify few or none of the other traits I despise humans for. |
Hint : The purpose behind giving examples of ugly and smelly organisms wasn't mockery.
The point was - every species has traits that you can despise them for.
Meanwhile try to come up with a few non-human species that will actually help another species' survival even when they're not involved in a direct symbiosis.
A species who'd use it's biggest power (intelligence in case of humans) for the betterment of others as well.@ the starter of the thread..
you dont like humans at all..? have you forgotten the fact that the two people tht are the sole reason for your existance are human..?
did you forget the fact that the teacher who taught you language was human? the guy who created the computer you are using is human? the guys who created these forums is human..?
have you totally forgotten the fact that you are human...?
i guess your avatar has done pretty good impact on you..
talking about anti-humanitairism..!! well..you could try and start that but trust me..you wont get many followers...
in the end..its just the couple of friends that stick by your side and not the loads of materialistic gain you've had over the course of time..!!
This is just as bad as a Jew being anti-semetic.
@Aredon & Morpheus:
We seem to have lost the point of the thread here. I am not trying to prove that humans are not the superior species; that's an indisputable fact. I'm trying to say that humans are not the better species.
(Just like how your boss at work may be your superior, but you might hate him nonetheless.)
| iNs@nE wrote: |
@ the starter of the thread..
you dont like humans at all..? have you forgotten the fact that the two people tht are the sole reason for your existance are human..?
did you forget the fact that the teacher who taught you language was human? the guy who created the computer you are using is human? the guys who created these forums is human..?
have you totally forgotten the fact that you are human...?
talking about anti-humanitairism..!! well..you could try and start that but trust me..you wont get many followers...
in the end..its just the couple of friends that stick by your side and not the loads of materialistic gain you've had over the course of time..!! |
No, I have not forgotten these things.
However,
I would rather two horses have brought me into existence, rather than two humans.
I would rather not have (and not need) language, computers, et cetera and be without them.
I have not forgotten that I am human: That's why I loathe myself.
You misunderstand me. I don't care about getting followers. They would be human followers and I don't like humans. This is just a philosophy I adopt for myself.
I suppose the reason I have so much disdain for humans is that I am one. If I could honestly tell myself that I am not human, and that I am not disgusted with myself, then I could probably tolerate humans just like one tolerates cockroaches. However, since I am disgusted with myself, and notice that all these other humans are much like myself, I am disgusted with them as well.
| missdixy wrote: |
| This is just as bad as a Jew being anti-semetic. |
Perhaps, but if there was a Jew who was convinced that Jews were horrible, why should that stop that Jew from being anti-semitic?
Why do you assume that any person must naturally not hate others like themselves, or themselves?
BIAS!
Subconsciously, you think 'I am perfect, therefore, the more different you are from me, the less perfect you are.' But what if you are not perfect? ocalhoun, would it be reasonable of me to re-phrase the question about superiority or whatever of the human species this way:
Would the world be better off without humans on it?
I kind of think that gets to the heart of your dilemma. It seems like it's our ability to affect the environment the way we do, greed, wars and the rest that bothers you so much.
Before we came along and our population started exploding and we changed the environment, it would've been a beautiful place to live. Nature controlled populations and each species just went about its life. Sounds pretty good to me.
So I say yes, the world would've been better off if humans had never existed.
If people weren't so moronic I wouldn't have a problem with humanity. If people had intelligence I would be happy to be a philanthropist. Unfortunately few people on this planet actually have brains. I don't know if CRTs are to blame for rotting brains or what but as technology has furthered people have gotten so stupid that I cannot believe it at times, and I'm not talking just about computers but other technologies as well.
I feel inclined on writing about this and posting it on the web right now, but I'm too tired from wasting my time doing manual labor.
i can't help but see nothing but hopelessness and laziness imprinted all over the first post, "justifying" the so-called hatred.
and the assumption that humans are ugly and have foul odor could only be a direct result of that hatred, therefore pointless.
You seem to think that your reason for continued existance is due to your hope that humans can be changed. And yet, you cite faults that you claim are "fundamental" qualities of humanity, such as our ugliness and foul odor. If these qualities are fundamental, can they be changed? I suspect that what you are most disgusted by is not the human creature, but human culture.
To all the other debaters: I think any discussion of the virtues or vices of animals should probably end. Virtue and morality (at least as we understand them) are human concepts, and have no rational application in the animal world. Animals are not better than us, nor are they worse. The same goes for things like beauty and odor. To us, rotting garbage is filthy and disgusting, but to a fly it is ambrosia.
