Conquer Club

Inspired by BBS's thread, but I'm going in a different direction with this.

It's not that the Japanese are to blame or anything silly like that, but are you guys claiming you feel actual sympathy for them? like you would feel when a friend is hurt?

What about all the other people who die every day? You guys feel sympathy for them too? D'you mourn every damn human being's passing?

Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

Perhaps more like empathy?

If I had Japanese relatives, or friends living in Japan, I guess it would hit closer to home.

However, it's a level of sympathy.

To say you care nothing about the situation paints you as a complete dick. Mothers and children are dead, dying, or still missing. However, you are not expected to sink to your knees, wail to the heavens, and rend your hair to mix blood with your tears.

Unless it's your mother or child ...


It's just not a black and white issue.

JRock

Johnny Rockets wrote:Perhaps more like empathy?

If I had Japanese relatives, or friends living in Japan, I guess it would hit closer to home.

However, it's a level of sympathy.

To say you care nothing about the situation paints you as a complete dick. Mothers and children are dead, dying, or still missing. However, you are not expected to sink to your knees, wail to the heavens, and rend your hair to mix blood with your tears.

Unless it's your mother or child ...


It's just not a black and white issue.

JRock

That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

I think that monkey sphere article makes some good points, I mean your rational brain can decide that it's a good thing to spare a hundred bucks and help them out, but I don't think it's normal for you to FEEL anything for them.

Aww poor ShitTosser. He was always my favorite. I'll dearly miss him.

-TG

Haggis_McMutton wrote:I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

This is scary

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Caring for others is one of the traits in evolution that has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

While the basic point is valid -- we care more about individuals we know or can get to know,than for huge masses of people --- they fail to fully illustrate some important differences between humans and monkeys. Its not just that our brains are larger, the way we process information is different from monkeys. That is why we can speak, not just one, but multiple languages, but monkeys can only use a few signs/sounds.

For example, that people do not box up glass may have less to do with "not caring" and more to do with the thinking that we know not everyone would take such steps, so the garbage collectors need to take steps to ensure they will not get cut, that they need to protect themselves and do our extra effort is just not necessary.

We had a classic example of this just recently. The Tsunami hit a few days before a large fire, where 1 person was tragically killed, many other people were left homeless, including serveral kids in my son's school. We talked about the Tsunami, it was sad. However, the victims of the fire are being stopped in the street and handed money, bags of clothing (too much clothing, in fact) have been donated.. etc. These people are OUR responsibility, the Japanese people... many of us have donated money, but they are not our personnal responsibility. I did call a friend of mine who has a mother overseas to see if they needed help getting her a ticket here (I just got my tax return back and so had some money I could loan for an emergency.. knowing FULL well it would be repaid soon), but lots of people are, together helping those Japanese victims. No one else, outside of our greater community (I include nearby towns in that, not just our own town), would help the fire victims.

I like the article. I've actually read something about this before, but with a different, much less funny name, and a higher number of maximum people we can actually conceptualize as people. But it was written back in the 90's so I'll trust this source over that. Interesting stuff. The guy who wrote the book I'm referring to also posited that racism stems from this, sorta like the article. Good stuff Haggis.

As far as the Japanese go, I mean, I feel bad for them, that's gotta suck. But no, it's not the same as if it happened to someone I knew. Before, I would hear about people being raped and murdered, and it was like, "oh well, shit happens all the time." Then it happened to someone I know. I reacted quite a bit different. Now I'm a bit more sensitive to that kind of thing just because of the familiarity. I suspect anyone who has lost loved ones to or lived through an earthquake would have more sympathy for the Japanese than those who haven't.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

This is scary

Allright. Do you also personally care about the people who died in the mongol invasion of China?
how far back does your empathy extend? Do you have unlimited capability for compassion? At some point it becomes only a statistic.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Caring for others is one of the traits in evolution that has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Yes, we've evolved to care about our family, we've evolved to care about our tribe, we haven't evolved to care about the tribe 1000 miles away.
I never said anything about being "not worthy", I just don't think it is actually possible to care about everyone in a significant way. I think we try to believe it is possible cause it makes us feel better.
Like I said, a lot of these acts are obviously horrible from a rational standpoint, you don't need feelings to believe they are horrible.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

While the basic point is valid -- we care more about individuals than huge masses of people, they fail to fully illustrate some important differences between humans and monkeys. Its not just that our brains are larger, the way we process information is different from monkeys. That is why we can speak, not just one, but multiple languages, but monkeys can only use a few signs/sounds.

Sure, there are differences, but I think the basic point remains. Do you always consider how your actions might affect the garbage man? or the cleaning lady or so on?
The example about traffic was pretty good as well, why don't people act like that in smaller groups?

tokerForElf wrote:As far as the Japanese go, I mean, I feel bad for them, that's gotta suck. But no, it's not the same as if it happened to someone I knew. Before, I would hear about people being raped and murdered, and it was like, "oh well, shit happens all the time." Then it happened to someone I know. I reacted quite a bit different. Now I'm a bit more sensitive to that kind of thing just because of the familiarity. I suspect anyone who has lost loved ones to or lived through an earthquake would have more sympathy for the Japanese than those who haven't.

This is a good point, and one of the "tricks" i think we may use to make ourselves care. Identify huge masses of people with a single person whom we actually know and who has suffered from the same plight, that way some of the sympathy may rub off


Also, on a tangent, I just finished reading the last strip of oots, and noticed something related to this in both my and the general forum's reaction.

There's this smart charismatic completely selfish dictator, who as it often happens, despite being completely evil is liked by a lot of people(me included). He's done all sorts of terrible things, like burning dozens of slave alive for trying to escape, but that didn't seem to affect too many people's views about him, we didn't know who the slaves are.
Now, he's just cold-bloodily ordered the death of two prisoners who are sort of episodic characters and good friends and whom we somewhat know and care about(even though they too aren't exactly good people). As soon as this happened I couldn't help but feel that I like the dictator slightly less, a feeling that was echoed in the forums.
It's because we actually know something about these guys, we actually care somewhat about them.
I know it's just a comic, but I think this happens to varying degrees in RL as well.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

This is scary

Allright. Do you also personally care about the people who died in the mongol invasion of China?
how far back does your empathy extend? Do you have unlimited capability for compassion? At some point it becomes only a statistic.

OK, sort of semantics more than anything else.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Caring for others is one of the traits in evolution that has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Yes, we've evolved to care about our family, we've evolved to care about our tribe, we haven't evolved to care about the tribe 1000 miles away.[/quote] Not true, now. Perhaps it was once, but the fact is that now many of us are even more "connected" to people far away than here. Also, because we know more people more readily, our capacity to care has shifted some.

Ironically, some people may actually care more about those 1000 people far away than those nearby. I talk about the local fire below. The home was a HUD home. Instantly, many people assumed it was a drug house and essentially withheld help from several families for that reason.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:I never said anything about being "not worthy", I just don't think it is actually possible to care about everyone in a significant way. I think we try to believe it is possible cause it makes us feel better.
Like I said, a lot of these acts are obviously horrible from a rational standpoint, you don't need feelings to believe they are horrible.

Except, that is the thing. Of COURSE, I know you understand those are people and I am not suggesting you are in any way about to paint a swastika on your shoulder, but it is a continuum. Saying you care less about people 1000 miles away or who we don't know is one thing. Saying they are "just statistics" is something else. It IS how we wind up being able to justify what wind up being horrific acts.

Today, more than ever our daily actions DO actually impact people all across the world, that is why it is more important now, than ever to actually care about, pay attention to and understand other people. It may be somewhat natural to care less about the Chinese "masses", but unless we do.. we are ALL "doomed", in a sense.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

While the basic point is valid -- we care more about individuals than huge masses of people, they fail to fully illustrate some important differences between humans and monkeys. Its not just that our brains are larger, the way we process information is different from monkeys. That is why we can speak, not just one, but multiple languages, but monkeys can only use a few signs/sounds.

Sure, there are differences, but I think the basic point remains. Do you always consider how your actions might affect the garbage man? or the cleaning lady or so on?
The example about traffic was pretty good as well, why don't people act like that in smaller groups?

tokerForElf wrote:As far as the Japanese go, I mean, I feel bad for them, that's gotta suck. But no, it's not the same as if it happened to someone I knew. Before, I would hear about people being raped and murdered, and it was like, "oh well, shit happens all the time." Then it happened to someone I know. I reacted quite a bit different. Now I'm a bit more sensitive to that kind of thing just because of the familiarity. I suspect anyone who has lost loved ones to or lived through an earthquake would have more sympathy for the Japanese than those who haven't.

This is a good point, and one of the "tricks" i think we may use to make ourselves care. Identify huge masses of people with a single person whom we actually know and who has suffered from the same plight, that way some of the sympathy may rub off


Also, on a tangent, I just finished reading the last strip of oots, and noticed something related to this in both my and the general forum's reaction.

There's this smart charismatic completely selfish dictator, who as it often happens, despite being completely evil is liked by a lot of people(me included). He's done all sorts of terrible things, like burning dozens of slave alive for trying to escape, but that didn't seem to affect too many people's views about him, we didn't know who the slaves are.
Now, he's just cold-bloodily ordered the death of two prisoners who are sort of episodic characters and good friends and whom we somewhat know and care about(even though they too aren't exactly good people). As soon as this happened I couldn't help but feel that I like the dictator slightly less, a feeling that was echoed in the forums.
It's because we actually know something about these guys, we actually care somewhat about them.
I know it's just a comic, but I think this happens to varying degrees in RL as well.[/quote]
Yes, and you hit upon why so many despotic leaders wind up persisting.

This is precisely the kind of "logic" the US has used in the past, still seems to employ. I mean, you always hear that we need to overthrow x regime because they are doing horrible things to their people, but there is a "strange cooincidental connection" between our ability to see "terrible acts" and the importance that country has to our economic interests.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Inspired by BBS's thread, but I'm going in a different direction with this.

It's not that the Japanese are to blame or anything silly like that, but are you guys claiming you feel actual sympathy for them? like you would feel when a friend is hurt?

What about all the other people who die every day? You guys feel sympathy for them too? D'you mourn every damn human being's passing?

Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

I feel empathy with them. Which is what the original post there was...originally.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:I mean sure, I want there to be minimal victims and I'm hoping they'll recuperate from this disaster well. But I don't feel any actual sympathy for them, they're pretty much a statistic to me.

This is scary

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Caring for others is one of the traits GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Haggis_McMutton wrote:Have you really managed to fit all of the japanese victims into your monkey sphere ?

While the basic point is valid -- we care more about individuals we know or can get to know,than for huge masses of people --- they fail to fully illustrate some important differences between humans and monkeys. Its not just that our brains are larger, the way we process information is different from monkeys. That is why we can speak, not just one, but multiple languages, but monkeys can only use a few signs/sounds.

For example, that people do not box up glass may have less to do with "not caring" and more to do with the thinking that we know not everyone would take such steps, so the garbage collectors need to take steps to ensure they will not get cut, that they need to protect themselves and do our extra effort is just not necessary.

We had a classic example of this just recently. The Tsunami hit a few days before a large fire, where 1 person was tragically killed, many other people were left homeless, including serveral kids in my son's school. We talked about the Tsunami, it was sad. However, the victims of the fire are being stopped in the street and handed money, bags of clothing (too much clothing, in fact) have been donated.. etc. These people are OUR responsibility, the Japanese people... many of us have donated money, but they are not our personnal responsibility. I did call a friend of mine who has a mother overseas to see if they needed help getting her a ticket here (I just got my tax return back and so had some money I could loan for an emergency.. knowing FULL well it would be repaid soon), but lots of people are, together helping those Japanese victims. No one else, outside of our greater community (I include nearby towns in that, not just our own town), would help the fire victims.

Fixed.

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

Jay's God is very limited.

Yes, I feel sympathy for them but no, I don't make an infinite number of threads talking about them and how bad I feel. People are dying all the time for a bunch of different things and I feel bad for ANYONE who goes through death. Even the Hitlers of the world. Idk why, I just do.

And it doesn't stop with humans...I feel this way about animals too. Not plants though. Does that make me an asshole?

I don't feel much sympathy for plants.

Army of GOD wrote:Yes, I feel sympathy for them but no, I don't make an infinite number of threads talking about them and how bad I feel. People are dying all the time for a bunch of different things and I feel bad for ANYONE who goes through death. Even the Hitlers of the world. Idk why, I just do.

And it doesn't stop with humans...I feel this way about animals too. Not plants though. Does that make me an asshole?

I don't feel much sympathy for plants.

You heartless bastard:




On a serious note, you're saying that if I provide a one line obituary now about a man that died in a car crash in Dubai, you will experience an actual emotion while reading that?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

Actually there is no evidence god has done anything. There is however plenty of evidence for evolution.

Baron Von PWN wrote:Actually there is no evidence god has done anything. There is however plenty of evidence for evolution.

lol.. as has been brought up in many threads, god can neither be proven nor disproven scientifically, empirically.

However, as you note, evolution can be and is. Not every last detail of the lines of descent, not exactly how it has happened throughout time, but that it happens, yes.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

jay_a2j wrote:He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

No, it does not. If scripture did, then the facts would not be as they are. God does not lie.
.. but I am more than happy to continue this in another thread more fully, if you wish.

Actually, I will go further. Show me the passages that show evolution did not happen.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

No, it does not. If scripture did, then the facts would not be as they are. God does not lie.
.. but I am more than happy to continue this in another thread more fully, if you wish.

Actually, I will go further. Show me the passages that show evolution did not happen.

The whole "God spoke" and 7 days thing is just slightly in conflict with that. As well as the passages about there being no death until humans sinned.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:On a serious note, you're saying that if I provide a one line obituary now about a man that died in a car crash in Dubai, you will experience an actual emotion while reading that?

Yes. It's not like it's a HUGE emotional reaction, but it is a subtle sadness. Dying seems like it sucks, period.

jay_a2j wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

your imaginary friend is not capable of anything...no matter how many times your write down on paper saying he is

Army of GOD wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:On a serious note, you're saying that if I provide a one line obituary now about a man that died in a car crash in Dubai, you will experience an actual emotion while reading that?

Yes. It's not like it's a HUGE emotional reaction, but it is a subtle sadness. Dying seems like it sucks, period.

Except if you're a plant, right?

Bigot.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:On a serious note, you're saying that if I provide a one line obituary now about a man that died in a car crash in Dubai, you will experience an actual emotion while reading that?

Yes. It's not like it's a HUGE emotional reaction, but it is a subtle sadness. Dying seems like it sucks, period.

Except if you're a plant, right?

Bigot.

I EAT plants, what does that make me ????

jay_a2j wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:That's just it. I think this may just be a cultural thing. We paint it as "normal" to care about those people on a personal level, and therefore due to peer pressure and such we try to convince ourselves that we care, that we aren't "monsters".

Player57832 wrote:Caring for others is one of the traits evolved to Jay change it to: GOD has ensured human survival, that distinguishes us from animals. (some animals absolutely do show compassion, but not to the extent we do)

Labeling others as "not worthy", in contrast, is the kind of thinking that allows/causes wars and such ulimately heneous acts as the holocaust, pol pot, apartheid, etc.

Now, of course I know you said you do care, just not as much. However, this capacity to care is a far from just a "social more".

Fixed.

God is FULLY capable of using evolution. And all evidence shows he has.

He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

Scripture doesn't show anything at all, actually. Well, it shows that if God exists, he's a very mean, merciless entity, but that's about it.

Night Strike wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:He is capable, but didn't. Scripture shows He didn't.

No, it does not. If scripture did, then the facts would not be as they are. God does not lie.
.. but I am more than happy to continue this in another thread more fully, if you wish.

Actually, I will go further. Show me the passages that show evolution did not happen.

The whole "God spoke" and 7 days thing is just slightly in conflict with that. As well as the passages about there being no death until humans sinned.

No it isn't. The 7 days thing does not at all relate to evolution not happening...only an idiot literalist (oh, I've been redundant there) would believe that.