About
A note on our important Editorial Policy.
Your donations help make Dean's World possible.
Or you could buy something for Dean from his WISH LIST!
Dean Esmay
Editor-In-Chief
Freedomist Network
Individual postings by contributors copyright by their respective authors.
Editor-In-Chief
Contributing Editors
Celia Farber
Categories
Music, Movies, Books, and Etc.
Questioning the HIV/AIDS establishment
Subscribe
Archives
Old Archives
We Support
|
Dean's World uses and recommends:
This is news?
On the other hand, humans are pretty perfect at being human. Flawlessly so, in fact. The problem is in expectations and assumptions of what 'human perfection' means.
It's the same deal with the idea that if humans do it, it's not 'natural', as though humans--and their technology--were not natural. Our world is the natural result of and the consequence of the actions of a particular type of primate. A computer is as natural as a stick used to dig termites out of a log. It just has more parts.
But conservatives have argued this for centuries; it's one of the main reasons, in fact, that they are so skeptical of revolutionaries.
I never get how terms like this get used as if they were complete sentences, when half the meaning is simply left out.
There's arguably none greater. Most evil gets done in the name of good.
When someone bluffs in a poker game, is he or she saying, "I claim that my hand is better than it is," or "You haven't offered to pay enough yet to find out what's in my hand"?
I say it's the latter.
I have another one to sell you about my grandchildren!!! SO THERE!
I'm saying people are intrinsically evolved to be something less than ideal, as opposed to the viewpoint that we start out innocent babes and are corrupted by the evil, cruel world.
The truth is, we start out evil and cruel and deceptive and only learn to be good people through great effort, as our parents apply the cumulative work of hundreds of generations.
That's a credit to you. Nothing is more important than the kind of people we create.
As to Dean's assertion, to say that human nature is "flawed" implies there is some model of human nature that is "flawless" to which we can compare human nature. In the absence of such an example, the assertion is merely that, an assertion, as unprovable as any assertion that has no basis in practical reality.
What about original sin?
Well, I like to think that Jesus guy came pretty close.
But again, this is mostly an argument against tabula rasa innnocence.
I concede that the fundamentalist religious subspecies of conservative may very well make the arguments as you have stated, but that is a subset of conservatism. Conservatism of the rational variety does not rely on supernatural arguments to describe human nature, nor to provide examples of perfect humans.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.