No, you have just been dead set on saying something is unnatural if it doesn't have a positive survival or reproductive value from an evolutionary perspective.Originally Posted by DogOfDanger
Nature is what is, warts and all, even the parts you don't like: that's reality.
What I've said repeatedly is that certain acts aren't primarily explained as being driven by natural instinct, instinct is something that evolved. Every instinct you have exists to hone you toward successful survival and reproduction. In nature instinct can get blocked and express in deferred ways. When that happens, the explanation for the behavior is the circumstances - the blockage of instinct. There are other reason people do things... everything you do is not in line with your natural instincts, or a full, harmonious expression of them.
And as I've explained twice, Kahns behavior did not occur in natural circumstances, where he would have been beaten over the head by people with boulders if he had gone and raped all the women in the tribe. Behavior that occurs within a social context is not the correct way to model or think about what is or isn't natural, evolved instinct. To think about our instincts, and to understand them, you should think about a tribe of cavemen living in the wilderness in mesopotamia. Those are the kinds of conditions inwhich we evolved. You also have to think in an idealistic way, because you're thinking on scales of billions of years ultimately. Do you understand? I've mentioned to you the fact that alpha male monkeys get ambushed and torn to pieces when their social approval drops below a certain point. If you spent two seconds trying to think critically about what we're talking about, instead of instantly looking for some hole to poke in FACTS about evolution to justify your life and sexuality, you would have thought of these things. But you don't stop for two seconds to look deeper into criticizing your own comments. Instead you expect me to come up with a full, giant rational to address your stupid comments because you made zero effort in thinking them through, because you are only interested in reconfirming to yourself your dogmatic ideological fixations. And you do this because, again, you are a moron.
And I'm tired of comments about human biology triggering tantrums from borderline, bipolar deluded nuts holding me accountable for their fucking sexual acts when all I try to do is avoid or smooth over their offended egos, where every fucking word I utter or idea I promote has to conform to somehow stoke these peoples fucking deluded ego about how they justify their sex lives. This has gone too far to the point we now pretend - PRETEND - that changing your fucking sex is an inherent biological need, and force us all to DENY INDISPUTABLE FACTS about biology. Fuck-off.
Last edited by DogOfDanger; 09-25-2022 at 03:54 AM.
Yes, but unless you're a dick that's not your life's purpose.
You actually are a dick, technically. In part...
So it is partly your life purpose.
Who is forcing you to "DENY INDISPUTABLE FACTS about biology"?
How could you be so stupid as to argue that child rape is not anti-evolutionary? It doesn't produce offspring, it makes the entire tribe want to kill the person... why would it be evolutionary, idiot?
@DogOfDanger @lavos
according to you, altruistic acts done for the benefit of strangers with no prospect of reward aside from personal pleasure are "unnatural", " the product of evil", "stupid", and have no purpose from an evolutionary perspective.
Huh?
Altruistic acts stem from the, again, human nature. The same it can cause evil, it can cause good. I won't argue that altruistic acts somehow benefit the herd or tribe like they do in the primitive or animal worlds (although it is plausible). Simply, humans can do good out of the blue, or they can do evil out of the blue (according to their nature). Although I have the belief that the human entity is good inherently, and evil has to be caused somehow.
You claim everything is instinct like as if we were animals, and now you're talking about altruistic acts?
Also, please don't group me with anyone as if my argument was the same as theirs, as all I've done is agree with most of the points they raised in the particular post I liked. However, I don't agree with anything you in particular have said thus far. What do you intend to transmit/what is your point?
I didn't say that everything is instinct. I only queried what was meant by an "unnatural" instinct.
My point was that by your interpretation, altruism with no benefit to the self except pleasure is as "unnatural" as child rape, something you consider evil because you consider it "unnatural" - something that animals don't do, in your view.
I'm aware of the the contradiction, but it's just that I believe it is unnatural also to humans despite human capacity for evil. One thing is "normal" evil, another thing is this. I'll give you an analogy to see if you understand it: do you identify a rock as food? I bet you don't. An apple is food, but not a rock. However, could you be convinced with some ruse or hypnagogic technique that a rock is food? It might be possible, but it would be unnatural. A corruption of the natural order of things The same way, children are not meant to be sexualizable beings. That's how I see it.
That's confusing natural categories with cultural norms.
This excuse for a "philosophy" is called objectivism.
Dog of Projection & Gaslighting
Go throw more tantrums about the fact you're gay you overgrown toddler.
Honey, I love and accept myself just fine. I think it's giving *you* the tantrum. I was trying to talk about Coeruleum's topic and u went ranting about the perceived natural purpose of my sperm.
You are projecting your heterosexuality and Right-wing morals into the truth but like we keep telling you: the truth is the truth regardless. And no, I'm not doing the same thing with my gayness. I already have accepted the fact there are people that are very different from me, u haven't done that yet and are still butthurt I'm not being str8 enough for your liking. And I'm not really your average ****** that can be easily destroyed or vaniquished; when a bully boy breeder str8 guy goes after me with ignorance and stupidity, I tend to fight back 5 times as hard. Behold my Chad Alpha Male ness. I'm a gay monkey, only this bitch is on top of the pecking order.
I know this probably seems like a big blow and round of applause, but to me it just reads like a bunch of nothing, so... keep "fighting", I'll be waiting for you to say something that make sense and is relevant to what we were discussing. Yes, your sperm are designed to fertilize an egg, I know this is something that deeply offends you.
So many spawning opportunities you've missed by posting in this thread. Nature must frown when it considers this from its teleological perspective.
I should clarify that I don't condone Genghis Khan.
Instinct by nature is natural (it's an oxymoron to speak of an "unnatural instinct"). The real question is how you qualify what constitutes an instinct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct
D E M O N I C I N S T I N C T S!
Oh yes, the dick is demonic. So demonic that it was created by God. Idiot....
Who created the idiots, and what does that say about them?
DogOfDanger, I find your argument interesting, but it sounds like something from a cult science fiction movie, and isn't your reaction a bit overblown?
...Wow, arguing is really easy when I completely reject the reality of what my opponents say and substitute my own!
Again, you are babbling in the abstract and really saying nothing here.
Cult fiction.... ok, useless. Overblown.... that's subjective, and biased. The paraphrasing.... it's poorly representative and contains no relevant information.
Try again
That's the fallacy that claims you need to leave your computer chair for reasons other than to piss, shit, or get food.
Oh, you're doing that as well?
No Project-y Ramsey, I don't mind not being straight.
Your ass is meant to be poked by dick because it has a prostate. I know it deeply offends you that you're not getting any gay male sex right now.
Despite my campiness and flair, I've been dropping logical and rational truth bombs all over the place. I wish you weren't such a white str8 male bore and could read between the lines better rather than just focusing on the emotionalism of my posts. I guess I have to try to communicate like a straight robot to get my point across to you.
bzzzzt You have a bad habit of using bzzzt selective reasoning and overly bzzzt simplistic thinking. You connect a to b but don't bzzzt see how bzzzt X, Y and Z (and all the other letters) can also lead small a to big B. bzzzt.
This has been bzzzt Robo Shazaam 3000.
The point is things you don't like also have evolutionary benefits and they don't stop having those benefits just because little ol str8 suburban Dog of Danger dislikes them.
Obviously pedophilia/sex abuse still serves SOME function in the world- or Mother Nature would have completely wiped it out entirely already. I know that's what we would all like to do to pedos & rapists (and say things like that when we're trying to virtue signal) but again , the truth is higher than any of us.
I don't want to come across like I'm justifying pedophilia obviously, but I mean real intelligence has always been against morals like that and also not about following the Karen trends as well. It's not about being popular. Grabbing a pitchfork and saying you hate that type of people because of X is about being popular , or is sometimes a proper emotional reaction from people who were abused by a pedophile. Intelligence is being the guy or girl that ignores that, and does their own research to arrive at the conclusion even if the truth is gonna offend some ears.
Many of our research into gay animals was blocked because scientific experts kept projecting their own heterosexuality into it- it wasn't until recently they removed themselves from the equation and discovered the genetic links of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Had to get over a lot of 'Ew yuck this is wrong' to study it accurately and without bias etc.
Arrogant people who think they are smart but aren't really smart- are quite dangerous (like Mama Ru taught us), so I guess at least your name is fitting.
That's not how natural selection works. There needs to be sufficient pressure and sufficient time for detriments to survival to be "wiped out entirely." If sexual abuse doesn't have an effect, or even has a small negative effect, on reproductive success then it's not necessarily weeded out, and the more complex a change is then the more time it would take for sufficient mutations to happen, if they can even happen. What would a mutation to prevent sexual abuse even look like? And if sexual abuse arises from cultural/social reasons rather than genetics it's even more complicated.
...Well, it reduces it at least. I don't think humans are going to evolve that any time soon, though. Another option would be if vaginas actually had teeth, but then rectums also having teeth would cause many more problems than it solves.
No, because not all behavior is driven primarily by instinct, and not all behavior is evolutionary. That's what I am saying. As I explained, due to circumstances the instincts can be blocked, and this is the situation we find ourselves in in modern society. This is what I call "extinction-mimicking conditions", or repressive conditions. Maybe this is natural, ... I think it probably is, but that doesn't make it evolutionary. Evolution occurs from life carrying forward, repeatedly, over very long periods.... it is natures selection mechanism. You could perhaps say nature has a kill mechanism as well, death is certainly part of nature. Nature perhaps chooses to reject certain things. That poor gazelle with the limp leg that gets it throat torn out by a cheetah is not going to be passing its genes on, sadly. Nature produced it... and then devoured it. I suppose it did serve a purpose insofar as it provided food for others... you couldn't really say that it molded natural instinct, though. Maybe it molded the instincts of others to kill it. That's about the most it did. Nothing unique about it lives on - its genes are gone.
As far as gay genes go, genes are expressed within an environment, and when you're making statements about something as ambiguous as human behavior and dealing in correlations of complex combinations of gene clusters and epigenetics... you can't separate out the environment. That being said, I've never denied there's some kind of correlation. What do you think I'm actually claiming? Do you think I'm claiming gays don't exist? Gays exist. Gay animals exist - I'm aware. All I've ever said on this topic is gay behavior has negative survival reproductive value, and so when you see this happening you have to look to circumstances for some sort of derailment or blocking of the instinct. That doesn't cast some kind of deep moral judgment on the person... Am I morally judging the gazelle that got its throat torn out? By observing that this is what happened? Not really, no...
You could get deeper into this, you could consider nature to be a kind of judge, evolution to be a sort of ultimate moral authority, but I've explained earlier that I consider human instinct completely derailed and so I'm not really interested in making these sorts of moral judgments about people. I am just really interested in understanding human nature and accurately describing human instinct, I think this is very enriching in that it can lead one to a deep understanding of themselves.
Infact, when we really dispense with the privilege given to gay males to be indiscriminately abusive to others, you are being far ruder than i have ever been toward you. I have explained things very fairly and thoroughly to you repeatedly, so...
Last edited by DogOfDanger; 09-25-2022 at 06:13 AM.
@subpee
Try an entire 1200 page textbook from front to back. I'm well aware that there are flaws in the design, that evolution is not perfection - but what you don't understand is the miracle that the machine works at all, much less that it works so incredibly well, the incalculable number of chemical processes happening in tandem, and the incredible elegance of it all. This is an impression you would get if you did infact crack open a biology textbook.
How do you know that virus DNA didn't drive mutation & promote evolution? Viruses do thin out the weaker organisms. There are many examples in nature of predator/prey relationships driving mutual evolution. How do you know that the incorporation of viral DNA isn't used by the innate immune system to identify the viruses...? You don't, you're just kind of dumbly assuming the design is inelegant - in the same way you jump to the simplest, dumbest conclusion about every other conversation topic.
Last edited by DogOfDanger; 09-25-2022 at 06:19 AM.
To what extent do you support slavery and forcing victims to marry their rapists?
Keep sitting in that computer chair and finding new injustices to whine about - it's an imaginary audience that cares.
Why are you unwilling to answer the question? Does your God support slavery and rape, or not?
I just spent a whole page trying to convince you that child rape is anti-evolutionary, so what do you think?
If you can't figure out whether nature selects for rape it's not a surprise you can't decipher what the bible has to say about it.
You are still avoiding the question.
That's because people who ask disingenuous questions don't deserve explanations.
Last edited by DogOfDanger; 09-26-2022 at 04:21 AM.
I didn't ask you if your God supported child rape.
Does your God support the killing of children?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote