Why are humans such idiots?

[The_Questioner]

Greetings all:

Before anything, when I say "humans are hopeless idiots" I do not point at any individual.
My thoughts are about the general population of Earth, and their idiocies.

When I think of humans, before anything, the picture of a locust pops up, where the locust symbolizes the "perfect parasite".
Indeed, if we take the definition of parasite, and we see this from an unbiased, objective point of view, this very definition applies to us.
In my own words, the definition of a parasite is:

The parasite invades a host: (Well, this does not apply to us in the "invasion" type of way, we evolved here from an ape type, still...).
The parasite robs the host of resources, not giving anything helpful in return (like a symbiotic entity would do): Yep, this very much applies to us.
The parasite pollutes it's host, not caring for the host at all: This too, sadly, applies to us.
The parasite prepares to move on, once it's host is nearly entirely deprived of the wanted resources: Oh, yes, we're aiming at other planets and moons.

Note, this is in my own words, as previously mentioned.

This brings me to intellect.
Not intelligence, mind, but what I call true intellect".
As I see it, sure, intellect is fairly well defined.
But it seems to be missing 2 general rules:
1) The ability and understanding the necessity to live with oneself, the next person and life in general, in peace, support and understanding.
2) The ability and understanding the necessity to live in balance and respect with one's surrounding and nature.

In about 200'000 years (it seems there's still debate around how long we have been around, so let's take 200'000 years) that we walk this very planet, we failed to learn both rules, leading up to this day in age and the situation the planet is in.
The year is 2019 almost, but even today, despite we try to make another believe that (our) kids are being so damned good cared for, these same kids drop simply dead from thirst, hunger, ...?
We stomp trillions into warfare, while, "next-door", people drop dead from simple water/nutrition deprivation?
How on Earth can we justify this to them?
How can we explain them, that, one airplane costing as much (and far more) as endless water supply to a village, is more important?

Racism, homophobia, theophobia, ..., how can we have this, if you consider, that there is basically no such thing as race (as said afore: we all derive from the same ape, basically, making ALL of us 'family' (science tells us we are at least 50% related to whomever wherever)), that being 'gay' is actually a natural thing (it is seen by many species in nature), that religion in itself (if applied correctly) is not a deadly thing (yes, some turn things in such way that the interpretation becomes a violent thing, like the ISIS folks, but these are nothing more than a heap of criminals trying to disrupt any form of life).
Any human life taken is therefore familicide.
But, who cares.

Or let's take on how we choose our leaders: politics and correct reasoning often stand opposing to one another (like the before mentioned example: buy war plane or water for the needy).
Yet, we take preferably good speakers more than actually rational or science based people.
For me, if I were to choose, I would compose a government based on scientists that are doing effort to fix global issues, one that has people from all-over the world, creating a GLOBAL government rather than local ones that we have now.
THAT would be a logic thing to do.
THAT is what Earth, the human species, needs.
But no... we keep on fucking that up as well...

We are in an age where the world became the size of a monitor, so to speak.
You fire up your PC, and you're in France, Russia, Turkey, India, you name it.
The internet became borderless.
And still, we hold on to the ideas of that old thinking: borders.
Instead of sharing science, we want to keep everything to ourselves, so we can make as much as possible money from this.
Why not share, and have people from wherever work on these things, giving them the option to benefit as well from it?
Let's take this French ITER project.
About 40 countries are working together to get this beast of a machine running.
This only proves it CAN be done.
And I took ITER as an example, but there are many like these.
But no, let's not do that, either.

I could go on and on, and while I am aware this is a scientific site, and this by no means a scientific post is, I just had to share this here, because, thought there are a few 'more evolved thinking people' around, these are not being heard, more, they are often being silenced, if not, even, killed.

I fail to find my place on this planet, I simply cannot get the stupidities I see around me, everything confuses, frustrates and aggravates me.
I just hope, that, on this site, where intellect is appreciated above all else, at least a few might feel the same...
That I am understood here, unlike in my surroundings, where i am considered a complete idiot...

Then again, who knows, I could be, indeed, insane.

[MigL]

I especially like the part where you state that being gay is a natural thing, because many species do it in nature.
And the extrapolation you make from this, is that it is OK, since it is 'natural'.
And I won't argue with that; it doesn't affect me and provides fulfillment in other people's lives.
Live and let live ( that is MY justification ).

Yet you fail to mention that in nature, all species reproduce as fast as they can, until they outstrip the ability of their environment to supply them ( food, water, predators, etc. ). Then 'nature' steps in and kills off a whole lot o them, until their population can be provided for again.
You fail to mention the predator/prey relation that most species have in nature. How compassionate is the predator to the prey ?
Sometimes even within the same specie, there is 'warfare' even more terrible than between humans ( at least we have some rules for military engagements ), and sometimes the sick and infirm ( or even the young ) are sacrificed to predators, to save the healthy herd.
All of this is 'natural', and done by countless species.

So, I don't understand, why aren't you using the same argument that you used for homosexuality, to justify selfish, predatory, self serving behavior . You instead condemn this behavior in humans, even though it is as 'natural' as homosexuality.

I think you need a better argument.
( and to speak for yourself )

Edited December 30, 2018 by MigL

[zapatos]

You lost me when you referred to the locust as a parasite.

[The_Questioner]

11 hours ago, MigL said:

I especially like the part where you state that being gay is a natural thing, because many species do it in nature.
And the extrapolation you make from this, is that it is OK, since it is 'natural'.
And I won't argue with that; it doesn't affect me and provides fulfillment in other people's lives.
Live and let live ( that is MY justification ).

Yet you fail to mention that in nature, all species reproduce as fast as they can, until they outstrip the ability of their environment to supply them ( food, water, predators, etc. ). Then 'nature' steps in and kills off a whole lot o them, until their population can be provided for again.
You fail to mention the predator/prey relation that most species have in nature. How compassionate is the predator to the prey ?
Sometimes even within the same specie, there is 'warfare' even more terrible than between humans ( at least we have some rules for military engagements ), and sometimes the sick and infirm ( or even the young ) are sacrificed to predators, to save the healthy herd.
All of this is 'natural', and done by countless species.

So, I don't understand, why aren't you using the same argument that you used for homosexuality, to justify selfish, predatory, self serving behavior . You instead condemn this behavior in humans, even though it is as 'natural' as homosexuality.

I think you need a better argument.
( and to speak for yourself )

You have a point.
You state, basically, that all beings are equally intelligent.
Thus, any animal being equally to humans.

If not, well, then my argument still stands.
Animals do not tend to kill for pleasure, in general.
They kill, for sure.
They battle over space, females, food, ...
And yes, females: the stonger will give stronger offspring.
Yes the weak are sometimes offered to the predators.
This then to protect the herd's health, doing that leads to stronger genes.

Can we say all that for humans?
Of, we kill for the same reasons, sure.
There are fights over space, food, ...
But so many just kill for the sake of killing.
And weak kill strong ones.
One needs no strength to pull a trigger.

So, to me, that just is NOT the same.

I hope almost, that you prove me wrong, I mean, I am eager to learn.
I do not care to change my view, if I made a mistake here, if I am proved wrong.
I'm only human, I am imperfect, but I CAN learn from my errors.

Edited December 30, 2018 by The_Questioner

[dimreepr]

37 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

You have a point.
You statedrives that all beings are equally intelligent.
Thus, any animal being equally to humans.If not, well, then my argument still stands.
Animals do not tend to kill for pleasure, in general.
They kill, for sure.
They battle over space, females, food, ...
And yes, females: the stonger will give stronger offspring.
Yes the weak are sometimes offered to the predators.
This then to protect the herd's health, doing that leads to stronger genes.
 

5

5

MigLs point is we are all Animals with the same drives.

Edited December 30, 2018 by dimreepr

[The_Questioner]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

MigLs point is we are all Animals with the same drives.

Then surely we can stop testing on other animals and begin testing on the human animal.
What better result could there ever be, right?
Plenty of those where they came from.

So, let's start gathering humans, put them in boxes in labs, and start experimenting.

[dimreepr]

38 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

Can we say all that for humans?
Of, we kill for the same reasons, sure.
There are fights over space, food, ...
But so many just kill for the sake of killing.
And weak kill strong ones.
One needs no strength to pull a trigger.

So, to me, that just is NOT the same.

 

who have You killed?

4 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

Then surely we can stop testing on other animals and begin testing on the human animal.
What better result could there ever be, right?
Plenty of those where they came from.

So, let's start gathering humans, put them in boxes in labs, and start experimenting.

 

What a bizarre argument.

[The_Questioner]

5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

who have You killed?

Oh, not yet, but I think of a few.
All, oddly enough, politicians...

I wonder why...

[Itoero]

22 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

If not, well, then my argument still stands.
Animals do not tend to kill for pleasure, in general.
They kill, for sure

they battle over space, females, food, ...

I think the reason that we often kill for pleasure  is because we have the technology to do so and we don't have to battle for space, females/males or food like in the time we were African apes. Since battling for the basic survival traits is not as important as it used to be we have much free time to let our mind wander and do things without a valid reason.

[The_Questioner]

1 minute ago, Itoero said:

I think the reason that we often kill for pleasure  is because we have the technology to do so and we don't have to battle for space, females/males or food like in the time we were African apes. Since battling for the basic survival traits is not as important as it used to be we have much free time to let our mind wander and do things without a valid reason.

But this would place us on a much lower step in intellect, as this serves no purpose.
None but well, 'fun', right?
That would make us indeed, the dumbest smart species.
Or simply idiots.

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, The_Questioner said:

Oh, not yet, but I think of a few.
All, oddly enough, politicians...

 

Then how do You know what drives a killer ?

[Itoero]

14 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

So, let's start gathering humans, put them in boxes in labs, and start experimenting.

I'm pretty sure you are a human. You're basically offering yourself to be a lab monkey?

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, Itoero said:

I think the reason that we often kill for pleasure

citation, please

[Itoero]

7 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

But this would place us on a much lower step in intellect, as this serves no purpose.
None but well, 'fun', right?
That would make us indeed, the dumbest smart species.
Or simply idiots.

Our intellect is the main reason why the world is 'fucked up'. But we do need our intellect to improve science, technology,... for human survival. It's probably correct to say we are the dumbest smart species. Our intellect is IMO our downfall.

[The_Questioner]

Sadly, the more we progress, the further we seem to cause harm to our planet.
Also, we are focusing on the wrong projects.
And these do not just cost insane amounts of money, but also precious time (as we could do other, more meaningful things in said time), resources of various form, intellect (seeing the same people could be used in the more needed projects...
It occurs to me, that the "great evil" is not per se our intellect, more that it is our emotion.
Greed, hate, distrust, ..., seems the base reason for our idiocy?

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Itoero said:

Our intellect is the main reason why the world is 'fucked up'. But we do need our intellect to improve science, technology,... for human survival. It's probably correct to say we are the dumbest smart species. Our intellect is IMO our downfall.

 

Our intellect is the one hope we have to overcome our drives.

[The_Questioner]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Our intellect is the one hope we have to overcome our drives.

Well yes, IF we allowed our intellect to make decision.
This in many a case seems not to be the fact?

Edited December 30, 2018 by The_Questioner

[dimreepr]

36 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Then how do You know what drives a killer ?

2 minutes ago, The_Questioner said:

Well yes, IF we allowed our intellect to make desision.
this in many a case seems not to be the fact?

quid pro quo

 

[Itoero]

12 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

citation, please

I think it's related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs.  When basic physiological and safety needs are fulfilled then you have time free to spend time on things unrelated to the basic survival needs. I don't have a citation to back up what I said.

 

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Itoero said:

I don't have a citation to back up what I said.

what does that tell you? 

[Itoero]

9 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Our intellect is the one hope we have to overcome our drives.

Which is what I said. "But we do need our intellect to improve science, technology,... "

Science/technology is what will (hopefully) enable us to overcome our drives.

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Itoero said:

Which is what I said. "But we do need our intellect to improve science, technology,... "

Science/technology is what will (hopefully) enable us to overcome our drives.

 

how?

[Itoero]

Just now, dimreepr said:

what does that tell you? 

The fact that you need a citation for something that obvious says a lot...I don't have a citation because I didn't look for one.

4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

how?

Seriously?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Itoero said:

The fact that you need a citation for something that obvious says a lot...I don't have a citation because I didn't look for one.

I say you're wrong, so look.

You must know how this works

[Strange]

35 minutes ago, Itoero said:

I think it's related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs. 

Which is just nonsense. It's from that old-school of psychology where people just made stuff up (see also Freud).

And I'm not aware of which bit of that says that people mainly kill for pleasure.