Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 7:03:55 PM   
eihwaz


Posts: 367
Joined: 10/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09
quote:

ORIGINAL: eihwaz
It would seem to me that 'human nature' encompasses a unique aggregate of traits, rather than an aggregate of unique traits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster
There is the superset of all traits possessed by all animals. There is a subset of those traits, composed of the traits possessed only by humans. Humans possess a combination of the two sets. Hence the unique aggregation of traits.

i don't think there's any one trait possessed only by humans. But there is a *collection* of traits possessed only by humans. For example: Complex cognition, the ability to think theoretically, sophisticated language, sentience, the ability to project into the future, creative thinking, advanced tool making and technology, altruistic behavior, food sharing, the need for companionship, the tendency to mate with one individual for long periods of time, cultural accomplishments such as music, dancing, art, language, the concept of morality and sin, archetypes, the ability to imagine things from another's point of view, long life, high metabolism, etc.

Other species may have one or another of these traits, but only humans tend to have them all.

pam

quote:

ORIGINAL tweakabelle
The test is a very simple one - for something to qualify as human nature, it has to be shared by all humans and only by humans.

Some thoughts on why this is such a hard problem:

First, as a construct, 'human nature' is not well bounded.  There will always have to be some arbitrariness --  best if explicitly agreed lest discussions founder on semantics -- about which categories of traits and phenomena to include and which to exclude.

Second, there are multiple valid frames of reference possible for 'human nature'.  The frame of reference affects which categories to include in the definition.

Third, which frame of reference and definitional categories used depends upon the application or purpose needing a definition of human nature.

Fourth, it is standard procedure to construct and use idealized descriptions of phenomena even though not every instance of a particular class of phenomenon exactly conforms to the ideal.  A useful model of human nature need only be substantially, rather than completely, inclusive.

Fifth, the uniqueness requirement -- whether individual traits or in aggregate -- depends upon the application -- a taxonomy requires at least aggregate uniqueness, but designing a society, a government, a building, an educational system, or a healthcare system really don't.

Sixth, a huge amount of historical baggage has accreted onto the term.

I've come to appreciate more deeply the wisdom of using richly expressive modes such as myth and narrative to describe something so complex.



(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 7:09:30 PM   
eihwaz


Posts: 367
Joined: 10/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09
[..] For example: Complex cognition, the ability to think theoretically, sophisticated language, sentience, the ability to project into the future, creative thinking, advanced tool making and technology, altruistic behavior, food sharing, the need for companionship, the tendency to mate with one individual for long periods of time, cultural accomplishments such as music, dancing, art, language, the concept of morality and sin, archetypes, the ability to imagine things from another's point of view, long life, high metabolism, etc.

Excellent list!

(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 7:27:23 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eihwaz

Excellent list!

To which might be added confirmation bias and an affinity for logical fallacies. But perhaps most importantly, human nature is what prevents intellectuals with utopian fantasies about what's good for us from getting their way.

K.

(in reply to eihwaz)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 7:50:06 PM   
eihwaz


Posts: 367
Joined: 10/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
... human nature is what prevents intellectuals with utopian fantasies about what's good for us from getting their way. K.

Gotta love such optimism!

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 7:51:08 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

Not everything has to be legislated or imposed, dear sir.

Some of us grew up with good manners, others did not.

I myself find it unfortunate that the multitude of laws and regulations we have are wasted on those who would be better shoved off the cliff.



(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 8:11:29 PM   
gungadin09


Posts: 3232
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: eihwaz

Excellent list!

To which might be added confirmation bias and an affinity for logical fallacies. But perhaps most importantly, human nature is what prevents intellectuals with utopian fantasies about what's good for us from getting their way.

K.


And let's not forget the tendency to hog the remote.

pam

P.S.- In spite of all that, i still have to give it up for human nature. Its flaws are also what prevent evil people with totalitarian aspirations from getting their way for too long.

< Message edited by gungadin09 -- 4/22/2011 8:18:22 PM >

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 8:29:19 PM   
gungadin09


Posts: 3232
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline 		Humanity i love you
because you would rather black the boots of
success than inquire whose soul dangles from his
watch-chain which would be embarrassing for both

parties and because you
unflinchingly applaud all
songs containing the words country home and
mother when sung at the old howard

Humanity i love you because
when you're hard up you pawn your
intelligence to buy a drink and when
you're flush pride keeps

you from the pawn shop and
because you are continually committing
nuisances but more
especially in your own house

Humanity i love you because you
are perpetually putting the secret of
life in your pants and forgetting
it's there and sitting down

on it
and because you are
forever making poems in the lap
of death Humanity

i hate you





(with apologies to e.e. cummings)

(in reply to eihwaz)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 8:36:21 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

Another is that AFAIK, there's universal agreement that the languages humans use are human inventions. (I've never heard of a contrary suggestion.) To agree that language-based achievements constitute human nature would be to agree that human nature is a human invention. Is that what you wish to argue?

Sort of. What i wish to argue is that at some point in evolution, primates developed a larger brain and with it the *potential* to become human, to develop those distinguishing traits that we regard as "human nature". It was upon realising that potential that they actually did *become* human from monkeys. So, yes, human nature is an invention, or an accomplishment of the mind. Or, in other words, so far humans alone have had the potential to develop sophisticated language and the other traits we associate with human nature.

If you're saying in order for that claim to be valid i have to be able to identify the *exact* point that primates became "human", or that it had to have happened all at once instead of by degrees over time, i'd say that's pretty unreasonable. Saying that human human nature is a human invention is an oversimplification. The development of any trait is a *process* of becoming one thing from another. It would be more accurate to say human nature is a set of traits that early humans developed over time, just as those fish developed the ability to breathe air and walk on land. You could just as easily call *that* an "invention".

pam


Yes. Just about all of the above is pretty close to the mark I suspect. Even the over-statements are over-statements! (I was playing a kind of Devil's Advocate role up to this point). For mine, the way you outlined the process whereby development of traits and their gradual accretion into what most people understand as human nature is perceptive. And I really like "accomplishment of the mind" - it conveys so much more than human invention.

I'd like to take this perspective a little further. It seems to me that human nature can be understood as a social fact. By that I mean a belief that is held by enough people with enough conviction that it generates a truth value of its own. This passes no judgement on the inherent truth of the belief. So, for example we can say that Thailand is a Buddhist country as c97% Of Thais are Buddhists, without making any judgement on the truth value of Buddhism itself. In this sense, for Thais and Thailand, Buddhism is a social fact.

So, for most people, human nature can be seen as a social fact. It may or may not have an inherent truth, but it's believed in by enough people with enough conviction that it is, for all intents and purposes, a fact. FWIW at an academic level, the question of whether human nature has an inherent truth will probably only be settled if and when a universal of human behaviour is identified. But we aren't under such constraints here.

Thus far here, two broad classes of candidates have been nominated ... cognitive complexity and emotional complexity. As people seem happy to accept generalisations, isn't the ability to successfully communicate cognitive and emotional complexity critical? It's seems to me that these things rely on our ability to communicate as a necessary pre-condition.

Other animals seem to have developed communication codes, and to possess emotional ranges. But AFAIK none have been shown to be able to successfully communicate these qualities at a complex level.

Even Descartes' famous doubting de-sensitised creature that eventually proposed 'I think therefore I am' seems to somehow have acquired an ability to successfully communicate thoughts ordered into sentences such as "I think therefore I am' (Perhaps it wasn't quite as de-sensitised as Descates claims ). So this ability could be a candidate that seems to me to include all the specific suggestions so far.

Emotional complexity is more difficult. Not because it's inherently a less likely candidate, but because so little research has been done on emotions. Emotions are difficult to measure or quantify so researchers tend to shy away from them. However, there's no doubt that humans are capable of successfully communicating emotional complexity.

Finally apologies for the hijack. It wasn't my intention and I have tried to get back to the OP but it seems to have developed a life of its own. It could also be said that the question of human nature is fundamental to the OP too I suppose.



_____________________________



(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 8:49:09 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

I've come to appreciate more deeply the wisdom of using richly expressive modes such as myth and narrative to describe something so complex.


All the points you raise are valid. I wanted to start off with a simple definition, if only to make the discussion as broad as possible.

The difficulties seem to have been recognised and the discussion seems to have moved onto how does human nature operate in society as much as any thing else.

The discussion started as a tangent to a post claiming some political such-and-such was against human nature. The points I wanted to explore - that political accounts of human nature are very disputable, that things commonly ascribed in this context to human nature aren't immutable - have been aired.

And I find your suggestion of viewing these phenomena as myths or narratives an excellent one. There is quite a bit of terrain to be covered between starting off with a statement like: 'greed is human nature' and ending up there.

_____________________________



(in reply to eihwaz)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 8:57:29 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


quote:



And let's not forget the tendency to hog the remote.





That which would best serve humanity by being tossed into the landfill, given a last hour reprieve in the cause of equality.





< Message edited by Edwynn -- 4/22/2011 9:15:46 PM >

(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 9:02:29 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

P.S.- In spite of all that, i still have to give it up for human nature. Its flaws are also what prevent evil people with totalitarian aspirations from getting their way for too long.
pam


That may well be true. In the countries we live in, it is used far more frequently by the rich and powerful to justify and 'naturalise' their greed and to deprive others of reasonable living standards it seems to me.

_____________________________



(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 9:57:50 PM   
eihwaz


Posts: 367
Joined: 10/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
It could also be said that the question of human nature is fundamental to the OP too I suppose.

Quite so.  I thought the relevant questions were: What definition of human nature should one use when designing or envisioning an optimal human society?  What aspects of human nature should one consider?  To what extent can desirable qualities be cultivated, to what extent must they be enforced?  Can undesirable qualities and behaviors be eliminated or must they be designed for or around and managed?  For example, the United States founding fathers were explicit about the model of human nature they were designing the government for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
That may well be true. In the countries we live in, it is used far more frequently by the rich and powerful to justify and 'naturalise' their greed and to deprive others of reasonable living standards it seems to me.

So, basically you're saying the rich and powerful are hogging the remote?

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 10:05:18 PM   
gungadin09


Posts: 3232
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline 		(this is for stella, wherever she is...)

How do you think capitalism has subverted human nature?

If personal property is the carrot on the stick that the ruling class currently holds out to enslave workers, what do you propose to replace it with to keep them motivated?

Without a revolution, how is man supposed to find independence and identity though work when he works for corrupt people?

Short of dictatorship, how can *any* political party that comes into power avoid compromising its ideals?

How can capitolism and socialism be melded into a workable plan for government?

pam

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 10:21:00 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


"Without a revolution, how is man supposed to find independence and identity though work when he works for corrupt people? "

I'm not understanding the given prerequisite there, but "how is man supposed to find independence and identity though work when he works for corrupt people? " is a monster of a question.


Bad as things are, I still take this system over the latter imposed dictatorships elsewhere, but the question you propose looms ever larger in the current situation nowadays.







(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/22/2011 11:14:18 PM   
gungadin09


Posts: 3232
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
I'm not understanding the given prerequisite there, but "how is man supposed to find independence and identity though work when he works for corrupt people? " is a monster of a question.


Fair enough. Stella said, she doesn't believe a revolution is necessary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk
There is no need for a revolution, armed struggles, or indeed civil unrest...


She also said that she believes work, employment is the key to socialism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk
Without labour there is... no commodity and nothing to trade. This explains why the work ethic is central to Marxism. Without labour and activity the worker has no power...


As i understand it, Marx advocated revolution because he believed as long as wealth and property were held by a few, that workers would always be enslaved to the ruling class as well as to their own greed and desire for personal possession. He also believed that man achieves his independence and creates his own identity through labor.

from Kirata's link:
quote:

...Marx speaks of man as essentially free...for the meaning of human labor is that man transforms the external world of nature, which in turn appears to him as his mirror. He sees in the products of his labor...himself, as his own product, he does not depend for what he is on anything outside himself. He is absolutely free of God, of nature, and of those men (the owners of bourgeois private property)...

and
quote:

From here we turn to...an account of "universal human emancipation" or communism, the goal of the revolution... Communism is that condition in which no individual man is dependent on any other man. This requires him to be completely in control of his external world as well as of himself. The existence of private property... not only makes the nonowners dependent on the owners for their subsistence; property also enkindles the artificial passion of avarice in the heart of the owner, a passion that attaches him to something outside himself, his property.

Stella seems to be advocating the blending of capitolism and socialism. i guess what i'm saying is that i don't see how that works. Specifically, i don't see how she reconciles the idea that working in the absence of private property is "freedom", with the idea that working for capitolists is "enslavement", and yet maintains that there is no need for revolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk
Workers have no property and can only theoretically gain property by working for capital, selling their labour power like any other commodity. Fear of unemployment is a permanent threat. Capitolism forces workers together in large workplaces where they are organised like armies under the command of a hierarchy of 'officers and sergeants'... the vast mahority of people are 'wage slaves', forced through circumstances to serve the global ruling class, bossed around at work, and threatened by the fear and social stigma of unemployment and social rejection...


quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
Bad as things are, I still take this system over the latter imposed dictatorships elsewhere...


So would i, but it strikes me that the OP is asking whether our system could be improved, not whether it is better than dictatorship.

pam

< Message edited by gungadin09 -- 4/22/2011 11:24:31 PM >

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/23/2011 8:41:28 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Not for you specifically pam...but just a comment in general.

Am I just naive? How come I don’t see this mysterious ruling class that is enslaving me? Do I see greed…yes. Do I see corruption… yes. Do I see a problem with living my American dream…No.

Do I have reasonable freedom to pursue my dreams…educate my children…live a comfortable life…YES

There is no ruling class… at least in America… yes there are the rich but not all, not even most, are greedy and trying to enslave you. Most are hard working creative people with good hearts and as honest as you.

I feel many people like to blame their inadequacies on others and those that are successful in life are good targets.

We would be much better off to open the closet door and check for boogiemen then get on with life.

Butch


_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to gungadin09)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/23/2011 9:07:30 AM   
WantsOfTheFlesh


Posts: 1226
Joined: 3/3/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
Am I just naive? How come I don’t see this mysterious ruling class that is enslaving me? Do I see greed…yes. Do I see corruption… yes. Do I see a problem with living my American dream…No.

Do I have reasonable freedom to pursue my dreams…educate my children…live a comfortable life…YES

There is no ruling class… at least in America… yes there are the rich but not all, not even most, are greedy and trying to enslave you. Most are hard working creative people with good hearts and as honest as you.

I feel many people like to blame their inadequacies on others and those that are successful in life are good targets.

I think you are right Kd. A lot of people see conspiracy in almost everything. It is a good example of people seeing what they want to see, sometimes (not always AFAIK) with a hate agenda. For example the media talks a lot of shit at times and gets it simply wrong a lot but there is no genuine reason to think it is trying to manipulate and control our lives.

_____________________________

"I had lot's of luck but its all been bad"

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/23/2011 10:07:27 AM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


Another denier. Honestly, you puds are even worse than the anti-climate change or birther folks.

I'm sure that Westinghouse (CBS) and GE (NBC) and Murdoch, et. al. all have our best interests at heart. Simple search will tell you all about the US media and who owns it.

Who do you think keeps propagating this notion of 'conspiracy' in the first place?

Some of us just look at what is happening and look into how it is happening, no 'theory' needed.








< Message edited by Edwynn -- 4/23/2011 10:14:29 AM >

(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/23/2011 10:23:15 AM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline



Unless someone here is trying to claim that the media told us all about the revolving doors of every important federal agency appointment for more than 30 years.

Do you know who Jim Miller is? Wendy Gramm before the fact? They had fun helping railroad her out of town when the Enron feathers hit the fan, but had the media been doing their job she never would have found her way into such position in the first place.

Anybody know who Arthur Hayes was? Michael Taylor?


Am I a 'conspiricist' because I know who these guys are despite media efforts to the contrary?






< Message edited by Edwynn -- 4/23/2011 10:27:54 AM >

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. - 4/23/2011 10:49:09 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Of course you have explained it all...how could I be so blind...Now I know why the guy across the street bought that black SUV...I should have known after all he is a business owner...oh I feel soooo enslaved.

We had better be careful talking about it I heard a click on my phone last year…bet the CIA is compiling a dossier on me as we speak.

Damn another black helicopter just flew over I know I shouldn’t have bought that GE light bulb.

Please help here in Missouri… GE is taking over our lives…it is futile to resist.



_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: That need to embrace change through Marxism. Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109