are we all hypocrites? is there such a thing as a legit good persone? i dont think so becuse i think that the only thing that matters to anybody deep down is what others think, they just dont realise it. for example if someone helps somebody out, it wont be out of pure kindness or anything like that, it will be becuse the persone your helping out will be grateful, you will look good in theyre eyes, your doing it for theyre opinion. or you help someone out to feel good about yourself, but then your doing it for you not the other. an other example, if someone close to you dies, you will be sad but are you sad becuse that persone wont be able to continue living theyre lives? or are you sad becuse you cant spend time with a human you liked? again your ultimately sad for yourself not the persone who died. so what do you guys think about this? by the way im not excluding myself from what i wrote.
Are we all hypocrites? is there such a thing as a legit good persone...
That's funny because everyone i tried to make them understand this denies it and made a point to subtly get back at me
get back at you how? what did they say?
It works like that:
>I hate lies and treason
>Lie and betray
Just talking shit in my back and putting me in weird situations
i also think where all extremely pretentious, emotional and easly prone to anger when someone says something we dont like or agree with. for example most of religious people. humanity is an extremely pretentious concept saying were superior to other spieces and "made with the image of god". i read a paper basicaly saying humanity apeared when the first neandertal made a burial to remember a fallen friend or family memeber. the argument was other animals dont do that, what compeled him to do it? i think its simple where simply more evolved and inteligent not becuse where some kind of chosen spieces. if people where less pretentious, narcissic, emotional and where able to think more with theyre logic in place of theyre emotions to come to a compromise the world would be a much better place.
Fuck you scumbag, I don't agree with that at all
since i realised all that,i feel out of touch with people around me, i feel i cant really identify with humanity anymore, or at least the current concept of what makes us a human being. i feel like the only human thing i still enjoy is art.
and kek by the way
You like getting handjobs? Yes?
Do you like giving handjobs? No?
Then youre a hipacritsizer too
oh i agree with you user but since i now realise it, i try to use it at my adventage. im not saying im being a scumbag or anything, i just try to do the most logical thing in any situation and most of the time, the logical thing to do is to not be a dick. example if i hate someone i see regularly that persone wont ever know i hate her, becuse i have a far greater adventage in keeping that persone mostly on my side.
i never said i wasnt one. i just realized it, i realized what really is human nature
For me when someone I care about dies, I feel sad because they died but because I think about myself too. It took me some time to realize, but it is true. Can't deny it. I have also noticed funerals are actually for the living and not the person who died.
About caring what other think, it depends. If it is someone I respect, I care. If it is some random douche bag, I can't be bothered to give a fuck. Sometimes I do the right thing not because I care, but because I know it is the right thing and that is what we should do. I don't know.
All life is just preserving itself. All love or selfless acts are just preserving itself or wqhaterver how that goes you know that guy that killed himself?
Idk im tired but yeah
altruism isn't real because all acts only preserve the self
basic thing ofd that
so i think, like i said, your helping people to feel good about yourself. becuse you did the right thing
i completely agree with you
Most of the time. But sometimes I am just happy to see them happy. Rarely happened though.
Only once or twice in my life I felt truly happy for somebody else. I really did, I almost cried. When somebody I know survived leukemia. When I saw her healthy again and smiling, I just snapped in a good way. Didn't even know I can feel like that for somebody else.
did you care about her? if so, it just proves my point about loss. you where scared to lose her, you didnt, so you where happy and releaved. i think deep down you where happy for yourself. you just did not realize it.
fuck off you prick i do altruistic stuff rather often
I didn't care about her. She was a class mate at uni and we rarely spoke. Had no attachment for her. Again, this was maybe the only time in my life I felt like that. So it is not impossible.
im not saying you dont. im saying your doing it for youself, to feel good about your good deed or your doing it to look good in the eyes of the persone you just helped, to have theyre gratitude, theyre respect and theyre admiration.
I think the idealized concepts need to be equated with their real-world counterparts. A legitimate "good person" is probably the person who helps others and is the shining paragon of virtue, outwardly, while being a selfish vapid cunt inwardly.
I mean, why not?
>humanity is an extremely pretentious concept
Word.
>if people where less pretentious
Sadly, if that was the case, the magic of "being human" would melt away and life would be so alien neither you or I could really consider it 1:1. The way our brains work, emotional memory, self preservation, and the like bring out those sort of character traits.
Narcissism sometimes saves lives. Remembering bad things over the good things means you try to avoid more bad things than you seek out good things. Wanting to care for children means those children don't just turn into raisins.
Altruism is real, it's just also self-serving, as opposed to the definition it carries. Being selfless is still a kind of selfish, because
>you
do it for
>them
and then entire thing is then dependent on what
>you
deem is valid for
>them
in the end.
sadly thats how i feel. the magic of being human is all gone, i dont feel like im part of something greater (humanity) like i said earlier the only "human" like thing i still enjoy is art. after realising all that am i still a human being? or am i just a homo sapien? i feel like i lost my humanity. i feel im just a highly inteligent primate. nothing more.
You're looking at it wrong. Even if someone did a good deed for their own purposes they still did a good thing regardless.
That's the beauty, though. You're just an intelligent primate with flaws, all kinds of flaws. Yet for all of that, you're still here. Alive, whatever alive is. You're something not many things are, you're still orders of magnitude more complex than a rock, even an ant, perhaps maybe even a small tree, and you're still smaller than the planet you live on. That planet, smaller than the star it orbits. And so on and so forth. All the recursive fuckery that goes on in our heads just so we can keep ourselves from falling face first while going on to move other parts of our body, and stay upright, is almost a miracle. Being a machine that knows it's a machine is more than a machine can ever ask for.
Ripping off bandaids hurt. But it's worth it in the end as opposed to slowly peeling out every hair from the follicle.
this is why i think i'm the perfect person, personality wise.
but you can't think like that, because in order to have a perfectly rounded personality, you have to be humble.
i actually help people just because i have the ability and i've helped people when i really didn't want to.
the only way to not be a hypocrite is to try and live with integrity and keep your thoughts neutral, always question and never really jump to a conclusion without evidence.
asking questions is better than statements sometimes.
when i experienced death i was sad because it was so random and undeserved and they died really young.
i wasn't that sad when my grandfather died, but it made me remember that my family is slipping away slowly.
i realise that. im just pointing out the hypocrisy of it. when someone helps me out or something im just not as fast to be super grateful, to look up to that persone or to respect that individual
>this is why i think i'm the perfect person, personality wise.
>in order to have a perfectly rounded personality, you have to be humble.
wew, you just proved OP's right, how hypocrite of you to claim something that you contradict right away
thats what i meant when i say where pretentious, where just alive becuse of a series of coincidences your giving it kind of a poetic look, but its not. your looking too deep into existence, life. sure its awesome and facinating but thats pretty much it.
exactly what i was saying. pretentious, hypocrit and narsissic. without even realising it.
A series of coincidences isn't a series of expected events, is it?
I'd say that's remarkable enough, by the by.
>your giving it kind of a poetic look
That's the point. We're not purely rational creatures at all. We're mostly irrational if nothing else, hence the "human nature" that bellies the tendency to be anthropocentric. We're self-assembling molecules carrying out physical programming sequences that encourage the matter itself to continue ordaining a specific state as best as possible until it is no longer possible. Being for the self aides that prerogative. To discount the existence of anything but yourself would be erroneous; scope is important, especially if you're sitting here posting on Sup Forums about human nature and threatening to become this introspective.
>sure its awesome and facinating
It has to be, otherwise everything would be dead already.
Its a topic that has already had a lot of discussion. Does real altruism exist? The conclusion has been leaning pretty heavily towards no.
The bullshit thing to the conclusion though is that it excludes selfless behaviours that make an individual feel good, as if it were a self serving desire to feel good. If an empathetic person feels good giving money to charity it isnt considered altruistic. If a person gives to charity and feels bad about it, that is considered to be real altruism.
but thats the problem! we should cast away our emotions and rely purely on stone cold logic. then i think we could achieve our true potential as a spieces and truly progress.
>are we all hypocrites?
Yes. Adulthood relies on hypocrisy in order to be sustainable.
>is there such a thing as a legit good person?
Not objectively because moral is relative for non-religious people.
Free advice: Get a job, get a girlfriend and make a child, or someday you'll find yourself in your 40s regretting your wasted life.
you're really dumb.
let me explain it: sometimes i want to think i'm the perfect person, but i can't think like that because in order to be the perfect, rounded person, i also have to be humble.
if you can't see the paradox in that, you have a tiny brain, that's not hypocrisy, it's paradox, look it up.
the point is you still aspire to be a perfect persone, why? probably to look good to others without even seeing it yourself. and that to me is pretentious and narsissic.
a hypocrite isn't self aware of their lack of humility. a hypocrite wouldn't go, "im such a great person" and then back pedal immediately after with a legit explanation.
a hypocrite would go, "im such a great person" and then would turn around and make someone feel like shit.
>without realizing it
except it was realized. you can never be the perfect person if you also brag about it, because to be perfect you need to be humble and you don't brag if you're humble.
thats more or less the plan. even if i rant about losing what makes me human im still an animal with a brain with reward centers. and i plan to use them to theyre full potential. i think theres no meaning to life, so if im juste here for absolutely nothing, i might as well have as much fun as possible while im here.
i don't aspire to be perfect.
i'm talking about having the perfect personality, doing things truly without ego and expectation and reward, that's what i'm talking about.
it's a character thing, it's not a resume.
yeah but you just cant be perfect, theres no such thing as perfect and thinking you might even be close to it is extremely pretentious. so therefore if you are pretentious you simply canot be perfect.
Well, the problem with that is that not every human being would be able to make that transition.
Provided any human being can make that transition.
A non-human ULM might succeed us, but we probably won't be joining it in the sense that we think. Furthermore, the whole operation of a human being on a daily basis prevents the sudden abject stone-cold switch. Everything we have right now is modeled on the nature of a human being (by extension then the nature of a bipedal multi-cellular vertebrae with photoreceptors and...). We really can't just throw it away unless you're dead set to just killing yourself, either instantly or over a short period of time.
Casting away emotions by any humanly possible means would also mean casting away important mechanisms that have helped us survive, think, and progress thus far. Learning highs and runner highs are examples; would you still bother to learn if you weren't getting a dose of dopamine to reward and reinforce you when you figured something out? Because the majority of that motivation... comes from all the chemicals. I say don't fix what isn't broken. Let's merely adapt the programs that are being executed daily to better suit our needs- as a human is built to fall fast than to play chess, a human should stick to using fear to improve memory than trying to cram trivia.
And come to think of it, I'd rather wait until we're at that crossroad, where we can have discussions with non-human intelligences, and better work out the nuances of whatever it is we've done over these last ~20k years before we simply get rid of it. We can't pretend we know absolutely everything about ourselves as it relates to the immediate, local environment (the known, tangible universe) as a whole- we'll need outside observers to really be able to make those claims.
perfect is the wrong word.
but i don't do any of the things OP is describing in this thread about hypocrites.
so basically, no, not everyone are hypocrites. people do try to live with integrity and honesty and consistency and learn from past misdeeds.
>there's no such thing as perfect
and the sky is blue and your mom is fat.
i guarantee people can have perfect personalities, they're not perfect in every aspect, but i guarantee there are people with near perfect personalities. perfect means without flaw.
i dont mean litteraly cast away our emotions, just to learn not tu use them when its time to take an important descision. like the trolley problem for example, cast away your usseless emotions of the moment and turn the tracks so the trolley hits the one guy instead of the other five.
your contradicting yourself. you say you can have perfect personnality just not in every aspect, but if its not in every aspect then its not perfection.
But, why even turn the tracks? Both outcomes result in death and property damage, and objectively, letting the trolley hit 5 people instead of 1 lessens the amount of potential property damage, trolley included. It may even not result in the deaths of all 5 people.
The deaths are more of an emotional concern than anything else, too. The trolley problem is only a problem if you are especially concerned with the lives present. There's no need to save lives where everyone would instead give theirs to ensure the propagation of other human beings not in harms' way, who in turn give their lives to continue ordaining the structure of society as a whole, to a point in which society would instead become a sort of living entity compromised of, and dependent upon, uncompromising individuals. Or, if there are more than 7 people in the whole world.
Absolute perfection as it is defined doesn't exist. It's an ideal concept.
If you struggle with that concept, then you have proven that perfection doesn't exist, as it is then not a perfect explanation. If you don't, then perfection doesn't exist in virtue of the explanation.
i shouldn't even be responding to this illiteracy, but:
i said you can have a perfect personality, but that doesn't mean you're the perfect person, you could be ugly or fat or something.
you're just not able to think about this properly, i dunno, you just want to label everything a contradiction and i keep having to explain everything in huge detail with zero agreement, not wroth the effort.
no one ever said absolute perfection. stop trying to correct people for no reason, no one is struggling with that concept.
i already said "perfect" was the wrong word. thread's dead, stop hanging on that one word.
i agree with you on this one on second tought. but i think it would depend of the quality of the five homo sapiens on the tracks. if theres five unhealty uninteligent people vs one perfectly healthy individual with a high iq i would choose the to kill de five lesser humans instead becuse the halthy human will pass on better genes to the next generation. therefore pushing the human race in the right direction.
I just dropped a tear :(
my point still applyes if were only talking about personality.
you should not my specialguy
So? Who cares?
If you help other people, that's good enough.
People don't even try though.
And what about sex? Do you still enjoy that?
He enjoys the art
What do you mean by a good person? Selfless? Compassionate? Because those people do exist. People who do good things when nobody is judging them, or expecting anything of them. And honestly, on your example, whenever I've cried for the death of a loved one, I never felt all that bad when thinking that I'd never see them again. I felt way worse thinking that my grandparents would never be together again, knowing the silence that my grandpa would have to live in for the rest of his days.
But regardless, the idea of a "good person" is a bad one, imo. Nobody is perfect. Everybody has their own special way they hurt the ones they love. Not because they're "bad people" (though they could be assholes), not usually on purpose, but just because living is hard, and any way you live inherently comes with different ways that you impact the people around you. And some people want some things from you, others want different things.
In the end, as long as you're not an explicit asshole, you're as "good" as they come imo.
well yeah...im still have a brain with reward centers that produce dopamine.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but some animals make art too, so art isn't just a "human thing".
Someone said absolute perfection when they said near perfection afterwards.
>perfect is the wrong word
>i guarantee people can have perfect personalities
>they're not perfect in every aspect
>i guarantee there are people with near perfect personalities
>perfect means without flaw
If perfect is without flaw, and people can have perfect personalities, then they can have absolutely no flaws in their personalities. Their perfection is then absolute. If people are not perfect in every aspect, then they have flaws in their personalities, and thus their perfection is not absolute. The
>ideal
personality is then flawless, which is then absolute perfection. You went one way and said that you could guarantee people could have perfect personalities. Then you went back and said that you could guarantee that there are people with near perfect personalities.
It's one or the other. Either you meant that people can be nearly perfect, as in, they can nearly be absolute in their perfection, or they can absolutely be perfect.
Setting the record straight because the two of you are going at this in an extremely indirect way, in turn obfuscating a lot of things and just talking at each other. If you couldn't bother to just type what it looks like you meant to type, which would be
>i guarantee there are people with near perfect personalities
and have determined that you didn't want to use a word like perfect, then this reply wouldn't have happened. Hence, as you have demonstrated in your reply, you could be ugly or fat or something, and not a perfect person.
wich animal? you cought my interest.
To be fair, it is only the super intelligent animals like elephants that make art with any sort of meaning. Other than that, yeah, technically, any animal can hold a brush, and paint, but is that really art, or are they just doing what they were trained to do?
...
if theres no meaning, no emotions behind art, its simply not art.
That's like, your opinion, man.
well i know that...its pretty much all ive been sharing in this thread.
...
you realized you typed all that up and it adds absolutely zero to the discussion?
you could sit and correct semantics all you want, if you're gonna take every word you hear in a speech 100% literally, you're going to struggle in life bro. smh, seriously.
thank you!
Puffer fish, for example, will make elaborate sand sculptures to attract a potential mate. If the mate is impressed by the "artistic abilities", procreation will occur. Humans are impressed by this because an animal is so "human-like", but what that animal does is something that occurs in many animals, including humans.
Humans (artists especially) delude themselves by attributing much more emotional value to their works than there actually is.
That's not human nature, that's just you and the people you know. Plenty of people out there make efforts to improve our world even when they don't win anything.
It does add to the discussion, though. It's a discussion within the discussion. The entire thread is steeped in semantics, look at the OP. I can certainly sit down and correct semantics all I want, and I can deliver that promise without using all the wrong words I didn't mean to use.
>if you're gonna take every word you hear in a speech 100% literally
Only someone with autism would do that.
so art is also pretentious, in a way. i had not seen things like that. but once again my conviction in my beliefs have only become stronger
What you're talking about are people that haven't evolved their self truly into an individual. Before that point a person knows them self in a largely reactionary way and for largely selfish reasons, even if it's done from a goodly moral perspective. In becoming an individual one identifies all old internalized beliefs and attachments to culture and family, challenges that and remolds them self based on what they identify with at that point. Usually this happens when one's environment becomes abrasive toward their true values. I personally think that only by living and having life experiences that by validate or sacrificing those values can a person really understand themselves and later honestly learn about them self. Those values are often very simple, and are often over complicated (emotionally as well as mentally). Unwinding all of that is a large task, but it's worth it in being satisfied with your life in the end in how to live it.
well honestly. i feel like thats pretty much where im at.
Well, why not become an individual then? It's equally the best and worst (initially) thing you can ever do for yourself. Rather then feeling left out you'll form your own reasons for being and pursue understanding yourself and applying that to your life...ultimately more fulfilling. However, if you commit to becoming an individual you'll likely be farther removed from common culture. If you want to start, I'd say6 be mindful of why you do what you do...and figure out your emotional motivations for your actions. Just be honest with yourself, even if you don't like it. Eventually when you're ready you can start breaking down all that inherited baggage from your parents, and your culture that simply doesn't jive with you anymore. Meditation and mindfulness helps a lot, I wouldn't insist on it if you're adverse.
We live in a world that's regulated by unnatural laws that suppress our animal impulses.
In nature, the only law that exists is that the strong dominate the weak and consequence of that is natural selection. Humans are fundamentally animals as well. That means that as long as at least one resource is limited (and everyone will agree that there's more than one), war is inevitable.
Laws were invented so a number of humans can coexist. Ultimately, base of any law is "Don't do to others what you wouldn't want others to do to you", which is selfish obviously. Laws exist to inhibit strong from taking what they want from the weak, which would be equivalent to anarchy.
So, in the end, what's moral is defined as opposite of what's amoral and most basic amoral deeds are defined by acting according to nature's laws.
In a sense, laws exist to prevent you and everyone around you from going and overpowering someone weaker and taking what you want from them, which is completely normal in nature. Concepts of good and bad don't really exist.
Art isn't pretentious, it's an instinct. Claiming it isn't instinct IS pretentious.
Redefining your perspective on life can help too. Just find a philosopher that appeals to you and read up on them, see what pulls your attention and what resonates with you. Friedrich Nietzsche was a big one for me, but I've moved beyond that phase for myself many years ago. I was trying to look up a better defined point of where a person reaches an extreme degree of philosophically thinking where it's extremely contentious and there is no real answer. I don't think that's your issue. I was going to warn your about it ahead of time that if you do reach that point in your thoughts it's very unpleasant but forces a sort of decision. Good luck though, I hope you find true satisfaction and a degree of peace in your travels here and otherwise.
well with all what i have written above, i think its clear that i already am honest with myself. i know who i am, my strengths and my weaknesses. i spend praticly all of my time thinking about this stuff while im working or just relaxing at home. i already am my own individual but im still a social animal, except i despise the company of most people. becuse of all the points i made in my two first posts.
i consider myself a nihilist but with a twist, if life has no meaning might as well give it one. but since nothing matters might as well have fun.
Found it. Existential crisis...look it up on Wikipedia if you want but I'm guessing you're going through a much lesser form of this if at all. It'll start you on your search for answers and as you dig deeper it'll get worse until you start to develop some real understanding. G'luck though.
i actually already tought of that.
That's a mating practice. Human art can be to convey meanings that we can put into words, statements about the world at large. That's a sign that says "fuck me". There's a difference.
I understand, but fish didn't make a "fuck me" sign, it made "be impressed by me" sign.
Human art is similar, but more progressed, and often more deluded.
but at its core human art is still be inpressed by me.
Well, I'd agree with your assessment of humanity for the most part in not being very wise, compassionate or understanding. Some are, but it's uncommon and not required in most cases and I'd say with the modern era going as it is the soul crushing economics of the world doesn't help much. I think the only advice I have is to try and understand people through their perspective and motivations. It's easy to get caught in applying a personal mode of understanding to how another person operates and ending up with an untrue assumption of the person. That being said, a lot of people are rather petty or unable understand things from conflicting points of view without taking offense...religion and politics and all that. If you do find someone you can actually talk to it's worth taking note, as they can be rather rare.
im open to the idea that there are exceptions, but the vast majority of people are like i said. but dont forget the part where they dont even realise it, i think its just deep down in theyre subconcious.
Art usually expresses emotion in the context of that cultural era. I don't remember the reason why modern art needs to be controversial, but there's a reason. I'd guess you're able to connect via the art and find interest or comfort in that expression.
Its called ego
and yes , some rise above it
What others are thinking is unimportant
if it is wrong.
I totally agree with you. I think those people are literally operating at a lower level of what they're consciously perceptive of, or are simply comfortable in what their culture informs them to be. Or both. Either way it's an ignorance, and ignorant people tend to hang on to it for petty reasons with a kung-fu death grip. The people that really bother me are those that do rise to the level of being able to understand all that I've written about, see the world for the whole that it is and still take advantage. I can understand why but it sacrifices progressiveness and unity(of a sort) for satisfying personal ends. Perhaps the person at that point still doesn't see the whole circle of things, how their actions influence others and effect those inside and outside of the circle of people whom they know, but there's a lot of wisdom in understanding the extent to what our actions cause directly and more subtly. I suppose there's lots of reasons for people to be selfish, I just don't see it being justified when it matters...per say if the person already has enough them self materially. But, I often feel like I'm living in a culture that doesn't suit my values.